Variable strategies to solve risk-reward tradeoffs in carnivore communities.
carnivore
facilitation
mesopredator release
scavenging
suppression
Journal
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
ISSN: 1091-6490
Titre abrégé: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7505876
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
31 08 2021
31 08 2021
Historique:
entrez:
25
8
2021
pubmed:
26
8
2021
medline:
21
12
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Mesopredator release theory suggests that dominant predators suppress subordinate carnivores and ultimately shape community dynamics, but the assumption that subordinate species are only negatively affected ignores the possibility of facilitation through scavenging. We examined the interplay within a carnivore community consisting of cougars, coyotes, black bears, and bobcats using contemporaneous Global Positioning System telemetry data from 51 individuals; diet analysis from 972 DNA-metabarcoded scats; and data from 128 physical investigations of cougar kill sites, 28 of which were monitored with remote cameras. Resource provisioning from competitively dominant cougars to coyotes through scavenging was so prolific as to be an overwhelming determinant of coyote behavior, space use, and resource acquisition. This was evident via the strong attraction of coyotes to cougar kill sites, frequent scavenging of cougar-killed prey, and coyote diets that nearly matched cougars in the magnitude of ungulate consumption. Yet coyotes were often killed by cougars and used space to minimize encounters, complicating the fitness benefits gained from scavenging. We estimated that 23% (95% CI: 8 to 55%) of the coyote population in our study area was killed by cougars annually, suggesting that coyote interactions with cougars are a complex behavioral game of risk and reward. In contrast, we found no indication that bobcat space use or diet was influenced by cougars. Black bears avoided cougars, but there was no evidence of attraction to cougar kill sites and much lower levels of ungulate consumption and carcass visitation than for coyotes. Interspecific interactions among carnivores are multifaceted, encompassing both suppression and facilitation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34429359
pii: 2101614118
doi: 10.1073/pnas.2101614118
pmc: PMC8536332
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no competing interest.
Références
Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2015 Nov;90(4):1197-214
pubmed: 25530248
Proc Biol Sci. 2017 Feb 8;284(1848):
pubmed: 28179516
Ecol Evol. 2019 Feb 05;9(2):880-890
pubmed: 30766677
Am Nat. 1999 May;153(5):492-508
pubmed: 29578790
Mol Ecol Resour. 2020 Nov;20(6):1505-1516
pubmed: 32521101
Ecol Appl. 2021 Oct;31(7):e02405
pubmed: 34245619
Mov Ecol. 2015 Nov 15;3:37
pubmed: 26568827
Ecol Lett. 2020 May;23(5):902-918
pubmed: 32185877
Ecology. 2012 Apr;93(4):921-9
pubmed: 22690642
Ecol Evol. 2016 Dec 16;7(1):189-199
pubmed: 28070283
Oecologia. 2016 Jul;181(3):695-708
pubmed: 26971522
Ecol Lett. 2009 Sep;12(9):982-98
pubmed: 19614756
J Anim Ecol. 2014 Jan;83(1):185-98
pubmed: 23859231
Ecol Lett. 2013 Aug;16(8):1023-30
pubmed: 23750905
PLoS One. 2019 Apr 3;14(4):e0213910
pubmed: 30943236
Sci Rep. 2017 Apr 12;7:46332
pubmed: 28402340
Am Nat. 2015 Jun;185(6):822-33
pubmed: 25996866
Ecology. 2009 Dec;90(12):3554-65
pubmed: 20120822
Am Nat. 2017 Nov;190(5):663-679
pubmed: 29053355
Science. 2014 Oct 3;346(6205):81-5
pubmed: 25278610
PeerJ. 2018 Jan 24;6:e4293
pubmed: 29379688
PLoS One. 2014 Jul 10;9(7):e102257
pubmed: 25010629
Am Nat. 2006 Apr;167(4):524-36
pubmed: 16670995