The effect of habitat structure on prey mortality depends on predator and prey microhabitat use

Structurally complex habitats provide cover and may hinder the movement of animals. In predator–prey relationships, habitat structure can decrease predation risk when it provides refuges for prey or hinders foraging activity of predators. However, it may also provide shelter, supporting structures and perches for sit-and-wait predators and hence increase their predation rates. We tested the effect of habitat structure on prey mortality in aquatic invertebrates in short-term laboratory predation trials that differed in the presence or absence of artificial vegetation. The effect of habitat structure on prey mortality was context dependent as it changed with predator and prey microhabitat use. Specifically, we observed an ‘anti-refuge’ effect of added vegetation: phytophilous predators that perched on the plants imposed higher predation pressure on planktonic prey, while mortality of benthic prey decreased. Predation by benthic and planktonic predators on either type of prey remained unaffected by the presence of vegetation. Our results show that the effects of habitat structure on predator–prey interactions are more complex than simply providing prey refuges or cover for predators. Such context-specific effects of habitat complexity may alter the coupling of different parts of the ecosystem, such as pelagic and benthic habitats, and ultimately affect food web stability through cascading effects on individual life histories and trophic link strengths.     

Associations between Non‐Lethal Injury,Body Size,and Foraging Ecology in an Amphibian Intraguild Predator

Theoretical treatments of intraguild predation and its effects on behavioral interactions regard the phenomenon as a size‐structured binary response wherein predation among competitors is completely successful or completely unsuccessful. However, intermediate outcomes occur when individuals escape intraguild (IG) interactions with non‐lethal injuries. While the effects of wounds for prey include compromised mobility and increased predation risk, the consequences of similar injuries among top predators are not well understood, despite the implications for species interactions. Using an amphibian IG predator, Ambystoma opacum (Caudata: Ambystomatidae), we examined associations between non‐lethal injuries and predator body size, foraging strategy, microhabitat selection, and intraspecific agonistic interactions. Wounds were common among IG predators, generally increasing in frequency throughout larval ontogeny. Non‐lethal injuries were associated with differences in predator body size and behavior, with injured predators exhibiting smaller body sizes, increased use of benthic microhabitats, reduced agonistic displays, and increased risk of intraspecific aggression. While such effects were not ultimately associated with reduced foraging success, non‐lethal injury could contribute to niche partitioning between injured and healthy predators via habitat selection, but injured predators likely continue to exert predatory pressure on IG and basal prey populations. Our results indicate that studies of top‐down population regulation should incorporate injury‐related modifications to both prey and predator behavior and size structure.     

You can’t run but you can hide: refuge use in frog tadpoles elicits density-dependent predation by dragonfly larvae

The potential role of prey refuges in stabilizing predator–prey interactions is of longstanding interest to ecologists, but mechanisms underlying a sigmoidal predator functional response remain to be fully elucidated. Authors have disagreed on whether the stabilizing effect of prey refuges is driven by prey- versus predator-centric mechanisms, but to date few studies have married predator and prey behavioural observations to distinguish between these possibilities. We used a dragonfly nymph–tadpole system to study the effect of a structural refuge (leaf litter) on the predator’s functional response, and paired this with behavioural observations of both predator and prey. Our study confirmed that hyperbolic (type II) functional responses were characteristic of foraging predators when structural cover was low or absent, whereas the functional response was sigmoidal (type III) when prey were provided with sufficient refuge. Prey activity and refuge use were density independent across cover treatments, thereby eliminating a prey-centric mechanism as being the genesis for density-dependent predation. In contrast, the predator’s pursuit length, capture success, and handling time were altered by the amount of structure implying that observed shifts in density-dependent predation likely were related to predator hunting efficiency. Our study advances current theory by revealing that despite fixed-proportion refuge use by prey, presence of a prey refuge can induce density-dependent predation through its effect on predator hunting strategy. Ultimately, responses of predator foraging decisions in response to changes in prey availability and search efficiency may be more important in producing density-dependent predation than the form of prey refuge use.     

Predation risk in tadpole populations shapes behavioural responses of prey but not strength of trait‐mediated indirect interactions

Prey animals often respond to predators by reducing activity levels. This can produce a trait‐mediated indirect interaction (TMII) between predators and prey resources, whereby reduced foraging by prey in the presence of a predator causes an increase in prey resources. TMIIs play important roles in structuring communities, and it is important to understand factors that determine their strength. One such influence may be behavioural variation in the prey species, with indirect effects of predators being stronger within populations that are more responsive to the presence of a predator. We tested 1) whether the behavioural responsiveness of populations of wood frog tadpoles to predator cues was related to the predation risk in their native ponds, and 2) whether more responsive tadpoles yielded stronger TMIIs. To do this, we 1) measured the activity of tadpoles from 18 populations in mesocosms with and without caged predators, and 2) measured changes in the biomass of periphyton (the tadpoles’ diet) between predator treatments for each population. We found that tadpoles from higher predation risk ponds reduced their time outside refuges more in the presence of predators and tended to move less when visible, suggesting possible local adaptation to predation regimes. Though the presence of predators generally resulted in higher periphyton biomass – a TMII – there was no evidence that the strength of this TMII was affected by variation in tadpole behaviour. Foraging activity and general activity may be decoupled to some extent, enabling high predation risk‐adapted tadpoles to limit the fitness costs of reduced foraging when predators are present.     

Predator identity and time of day interact to shape the risk–reward trade-off for herbivorous coral reef fishes

Non-consumptive effects (NCEs) of predators occur as prey alters their habitat use and foraging decisions to avoid predation. Although NCEs are recognized as being important across disparate ecosystems, the factors influencing their strength and importance remain poorly understood. Ecological context, such as time of day, predator identity, and prey condition, may modify how prey species perceive and respond to risk, thereby altering NCEs. To investigate how predator identity affects foraging of herbivorous coral reef fishes, we simulated predation risk using fiberglass models of two predator species (grouper Mycteroperca bonaci and barracuda Sphyraena barracuda) with different hunting modes. We quantified how predation risk alters herbivory rates across space (distance from predator) and time (dawn, mid-day, and dusk) to examine how prey reconciles the conflicting demands of avoiding predation vs. foraging. When we averaged the effect of both predators across space and time, they suppressed herbivory similarly. Yet, they altered feeding differently depending on time of day and distance from the model. Although feeding increased strongly with increasing distance from the predators particularly during dawn, we found that the barracuda model suppressed herbivory more strongly than the grouper model during mid-day. We suggest that prey hunger level and differences in predator hunting modes could influence these patterns. Understanding how context mediates NCEs provides insight into the emergent effects of predator–prey interactions on food webs. These insights have broad implications for understanding how anthropogenic alterations to predator abundances can affect the spatial and temporal dynamics of important ecosystem processes.     

Trading off safety against food: state dependent habitat choice and foraging in crucian carp

The influence of hunger level and predation risk on habitat choice and foraging in crucian carp, Carassius carassius, were studied in a laboratory experiment. Experiments were carried out in aquaria with or without a predator (pike, Esox lucius). Habitat use and foraging activity of three-fish foraging groups of either fed or hungry crucian carp were studied. Fish were allowed to choose between an open (risky) habitat with Tubifex worms and a habitat with dense vegetation (safe) without food. Habitat use was significantly affected by both risk of predation and hunger level. Crucian carp spent less time in the open habitat when there was a predator present and they also spent less time there when fed than when hungry. Furthermore, there was a significant interaction between risk of predation and hunger level, indicating a state-dependent trade-off between food acquisition and predator avoidance.     

Behavioural Response of Bats to Perceived Predation Risk While Foraging

The ability to detect and respond to predation risk while foraging may have important fitness consequences for prey organisms. Anti‐predator behaviours may reduce the probability of mortality because of predation, but they may also be associated with reduced foraging efficiency. Several behaviours of bats have been suggested to serve as anti‐predator responses, and there is evidence that predation, particularly by avian predators such as owls, may be an important cause of bat mortality. Previous studies have attempted to determine whether predator presence affects bat behaviour when emerging from roost sites, but few have examined effects of predator presence on bat behaviour while foraging. In this study, we investigated whether foraging bats respond to predator cues by presenting bats with an acoustic cue simulating the presence of an owl. Within matched trials, which were conducted at different locations each of 18 nights, significantly fewer bat detections were recorded at owl playback stations than at control stations (no auditory cue), suggesting an avoidance response by bats. An acoustic control (i.e. station playing woodpecker calls), however, did not have significantly more detections than the stations playing the owl calls, suggesting that bats may simply be avoiding noise and more detailed investigation is warranted. Although evidence for owl predation on bats is minimal in North America, results of this study may indicate that the perceived presence of owls may represent a factor influencing the behaviour of bats while foraging.     

Non-lethal effects of predation in birds

Predators can affect individual fitness and population and community processes through lethal effects (direct consumption or ‘density’ effects), where prey is consumed, or through non‐lethal effects (trait‐mediated effects or interactions), where behavioural compensation to predation risk occurs, such as animals avoiding areas of high predation risk. Studies of invertebrates, fish and amphibians have shown that non‐lethal effects may be larger than lethal effects in determining the behaviour, condition, density and distribution of animals over a range of trophic levels. Although non‐lethal effects have been well described in the behavioural ecology of birds (and also mammals) within the context of anti‐predation behaviour, their role relative to lethal effects is probably underestimated. Birds show many behavioural and physiological changes to reduce direct mortality from predation and these are likely to have negative effects on other aspects of their fitness and population dynamics, as well as affecting the ecology of their own prey and their predators. As a consequence, the effects of predation in birds are best measured by trade‐offs between maximizing instantaneous survival in the presence of predators and acquiring or maintaining resources for long‐term survival or reproduction. Because avoiding predation imposes foraging costs, and foraging behaviour is relatively easy to measure in birds, the foraging–predation risk trade‐off is probably an effective framework for understanding the importance of non‐lethal effects, and so the population and community effects of predation risk in birds and other animals. Using a trade‐off approach allows us to predict better how changes in predator density will impact on population and community dynamics, and how animals perceive and respond to predation risk, when non‐lethal effects decouple the relationship between predator density and direct mortality rate. The trade‐off approach also allows us to identify where predation risk is structuring communities because of avoidance of predators, even when this results in no observable direct mortality rate.     

Living and dying in a multi‐predator landscape of fear: roe deer are squeezed by contrasting pattern of predation risk imposed by lynx and humans

The theory of predation risk effects predicts behavioral responses in prey when risk of predation is not homogenous in space and time. Prey species are often faced with a tradeoff between food and safety in situations where food availability and predation risk peak in the same habitat type. Determining the optimal strategy becomes more complex if predators with different hunting mode create contrasting landscapes of risk, but this has rarely been documented in vertebrates. Roe deer in southeastern Norway face predation risk from lynx, as well as hunting by humans. These two predators differ greatly in their hunting methods. The predation risk from lynx, an efficient stalk‐and‐ambush predator is expected to be higher in areas with dense understory vegetation, while predation risk from human hunters is expected to be higher where visual sight lines are longer. Based on field observations and airborne LiDAR data from 71 lynx predation sites, 53 human hunting sites, 132 locations from 15 GPS‐marked roe deer, and 36 roe deer pellet locations from a regional survey, we investigated how predation risk was related to terrain attributes and vegetation classes/structure. As predicted, we found that increasing cover resulted in a contrasting lower predation risk from humans and higher predation risk from lynx. Greater terrain ruggedness increased the predation risk from both predators. Hence, multiple predators may create areas of contrasting risk as well as double risk in the same landscape. Our study highlights the complexity of predator–prey relationship in a multiple predator setting. Synthesis In this study of risk effects in a multi‐predator context, LiDAR data were used to quantify cover in the habitat and relate it to vulnerability to predation in a boreal forest. We found that lynx and human hunters superimpose generally contrasting landscapes of fear on a common prey species, but also identified double‐risk zones. Since the benefit of anti‐predator responses depends on the combined risk from all predators, it is necessary to consider complete predator assemblages to understand the potential for and occurrence of risk effects across study systems.     

Local prey vulnerability increases with multiple attacks by a predator

Theory and empirical evidence suggest that predator activity makes prey more wary and less vulnerable to predation. However if at least some prey in the population are energetically or spatially constrained, then predators may eventually increase local prey vulnerability because of the cumulative costs of anti‐predation behaviour. We tested whether repeated attacks by a predator might increase prey vulnerability in a system where redshanks on a saltmarsh are attacked regularly by sparrowhawks from adjacent woodland. Cumulative attack number led to a reduction in redshank numbers and flock size (but had no effect on how close redshanks fed to predator‐concealing cover) because some redshanks moved to safer but less profitable habitats, leaving smaller flocks on the saltmarsh. This effect held even though numbers of redshank on the saltmarsh increased with time of day. As a result of the change in flock size, predicted attack‐success increased up to 1.6‐fold for the sparrowhawk, while individual risk of capture for the redshank increased up to 4.5‐fold among those individuals remaining on the saltmarsh. The effect did not arise simply because hawks were more likely to attack smaller flocks because attack rate was not dependent on flock size or abundance. Our data demonstrate that when some individual prey are constrained in their ability to feed on alternative, safer foraging sites, their vulnerability to predation increases as predator attacks accumulate, although those, presumably better quality individuals that leave the immediate risky area will have lower vulnerability, so that the mean vulnerability across the entire population may not have changed substantially. This suggests that the selective benefits of multiple low‐cost attacks by predators on prey could potentially lead to 1) locally heightened trait‐mediated interactions, 2) locally reduced interference among competing predators, and 3) the evolution of active prey manipulation by predators.     

Nest and foraging‐site selection in Yellowhammers Emberiza citrinella: implications for chick provisioning

Capsule Vegetation structure and invertebrate abundance interact to influence both foraging sites and nestling provisioning rate; when invertebrate availability is low, adults may take greater risks to provide food for their young.

Aims To investigate nesting and foraging ecology in a declining farmland bird whose fledging success is influenced by the availability of invertebrate prey suitable for feeding to offspring, and where perceived predation risk during foraging can be mediated by vegetation structure.

Methods Provisioning rates of adult Yellowhammers feeding nestlings were measured at nests on arable farmland. Foraging sites were compared with control sites of both the same and different microhabitats; provisioning rate was related to habitat features of foraging‐sites.

Results Foraging sites had low vegetation density, probably enhancing detection of predators, or high invertebrate abundance at high vegetation density. Parental provisioning rate decreased with increasing vegetation cover at foraging sites with high invertebrate abundance; conversely, where invertebrate abundance was low, provisioning rate increased with increasing vegetation cover.

Conclusions Vegetation structure at foraging sites suggests that a trade‐off between predator detection and prey availability influences foraging site selection in Yellowhammers. Associations between parental provisioning rate and vegetation variables suggest that where invertebrate abundance is high birds increase time spent scanning for predators at higher vegetation densities; however, when prey are scarce, adults may take more risks to provide food for their young.     

The effect of predation pressure and predator adaptive foraging on the relative importance of consumptive and non‐consumptive predator net effects in a freshwater model system

An important challenge in community ecology is identifying the functional characteristics capable of predicting the nature and strength of predator effects on food webs. We developed an individual‐based model, based on a shallow lake model system, to evaluate the total, consumptive, and non‐consumptive indirect effect that predators have on basal resources when the predators differ in their foraging types (active adaptive foraging or sedentary foraging). Overall, both predator types caused similar total indirect effects on lower trophic levels. However, the nature net effects of predators diverged between predator foraging types. Active predators caused larger non‐consumptive effects, relative to the total indirect effect, irrespective of predation pressure levels. On the other hand, sedentary predators caused larger non‐consumptive effects for lower predation pressure levels, but consumptive effects became more important as predation pressure increased. Our simulations showed that the reliance on a particular mechanism driving consumer–resource interactions is altered by predator foraging behavior and highlight the importance of both prey and predator foraging behaviors to predict the causes and consequences of cascading effects observed in food webs.     

Foraging speed in staging flocks of semipalmated sandpipers: evidence for scramble competition

Foraging speed is a key determinant of fitness affecting both foraging success and predator attack survival. In a scramble for food, for instance, evolutionary stable strategy models predict that speed should increase with competitor density and decrease when the risk of attack by predators increases. Foraging speed should also decrease in richer food patches where the level of competition is reduced. I tested these predictions in fall staging flocks of semipalmated sandpipers (Calidris pusilla) foraging for an evasive prey. Capture rate of these prey decreased with sandpiper density as the presence of competitors reduced the availability of resources for those behind. Foraging speed was evaluated indirectly by measuring the time needed to cross fixed boundaries on mudflats over 6 years. As predicted, foraging speed increased with sandpiper density and decreased with food density, but, unexpectedly, increased closer to obstructive cover where predation risk was deemed higher. When foraging closer to cover, from where predators launch surprise attacks, the increase in foraging speed may compensate for an increase in false alarms that interrupted foraging. While foraging in denser flocks decreases foraging success, joining such flocks may also increase safety against predators. In semipalmated sandpipers that occupy an intermediate position in the food chain, foraging behavior is influenced simultaneously by the evasive responses of their prey and by the risk of attack from their own predators.     

Female blue tits with brighter yellow chests transfer more carotenoids to their eggs after an immune challenge

Predicting the consequences of predator biodiversity loss on prey requires an understanding of multiple predator interactions. Predators are often assumed to have independent and additive effects on shared prey survival; however, multiple predator effects can be non-additive if predators foraging together reduce prey survival (risk enhancement) or increase prey survival through interference (risk reduction). In marine communities, juvenile reef fish experience very high mortality from two predator guilds with very different hunting modes and foraging domains—benthic and pelagic predator guilds. The few previous predator manipulation studies have found or assumed that mortality is independent and additive. We tested whether interacting predator guilds result in non-additive prey mortality and whether the detection of such effects change over time as prey are depleted. To do so, we examined the roles of benthic and pelagic predators on the survival of a juvenile shoaling zooplanktivorous temperate reef fish, Trachinops caudimaculatus, on artificial patch reefs over 2 months in Port Phillip Bay, Australia. We observed risk enhancement in the first 7 days, as shoaling behaviour placed prey between predator foraging domains with no effective refuge. At day 14 we observed additive mortality, and risk enhancement was no longer detectable. By days 28 and 62, pelagic predators were no longer significant sources of mortality and additivity was trivial. We hypothesize that declines in prey density led to reduced shoaling behaviour that brought prey more often into the domain of benthic predators, resulting in limited mortality from pelagic predators. Furthermore, pelagic predators may have spent less time patrolling reefs in response to declines in prey numbers. Our observation of the changing interaction between predators and prey has important implications for assessing the role of predation in regulating populations in complex communities.     

Hunting‐mediated predator facilitation and superadditive mortality in a European ungulate

Predator‐prey theory predicts that in the presence of multiple types of predators using a common prey, predator facilitation may result as a consequence of contrasting prey defense mechanisms, where reducing the risk from one predator increases the risk from the other. While predator facilitation is well established in natural predator‐prey systems, little attention has been paid to situations where human hunters compete with natural predators for the same prey. Here, we investigate hunting‐mediated predator facilitation in a hunter‐predator‐prey system. We found that hunter avoidance by roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) exposed them to increase predation risk by Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx). Lynx responded by increasing their activity and predation on deer, providing evidence that superadditive hunting mortality may be occurring through predator facilitation. Our results reveal a new pathway through which human hunters, in their role as top predators, may affect species interactions at lower trophic levels and thus drive ecosystem processes.     

Variation in foraging success among predators and its implications for population dynamics

The effects of the expected predation rate on population dynamics have been studied intensively, but little is known about the effects of predation rate variability (i.e., predator individuals having variable foraging success) on population dynamics. In this study, variation in foraging success among predators was quantified by observing the predation of the wolf spider Pardosa pseudoannulata on the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus in the laboratory. A population model was then developed, and the effect of foraging variability on predator–prey dynamics was examined by incorporating levels of variation comparable to those quantified in the experiment. The variability in the foraging success among spiders was greater than would be expected by chance (i.e., the random allocation of prey to predators). The foraging variation was density‐dependent; it became higher as the predator density increased. A population model that incorporates foraging variation shows that the variation influences population dynamics by affecting the numerical response of predators. In particular, the variation induces negative density‐dependent effects among predators and stabilizes predator–prey dynamics.     

Habitat-dependent foraging in a classic predator–prey system: a fable from snowshoe hares

Current research contrasting prey habitat use has documented, with virtual unanimity, habitat differences in predation risk. Relatively few studies have considered, either in theory or in practice, simultaneous patterns in prey density. Linear predator–prey models predict that prey habitat preferences should switch toward the safer habitat with increasing prey and predator densities. The density‐dependent preference can be revealed by regression of prey density in safe habitat versus that in the riskier one (the isodar). But at this scale, the predation risk can be revealed only with simultaneous estimates of the number of predators, or with their experimental removal. Theories of optimal foraging demonstrate that we can measure predation risk by giving‐up densities of resource in foraging patches. The foraging theory cannot yet predict the expected pattern as predator and prey populations covary. Both problems are solved by measuring isodars and giving‐up densities in the same predator–prey system. I applied the two approaches to the classic predator–prey dynamics of snowshoe hares in northwestern Ontario, Canada. Hares occupied regenerating cutovers and adjacent mature‐forest habitat equally, and in a manner consistent with density‐dependent habitat selection. Independent measures of predation risk based on experimental, as well as natural, giving‐up densities agreed generally with the equal preference between habitats revealed by the isodar. There was no apparent difference in predation risk between habitats despite obvious differences in physical structure. Complementary studies contrasting a pair of habitats with more extreme differences confirmed that hares do alter their giving‐up densities when one habitat is clearly superior to another. The results are thereby consistent with theories of adaptive behaviour. But the results also demonstrate, when evaluating differences in habitat, that it is crucial to let the organisms we study define their own habitat preference.     

Nonconsumptive effects in a multiple predator system reduce the foraging efficiency of a keystone predator

Many studies have demonstrated that the nonconsumptive effect (NCE) of predators on prey traits can alter prey demographics in ways that are just as strong as the consumptive effect (CE) of predators. Less well studied, however, is how the CE and NCE of multiple predator species can interact to influence the combined effect of multiple predators on prey mortality. We examined the extent to which the NCE of one predator altered the CE of another predator on a shared prey and evaluated whether we can better predict the combined impact of multiple predators on prey when accounting for this influence. We conducted a set of experiments with larval dragonflies, adult newts (a known keystone predator), and their tadpole prey. We quantified the CE and NCE of each predator, the extent to which NCEs from one predator alters the CE of the second predator, and the combined effect of both predators on prey mortality. We then compared the combined effect of both predators on prey mortality to four predictive models. Dragonflies caused more tadpoles to hide under leaf litter (a NCE), where newts spend less time foraging, which reduced the foraging success (CE) of newts. Newts altered tadpole behavior but not in a way that altered the foraging success of dragonflies. Our study suggests that we can better predict the combined effect of multiple predators on prey when we incorporate the influence of interactions between the CE and NCE of multiple predators into a predictive model. In our case, the threat of predation to prey by one predator reduced the foraging efficiency of a keystone predator. Consequently, the ability of a predator to fill a keystone role could be compromised by the presence of other predators.     

Mechanisms of coexistence in diverse herbivore–carnivore assemblages: demographic,temporal and spatial heterogeneities affecting prey vulnerability

Simple models coupling the dynamics of single predators to single prey populations tend to generate oscillatory dynamics of both predator and prey, or extirpation of the prey followed by that of the predator. In reality, such oscillatory dynamics may be counteracted by prey refugia or by opportunities for prey switching by the predator in multi‐prey assemblages. How these mechanisms operate depends on relative prey vulnerability, a factor ignored in simple interactive models. I outline how compositional, temporal, demographic and spatial heterogeneities help explain the contrasting effects of top predators on large herbivore abundance and population dynamics in species‐rich African savanna ecosystems compared with less species‐diverse northern temperate or subarctic ecosystems. Demographically, mortality inflicted by predation depends on the relative size and life history stage of the prey. Because all animals eventually die and are consumed by various carnivores, the additive component of the mortality inflicted is somewhat less than the predation rate. Prey vulnerability varies annually and seasonally, and between day and night. Spatial variation in the risk of predation depends on vegetation cover as well as on the availability of food resources. During times of food shortage, herbivores become prompted to occupy more risky habitats retaining more food. Predator concentrations dependent on the abundance of primary prey species may restrict the occurrence of other potential prey species less resistant to predation. The presence of multiple herbivore species of similar size in African savannas allows the top predator, the lion, to shift its prey selection flexibly dependent on changing prey vulnerability. Hence top–down and bottom–up influences on herbivore populations are intrinsically entangled. Models coupling the population dynamics of predators and prey need to accommodate the changing influences of prey demography, temporal variation in environmental conditions, and spatial variation in the relative vulnerability of alternative prey species to predation. Synthesis While re‐established predators have had major impacts on prey populations in northern temperate regions, multiple large herbivore species typically coexist along with diverse carnivores in African savanna ecosystems. In order to explain these contrasting outcomes, certain functional heterogeneities must be recognised, including relative vulnerability of alternative prey, temporal variation in the risk of predation, demographic differences in susceptibility to predation, and spatial contrasts in exposure to predation. Food shortfalls prompt herbivores to exploit more risky habitats, meaning that top–down and bottom–up influences on prey populations are intrinsically entangled. Models coupling the interactive dynamics of predator and prey populations need to incorporate these varying influences on relative prey vulnerability.     

The landscape of fear as an emergent property of heterogeneity: Contrasting patterns of predation risk in grassland ecosystems

The likelihood of encountering a predator influences prey behavior and spatial distribution such that non‐consumptive effects can outweigh the influence of direct predation. Prey species are thought to filter information on perceived predator encounter rates in physical landscapes into a landscape of fear defined by spatially explicit heterogeneity in predation risk. The presence of multiple predators using different hunting strategies further complicates navigation through a landscape of fear and potentially exposes prey to greater risk of predation. The juxtaposition of land cover types likely influences overlap in occurrence of different predators, suggesting that attributes of a landscape of fear result from complexity in the physical landscape. Woody encroachment in grasslands furnishes an example of increasing complexity with the potential to influence predator distributions. We examined the role of vegetation structure on the distribution of two avian predators, Red‐tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) and Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus), and the vulnerability of a frequent prey species of those predators, Northern Bobwhite (Colinus virginianus). We mapped occurrences of the raptors and kill locations of Northern Bobwhite to examine spatial vulnerability patterns in relation to landscape complexity. We use an offset model to examine spatially explicit habitat use patterns of these predators in the Southern Great Plains of the United States, and monitored vulnerability patterns of their prey species based on kill locations collected during radio telemetry monitoring. Both predator density and predation‐specific mortality of Northern Bobwhite increased with vegetation complexity generated by fine‐scale interspersion of grassland and woodland. Predation pressure was lower in more homogeneous landscapes where overlap of the two predators was less frequent. Predator overlap created areas of high risk for Northern Bobwhite amounting to 32% of the land area where landscape complexity was high and 7% where complexity was lower. Our study emphasizes the need to evaluate the role of landscape structure on predation dynamics and reveals another threat from woody encroachment in grasslands.