A field demonstration of the costs and benefits of group living to edible and defended prey
A field demonstration of the costs and benefits of group living to edible and defended prey
复制标题
DOI：
10.1098/rsbl.2015.0152
复制
发表时间：
2015-06-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Speed, Michael P.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Curley, Edward A. M.;Rowley, Hannah E.;Speed, Michael P.
理论和实验室研究都表明，许多被捕食的动物应该生活在孤立的、分散的分布中，除非它们缺乏毒素、毒液和叮咬等驱避性防御。相比之下，化学防御的猎物可能会从聚集中获得很大好处，因为空间定位可能会导致捕食者对猎物毒素的快速满足，从而保护许多个体免受攻击。如果驱避性防御促进了猎物的聚集，它们也为新的社会互动提供了机会；因此，防御的后果可能对动物物种的行为生物学产生深远的影响。缺乏现场数据来支持关于聚合的相对成本和收益的预测。我们在这里首次使用野生捕食者表明，可食用的、无防御的人工猎物如果聚集在一起，确实会遭受更高的死亡率；而化学防御的猎物可能会从分组中获得很大好处。我们认为，由于许多化学防御是昂贵的猎物，聚集可能会受到青睐，因为它使昂贵的防御变得更加有效，或许还允许群体个人在化学防御上投资较少。
Both theoretical and laboratory research suggests that many prey animals should live in a solitary, dispersed distribution unless they lack repellent defences such as toxins, venoms and stings. Chemically defended prey may, by contrast, benefit substantially from aggregation because spatial localization may cause rapid predator satiation on prey toxins, protecting many individuals from attack. If repellent defences promote aggregation of prey, they also provide opportunities for new social interactions; hence the consequences of defence may be far reaching for the behavioural biology of the animal species. There is an absence of field data to support predictions about the relative costs and benefits of aggregation. We show here for the first time using wild predators that edible, undefended artificial prey do indeed suffer heightened death rates if they are aggregated; whereas chemically defended prey may benefit substantially by grouping. We argue that since many chemical defences are costly to prey, aggregation may be favoured because it makes expensive defences much more effective, and perhaps allows grouped individuals to invest less in chemical defences.