IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0102257.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trophic Facilitation or Limitation? Comparative Effects of Pumas and Black Bears on the Scavenger Community

Author

Listed:
  • Maximilian L Allen
  • L Mark Elbroch
  • Christopher C Wilmers
  • Heiko U Wittmer

Abstract

Scavenging is a widespread behaviour and an important process influencing food webs and ecological communities. Large carnivores facilitate the movement of energy across trophic levels through the scavenging and decomposition of their killed prey, but competition with large carnivores is also likely to constrain acquisition of carrion by scavengers. We used an experimental approach based on motion-triggered video cameras at black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) carcasses to measure the comparative influences of two large carnivores in the facilitation and limitation of carrion acquisition by scavengers. We found that pumas (Puma concolor) and black bears (Ursus americanus) had different effects on their ecological communities. Pumas, as a top-level predator, facilitated the consumption of carrion by scavengers, despite significantly reducing their observed sum feeding times (165.7 min±21.2 SE at puma kills 264.3 min±30.1 SE at control carcasses). In contrast, black bears, as the dominant scavenger in the system, limited consumption of carrion by scavengers as evidenced by the observed reduction of scavenger species richness recorded at carcasses where they were present (mean = 2.33±0.28 SE), compared to where they were absent (mean = 3.28±0.23 SE). Black bears also had large negative effects on scavenger sum feeding times (88.5 min±19.8 SE at carcasses where bears were present, 372.3 min±50.0 SE at carcasses where bears were absent). In addition, we found that pumas and black bears both increased the nestedness (a higher level of order among species present) of the scavenger community. Our results suggest that scavengers have species-specific adaptions to exploit carrion despite large carnivores, and that large carnivores influence the structure and composition of scavenger communities. The interactions between large carnivores and scavengers should be considered in future studies of food webs and ecological communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Maximilian L Allen & L Mark Elbroch & Christopher C Wilmers & Heiko U Wittmer, 2014. "Trophic Facilitation or Limitation? Comparative Effects of Pumas and Black Bears on the Scavenger Community," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-10, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0102257
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102257
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0102257
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0102257&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0102257?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sophie Ståhlberg & Marco Apollonio, 2023. "Scavenger Activity and Anti-Predator Behaviour in an Apennine Wolf Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-16, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0102257. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.