Author
Listed:
- Sara Magalhães
- Christian Tudorache
- Marta Montserrat
- Roos van Maanen
- Maurice W. Sabelis
- Arne Janssen
Abstract
In two-predator, one-prey systems with intraguild predation and patchily distributed prey, the intraguild prey may face a choice between prey patches with and without intraguild predators. To minimize falling victim to intraguild predation, intraguild prey are expected to perceive cues specifically associated with the presence of intraguild predators. We investigate whether intraguild prey avoided intraguild predators and which cues triggered this behavior in a system composed of plant-inhabiting arthropods. We found that intraguild prey recognized intraguild predators from a distance, based on their diet: they avoided odors of intraguild predators that had consumed shared prey but did not avoid odors of intraguild predators that had fed on other diets, including a diet of conspecifics. When intraguild prey were foraging on a patch, detection of intraguild predators led to longer periods of immobility and to fewer captures of the shared prey. However, intraguild predators that were either starved or had previously consumed intraguild prey posed a higher risk to intraguild prey than did intraguild predators that had consumed the shared prey. We conclude that the cues used by intraguild prey to avoid intraguild predators are associated with the circumstances under which they encounter intraguild predators in the field and not to different degrees of danger. Copyright 2005.
Suggested Citation
Sara Magalhães & Christian Tudorache & Marta Montserrat & Roos van Maanen & Maurice W. Sabelis & Arne Janssen, 2005.
"Diet of intraguild predators affects antipredator behavior in intraguild prey,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 16(2), pages 364-370, March.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:16:y:2005:i:2:p:364-370
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
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:oup:beheco:v:16:y:2005:i:2:p:364-370. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.