Knowledge

Prey naiveté

Source 📝

327:). Results indicated that quoll-exposed bettongs engaged in less inattentive foraging compared to controls but did not differentiate between predator and non-predator cues. In contrast, quoll-exposed hopping mice adjusted their foraging behaviors in open areas and increased their wariness in response to quoll stimuli, while cat-exposed hopping mice only heightened their caution in the presence of cat stimuli. Although reintroducing native predators improved general antipredator responses among naïve prey populations, evidence for enhanced discrimination towards introduced predators was limited, although the findings suggest that exposure to native predators may better prepare naïve prey for environments where novel predators are present. 346:) can enhance their survival upon reintroduction. Over two years, bilbies were exposed to feral cats in a fenced area, and their behaviors were assessed. Results showed that predator-exposed bilbies exhibited increased wariness—spending less time moving and more time in cover—compared to naïve bilbies. Following 118:
ones. The naïveté was most significant towards non-native predators lacking native relatives in the community. Time since introduction plays a role, with prey naïveté diminishing over generations; approximately 200 generations may be needed for prey to sufficiently develop antipredator behaviors
294:
While excluding novel predators from conservation areas has had mixed results, the absence of any predators can worsen prey naiveté. Reintroducing native predators has been proposed as a potential solution to enhance prey behavioral responses. A study published in 2024 assessed the behavioral
185:
Prey naiveté was initially conceptualized as a straightforward phenomenon in which native fauna become vulnerable to non-native predators due to naive behavioral responses. It is now understood to be a multifaceted issue, and is classified into four distinct levels:
350:, the predator-exposed group had higher survival rates and was less likely to be predated upon than their naïve counterparts. The study suggests that training naïve prey in the presence of predators may improve their survival in reintroduction efforts. 243:
Prey overreact to the predator, exhibiting heightened fear and anxiety after experiencing significant sublethal predation costs. This can lead to excessive caution that disrupts their normal behavior and ecological functions.
59:
recognition of predators. Certain antipredator behaviors that develop in response to coevolved predators may persist over time, even in their absence, particularly when other predators are present, as suggested by the
232:
Prey display behavioral responses that are suitable but ultimately ineffective against the predator. For example, they may attempt to flee or seek refuge, but these actions do not adequately enhance their survival.
221:
Prey acknowledge the presence of the predator but respond with inappropriate behavioral responses, which do not effectively mitigate the threat. This can include ineffective flight or hiding strategies.
211:
Prey fail to recognize the non-native predator as a threat, leading to a complete absence of any antipredator behavior. This naiveté can leave them highly vulnerable to predation.
270:. Although prey naiveté is widely recognized in ecological studies, its variability under the influence of eco-evolutionary factors is not yet fully quantified. 162:
of predator introduction may influence prey recognition, with lower latitudes possibly exhibiting higher recognition rates due to greater predation pressure and
47:
factors such as biogeographic isolation and prey adaptation. A prey species' ability to detect and evade predators can be shaped by the life history,
27:
history with it. Prey naïveté is believed to intensify the effects of non-native predators, which can contribute significantly to the risks of
43:
defenses result from a lack of evolutionary exposure to specific predators. This naiveté towards non-native predators is likely influenced by
127:
The occurrence and intensity of prey naiveté are hypothesized to arise from several interrelated factors, categorized into four themes:
477:
Stepkovitch, Ben; Van der Weyde, Leanne K.; Finlayson, Graeme; Blumstein, Daniel T.; Letnic, Mike; Moseby, Katherine E. (August 2024).
88: 142:
may also experience heightened naiveté due to lack of eco-evolutionary experience with both non-native and native predators.
563: 250:
In addition to behavioral inadequacies, prey species lacking evolutionary exposure to non-native predation may possess
134:: Prey naiveté is thought to be exacerbated by evolutionary isolation between predator and prey, particularly in 44: 508:
Ross, Alexandra K.; Letnic, Mike; Blumstein, Daniel T.; Moseby, Katherine E. (July 2019). Hayward, Matt (ed.).
149: 40: 61: 509: 304: 283: 347: 115: 258:
traits that render them more susceptible to such threats, including insufficient defensive structures,
251: 111: 152:
over generations following the introduction of a predator, with naiveté diminishing as prey adapt.
558: 478: 100: 421: 529: 459: 441: 391: 91:
mammalian nest predators. However, the negative effects of rats are lessened on islands with
553: 521: 490: 449: 433: 383: 107: 96: 176:, suggesting that certain prey species are better equipped to recognize specific predators. 259: 510:"Reversing the effects of evolutionary prey naiveté through controlled predator exposure" 420:
Anton, Andrea; Geraldi, Nathan R.; Ricciardi, Anthony; Dick, Jaimie T. A. (2020-06-10).
454: 370:
Barrio, Isabel C.; Bueno, C. Guillermo; Banks, Peter B.; Tortosa, Francisco S. (2010).
92: 56: 547: 331: 312: 163: 494: 135: 99:, as the fauna on these islands appear to be less naïve to the threats posed by 55:
systems display species-specific avoidance behaviors, many taxa require learned
24: 23:
often struggle to recognize or avoid an introduced predator because they lack a
479:"Reintroducing native predators improves antipredator responses in naïve prey" 279: 267: 255: 28: 533: 445: 395: 330:
A 2019 study explored whether exposing predator-naïve prey, specifically the
525: 387: 339: 320: 139: 52: 20: 463: 437: 371: 372:"Prey naiveté in an introduced prey species: the wild rabbit in Australia" 159: 103: 282:
and endangerment of prey species globally, as well as to the failure of
84: 48: 296: 76: 72: 173: 51:, and evolutionary context of both predator and prey. While some 263: 80: 68: 106:. Prey are generally naïve towards non-native predators in 422:"Global determinants of prey naiveté to exotic predators" 426:
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
39:
The prey naïveté hypothesis suggests that ineffective
338:), to controlled numbers of introduced predators ( 311:)—to the reintroduction of a native predator, the 172:: Recognition of introduced predators may vary by 75:have been implicated in the extinction of many 278:Prey naïveté contributes significantly to the 8: 453: 319:), and its impact on their responses to 188: 150:acquire effective antipredator responses 359: 87:that lack evolutionary experience with 31:and endangerment of prey populations. 19:is a theory that suggests that native 7: 415: 413: 411: 409: 407: 405: 365: 363: 295:reactions of two prey species—the 119:towards these non-native threats. 14: 1: 495:10.1016/j.anbehav.2024.05.012 95:rats or functionally similar 580: 514:Journal of Applied Ecology 156:Latitude and biodiversity 114:environments, but not in 284:wildlife reintroductions 62:multipredator hypothesis 526:10.1111/1365-2664.13406 132:Biogeographic isolation 17:Prey naïveté hypothesis 438:10.1098/rspb.2019.2978 305:spinifex hopping mouse 181:Levels of prey naiveté 71:introduced to oceanic 388:10.1093/beheco/arq103 170:Taxonomic specificity 138:environments. Island 146:Adaptation over time 564:Ecological theories 190: 432:(1928): 20192978. 376:Behavioral Ecology 317:Dasyurus geoffroii 189: 301:Bettongia lesueur 297:burrowing bettong 248: 247: 571: 538: 537: 520:(7): 1761–1769. 505: 499: 498: 483:Animal Behaviour 474: 468: 467: 457: 417: 400: 399: 367: 336:Macrotis lagotis 266:, or inadequate 191: 45:eco-evolutionary 579: 578: 574: 573: 572: 570: 569: 568: 544: 543: 542: 541: 507: 506: 502: 476: 475: 471: 419: 418: 403: 369: 368: 361: 356: 292: 276: 183: 174:taxonomic group 125: 123:Driving factors 37: 12: 11: 5: 577: 575: 567: 566: 561: 556: 546: 545: 540: 539: 500: 469: 401: 382:(5): 986–991. 358: 357: 355: 352: 309:Notomys alexis 291: 288: 275: 272: 262:, conspicuous 260:flightlessness 246: 245: 241: 235: 234: 230: 224: 223: 219: 213: 212: 209: 203: 202: 200:Characteristic 197: 182: 179: 178: 177: 167: 153: 143: 124: 121: 67:For instance, 36: 33: 25:coevolutionary 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 576: 565: 562: 560: 557: 555: 552: 551: 549: 535: 531: 527: 523: 519: 515: 511: 504: 501: 496: 492: 488: 484: 480: 473: 470: 465: 461: 456: 451: 447: 443: 439: 435: 431: 427: 423: 416: 414: 412: 410: 408: 406: 402: 397: 393: 389: 385: 381: 377: 373: 366: 364: 360: 353: 351: 349: 348:translocation 345: 341: 337: 333: 332:greater bilby 328: 326: 322: 318: 314: 313:western quoll 310: 306: 302: 298: 289: 287: 285: 281: 273: 271: 269: 265: 261: 257: 256:physiological 253: 252:morphological 242: 240: 237: 236: 231: 229: 226: 225: 220: 218: 215: 214: 210: 208: 205: 204: 201: 198: 196: 193: 192: 187: 180: 175: 171: 168: 165: 161: 157: 154: 151: 147: 144: 141: 137: 133: 130: 129: 128: 122: 120: 117: 113: 109: 105: 102: 98: 94: 90: 86: 82: 78: 74: 70: 65: 63: 58: 54: 53:predator-prey 50: 46: 42: 34: 32: 30: 26: 22: 18: 517: 513: 503: 486: 482: 472: 429: 425: 379: 375: 343: 335: 329: 324: 316: 308: 300: 293: 277: 249: 238: 227: 216: 206: 199: 194: 184: 169: 164:biodiversity 155: 145: 131: 126: 66: 41:antipredator 38: 16: 15: 344:Felis catus 325:Felis catus 148:: Prey may 116:terrestrial 548:Categories 354:References 340:feral cats 321:feral cats 290:Mitigation 280:extinction 268:camouflage 140:ecosystems 136:freshwater 112:freshwater 101:introduced 97:land crabs 89:generalist 29:extinction 559:Predation 534:0021-8901 489:: 11–25. 446:0962-8452 396:1465-7279 104:omnivores 57:olfactory 464:32486977 160:latitude 85:reptiles 35:Overview 554:Ecology 455:7341919 239:Level 4 228:Level 3 217:Level 2 207:Level 1 77:mammals 73:islands 49:ecology 532:  462:  452:  444:  394:  303:) and 274:Impact 158:: The 108:marine 93:native 83:, and 264:odors 195:Level 81:birds 530:ISSN 460:PMID 442:ISSN 392:ISSN 110:and 69:rats 21:prey 522:doi 491:doi 487:214 450:PMC 434:doi 430:287 384:doi 286:. 254:or 64:." 550:: 528:. 518:56 516:. 512:. 485:. 481:. 458:. 448:. 440:. 428:. 424:. 404:^ 390:. 380:21 378:. 374:. 362:^ 342:, 79:, 536:. 524:: 497:. 493:: 466:. 436:: 398:. 386:: 334:( 323:( 315:( 307:( 299:( 166:. 60:"

Index

prey
coevolutionary
extinction
antipredator
eco-evolutionary
ecology
predator-prey
olfactory
multipredator hypothesis
rats
islands
mammals
birds
reptiles
generalist
native
land crabs
introduced
omnivores
marine
freshwater
terrestrial
freshwater
ecosystems
acquire effective antipredator responses
latitude
biodiversity
taxonomic group
morphological
physiological

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.