Studies of habitat selection often measure an animal's use of space via radiotelemetry or GPS-based technologies. Such data tend to be analyzed using a resource selection function, despite the fact that the actual resources acquired are typically not recorded. Without explicit proof of resource use, conclusions from RSF models are based on assumptions regarding an animal's behavior and the resources gained. Conservation initiatives are often based on space-use models, and could be detrimental to the target species if these assumptions are incorrect. We used GPS dataloggers and digital video recorders to determine precise locations where nocturnally foraging Burrowing Owls acquired food resources (vertebrate prey). We compared land cover type selection patterns using a presence-only resource selection function (RSF) to a model that incorporated prey capture locations (CRSF). We also compared net prey returns in each cover type to better measure reward relative to foraging effort. The RSF method did not reflect prey capture patterns and cover-type rankings from this model were quite different from models that used only locations where prey was known to have been obtained. Burrowing Owls successfully foraged across all cover types; however, return vs. effort models indicate that different cover types were of higher quality than those identified using resource selection functions. Conclusions about the type of resources acquired should not be made from RSF-style models without evidence that the actual resource of interest was acquired. Conservation efforts based on RSF models alone may be ineffective or detrimental to the target species if the limiting resource and where it is acquired are not properly identified.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/12-1931.1 | DOI Listing |
Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry
January 2025
Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Tooth Restoration and Regeneration & Tongji Research Institute of Stomatology & Department of Prosthodontics, Stomatological Hospital and Dental School, Tongji University, Shanghai 200072, China. Electronic address:
Eating behavior stands as a fundamental determinant of animal survival and growth, intricately regulated by an amalgamation of internal and external stimuli. Coordinated movements of facial muscles and the mandible orchestrate prey capture and food processing, propelled by the allure of taste and rewarding food properties. Conversely, satiation, pain, aversion, negative emotion or perceived threats can precipitate the cessation or avoidance of eating activities.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInsects
November 2024
Laboratório de Biologia Comportamental, Departamento de Fisiologia e Comportamento, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal 59078-970, RN, Brazil.
When searching for food, animals often make decisions about where to go, how long to stay in a foraging area, and whether to return to the most recently visited spot. These decisions can be enhanced by cognitive traits and adjusted based on previous experience. In social insects, such as ants, foraging efficiency has an impact at both the individual and colony levels.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBull Math Biol
January 2025
Department of Theoretical Biology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology, August-Thienemann-Strasse 2, 24306, Ploen, Germany.
The human immune system can recognize, attack, and eliminate cancer cells, but cancers can escape this immune surveillance. Variants of ecological predator-prey models can capture the dynamics of such cancer control mechanisms by adaptive immune system cells. These dynamical systems describe, e.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFHeliyon
November 2024
Prasad V.Potluri Siddhartha Institute of Technology, Kanuru, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, 520007, India.
This paper proposes Pomarine jaeger Optimization (PJO) algorithm, Tiger hunting Optimization (THO) Algorithm, Desert Reynard and Vixen Inspired Optimization (DRVIO) Algorithm, Lonchodidae optimization (LO) algorithm, Caracal optimization (CO) algorithm, Barasingha optimization (BO) algorithm, Amur leopard optimization (AO) algorithm and Empress SARANI Optimization Algorithm to solve the active power loss reduction problem. Regular actions of Pomarine jaeger have been emulated to model the PJO procedure. In THO algorithm, how the Tiger moves to capture the prey is imitated and formulated.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFSci Rep
December 2024
Department of Computer Science, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, 11543, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
The traditional optimization approaches suffer from certain problems like getting stuck in local optima, low speed, susceptibility to local optima, and searching unknown search spaces, thus requiring reliance on single-based solutions. Herein, an Improved Aquila Optimizer (IAO) is proposed, which is a unique meta-heuristic optimization method motivated by the hunting behavior of Aquila. An improved version of Aquila optimizer seeks to increase effectiveness and productivity.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!