Covariance between predation risk and nutritional preferences confounds interpretations of giving-up density experiments

17Citations
Citations of this article
57Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Giving-up density (GUD) experiments have been a foundational method to evaluate perceived predation risk, but rely on the assumption that food preferences are absolute, so that areas with higher GUDs can be interpreted as having higher risk. However, nutritional preferences are context dependent and can change with risk. We used spiders and grasshoppers to test the hypothesis that covariance in nutritional preferences and risk may confound the interpretation of GUD experiments. We presented grasshoppers with carbohydrate-rich and protein-rich diets, in the presence and absence of spider predators. Predators reduced grasshopper preference for the protein-rich food, but increased their preference for the carbohydrate-rich food. We then measured GUDs with both food types under different levels of risk (spider density, 0–5). As expected, GUDs increased with spider density indicating increasing risk, but only when using protein-rich food. With carbohydrate-rich food, GUD was independent of predation risk. Our results demonstrate that predation risk and nutritional preferences covary and can confound interpretation of GUD experiments.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

McMahon, J. D., Lashley, M. A., Brooks, C. P., & Barton, B. T. (2018). Covariance between predation risk and nutritional preferences confounds interpretations of giving-up density experiments. Ecology, 99(7), 1517–1522. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2365

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free