

Publisher: John Wiley & Sons Inc
E-ISSN: 1939-9170|92|12|2190-2195
ISSN: 0012-9658
Source: Ecology, Vol.92, Iss.12, 2011-12, pp. : 2190-2195
Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.
Abstract
Risk effects, or the costs of antipredator behavior, can comprise a large proportion of the total effect of predators on their prey. While empirical studies are accumulating to demonstrate the importance of risk effects, there is no general theory that predicts the relative importance of risk effects and direct predation. Working toward this general theory, it has been shown that functional traits of predators (e.g., hunting modes) help to predict the importance of risk effects for ecosystem function. Here, I note that attributes of the predator, the prey, and the environment are all important in determining the strength of antipredator responses, and I develop hypotheses for the ways that prey functional traits might influence the magnitude of risk effects. In particular, I consider the following attributes of prey: group size and dilution of direct predation risk, the degree of foraging specialization, body mass, and the degree to which direct predation is additive vs. compensatory. Strong tests of these hypotheses will require continued development of methods to identify and quantify the fitness costs of antipredator responses in wild populations.
Related content


Tests of Compensatory vs. Additive Hypotheses of Mortality in Mallards
Ecology, Vol. 65, Iss. 1, 1984-02 ,pp. :


EFFECTS OF A PREDATOR ON PREY METAMORPHOSIS: PLASTIC RESPONSES BY PREY OR SELECTIVE MORTALITY?
Ecology, Vol. 78, Iss. 3, 1997-04 ,pp. :


Urban Ecosystems, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, 2004-03 ,pp. :

