The advantage of alternative tactics of prey and predators depends on the spatial pattern of prey and social interactions among predators

Changes in the feeding ecology of an opportunistic predator inhabiting urban environments in response to COVID-19 lockdown

Urban-dwelling species present feeding and behavioural innovation that enable them to adjust to anthropogenic food subsidies available in cities. In 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 virus outbreak resulted in unprecedented reduction in the human activity worldwide associated with the human lockdown. This situation opened an excellent opportunity to investigate the capability of urban wildlife to cope with this anthropopause event. Here, we investigated the effects of the COVID-19 lockdown on the feeding strategies of the urban yellow-legged gull (Larus michahellis) population inhabiting the highly dense city of Barcelona (NE Spain). We compared the diet of chicks (through stomach content and stable isotope analyses) sampled randomly around the city of Barcelona before (2018 and 2019), during (2020) and after (2021) the COVID-19 lockdown. The results revealed that the anthropopause associated with the lockdown had an effect on the diet of this urban-dwelling predator. The diversity of prey consumed during the lockdown was lower, and consumption of urban birds (pigeons and parakeets) and marine prey (fishery discards and natural prey) decreased during the year of lockdown. Although it was not analysed, these diet changes probably were associated with variations in the availability of these resources due to the decrease in human activity during the lockdown. These results demonstrate the trophic flexibility of urban-dwelling species to cope with the changes in the availability of human-related anthropogenic resources in urban marine ecosystems.

A guide to area-restricted search: a foundational foraging behaviour

Area-restricted search is the capacity to change search effort adaptively in response to resource encounters or expectations, from directional exploration (global, extensive search) to focused exploitation (local, intensive search). This search pattern is used by numerous organisms, from worms and insects to humans, to find various targets, such as food, mates, nests, and other resources. Area-restricted search has been studied for at least 80 years by ecologists, and more recently in the neurological and psychological literature. In general, the conditions promoting this search pattern are: (1) clustered resources; (2) active search (e.g. not a sit-and-wait predator); (3) searcher memory for recent target encounters or expectations; and (4) searcher ignorance about the exact location of targets. Because area-restricted search adapts to resource encounters, the search can be performed at multiple spatial scales. Models and experiments have demonstrated that area-restricted search is superior to alternative search patterns that do not involve a memory of the exact location of the target, such as correlated random walks or Lévy walks/flights. Area-restricted search is triggered by sensory cues whereas concentrated search in the absence of sensory cues is associated with other forms of foraging. Some neural underpinnings of area-restricted search are probably shared across metazoans, suggesting a shared ancestry and a shared solution to a common ecological problem of finding clustered resources. Area-restricted search is also apparent in other domains, such as memory and visual search in humans, which may indicate an exaptation from spatial search to other forms of search. Here, we review these various aspects of area-restricted search, as well as how to identify it, and point to open questions.

The interaction between ambush predators, search patterns of herbivores, and aggregations of plants

While predators benefit from spatial overlap with their prey, prey strive to avoid predators. I used an individual-based simulation comprising sit-and-wait predators, widely foraging herbivores, and plants, to examine the link between predator ambush location, herbivore movement, and plant aggregation. I used a genetic algorithm to reach the best strategies for all players. The predators could ambush herbivores either inside or outside plant patches. The herbivores could use movement of varying directionality levels, with a change in directionality following the detection of plants. When the predators were fixed outside plant patches, the herbivores were selected to use a directional movement before plant encounter followed by a tortuous movement afterwards. When predators were fixed inside patches, herbivores used a continuous directional movement. Predators maintained within-patch positions when the herbivores were fixed to use the directional-tortuous movement. The predator location inside patches led to higher plant aggregations, by changing the herbivore movement. Finally, I allowed half of the predators to search for herbivores and let them compete with sit-and-wait predators located inside plant patches. When plants were clumped and herbivores used a directional-tortuous movement, with a movement shift after plant detection, ambush predators had the highest success relative to widely foraging predators. In all other scenarios, widely foraging predators did much better than ambush predators. The findings from my simulation suggest a behavioral mechanism for several observed phenomena of predator–prey interactions, such as a shorter stay by herbivores in patches when predators ambush them nearby, and a more directional movement of herbivores in riskier habitats.

Factors That Can Affect the Spatial Positioning of Large and Small Individuals in Clusters of Sit-and-Wait Predators

Shadow competition, the interception of prey by sit-and-wait predators closest to the source of prey arrival, is prevalent in clusters of sit-and-wait predators. Peripheral positions in the cluster receive more prey and should thus be more frequently occupied. Models predicting spatial positioning in groups, however, usually ignore variability among group members. Here, I used a simulation model to determine conditions under which small and large sit-and-wait predators, which differ in their attack range, should differ in their spatial positions in the cluster. Small predators occupied peripheral positions more frequently than large predators at the simulation beginning, while the opposite held true as time advanced. Because of the large and small attack range of large and small predators, respectively, small predators mistakenly relocated away from peripheral positions, while large predators did not relocate fast enough from inferior central positions. Any factor that moderated the frequent relocations of small predators or had the opposite effect on large predators assisted small or large predators, respectively, in reaching the more profitable peripheral positions. Furthermore, any factor elevating shadow competition led to longer occupation of the periphery by large predators. This model may explain why sit-and-wait predators are not homogenously distributed in space according to size.

Spatial Patterning of Prey at Reproduction to Reduce Predation Risk: What Drives Dispersion from Groups?

Group living is a widespread behavior thought to be an evolutionary adaptation for reducing predation risk. Many group-living species, however, spend a portion of their life cycle as dispersed individuals, suggesting that the costs and benefits of these opposing behaviors vary temporally. Here, we evaluated mechanistic hypotheses for explaining individual dispersion as a tactic for reducing predation risk at reproduction (i.e., birthing) in an otherwise group-living animal. Using simulation analyses parameterized by empirical data, we assessed whether dispersion increases reproductive success by (i) increasing predator search time, (ii) reducing predator encounter rates because individuals are inconspicuous relative to groups, or (iii) eliminating the risk of multiple kills per encounter. Simulations indicate that dispersion becomes favorable only when detectability increases with group size and there is risk of multiple kills per encounter. This latter effect, however, is likely the primary mechanism driving females to disperse at reproduction because group detectability effects are presumably constant year-round. We suggest that the risk of multiple kills imposed by highly vulnerable offspring may be an important factor influencing dispersive behavior in many species, and conservation strategies for such species will require protecting sufficient space to allow dispersion to effectively reduce predation risk.