Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33507398›Full record

ArticleOecologia2021

Dynamic interactions between apex predators reveal contrasting seasonal attraction patterns.

S Périquet, H Fritz, E Revilla, D W Macdonald, A J Loveridge, G Mtare, M Valeix

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Oecologia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

S PériquetLaboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive UMR 5558, CNRS, Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, 69622, Villeurbanne, France. stephanie.periquet@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8901-3729
H FritzLaboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive UMR 5558, CNRS, Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, 69622, Villeurbanne, France.
E RevillaDepartamento Biología de la Conservación, Estación Biológica de Doñana (CSIC), 26 Calle Américo Vespucio, 41092, Seville, Spain.
D W MacdonaldWildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Recanati-Kaplan Centre, Tubney House, Abingdon Road, Oxfordshire, OX13 5QL, United Kingdom.
A J LoveridgeWildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Recanati-Kaplan Centre, Tubney House, Abingdon Road, Oxfordshire, OX13 5QL, United Kingdom.
G MtareZimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority, Causeway, PO Box CY140, Harare, Zimbabwe.
M ValeixLaboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive UMR 5558, CNRS, Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, 69622, Villeurbanne, France.

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche ANR-08-BLAN-0022Darwin Initiative for Biodiversity 162/09/015FEDER CGL2009-07301/BOSFEDER CGL2012- 252 35931/BOSFEDER CGL2017- 83045-R
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Apex predators play important roles in ecosystem functioning and, where they coexist, intraguild interactions can have profound effects on trophic relationships. Interactions between predators range from intraguild predation and competition to facilitation through scavenging opportunities. Despite the increased availability of fine-scale GPS data, the determinants and outcomes of encounters between apex predators remain understudied. We used simultaneous GPS data from collared spotted hyaenas (Crocuta crocuta) and African lions (Panthera leo) in Hwange National Park, Zimbabwe, to determine the environmental conditions of the encounters between the two species, which species provoked the encounter, and which species dominated the encounter. Our results show that encounters between hyaenas and lions are mostly resource-related (over a carcass or around waterholes). In the wet season, encounters mainly occur at a carcass, with lions being dominant over its access. In the dry season, encounters mainly occur in the absence of a carcass and near waterholes. Movements of hyaenas and lions before, during, and after these dry-season encounters suggest two interference scenarios: a passive interference scenario whereby both predators would be attracted to waterholes but lions would leave a waterhole used by hyaenas because of prey disturbance, and an active interference scenario whereby hyaenas would actively chase lions from waterhole areas, which are prime hunting grounds. This study highlights the seasonal dynamics of predator interactions and illustrates how the relative importance of negative interactions (interference competition during the dry season) and positive interactions (scavenging opportunities during the wet season) shifts over the course of the year.

Indexed as

EcosystemLionsAnimalsPredatory BehaviorSeasonsAfrican lionCarnivore intraguild interactionsCrocuta crocutaPanthera leoSpotted hyaena

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.