ArticleEcology and evolution2021
Consistency in the flight and visual orientation distances of habituated chacma baboons after an observed leopard predation. Do flight initiation distance methods always measure perceived predation risk?
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- No Evidence of Reactive Avoidance of Baboons (Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Zebra Risk Perception in a Landscape of Fear.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Behavioural compatibility, not fear, best predicts the looking patterns of chacma baboons.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Animal-friendly behavioral testing in field studies: examples from ground squirrels.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2023Review
- Intolerant baboons avoid observer proximity, creating biased inter-individual association patterns.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Consistency in the flight and visual orientation distances of habituated chacma baboons after an observed leopard predation. Do flight initiation distance methods always measure perceived predation risk?Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Flight initiation distance (FID) procedures are used to assess the risk perception animals have for threats (e.g., natural predators, hunters), but it is unclear whether these assessments remain meaningful if animals have habituated to certain human stimuli (e.g., researchers, tourists). Our previous work showed that habituated baboons displayed individually distinct and consistent responses to human approaches, a tolerance trait, but it is unknown if the trait is resilient to life-threatening scenarios. If it were consistent, it would imply FIDs might measure specific human threat perception only and not generalize to other threats such as predators when animals have experienced habituation processes. We used FID procedures to compare baseline responses to the visual orientation distance, FID, and individual tolerance estimates assessed after a leopard predation on an adult male baboon (group member). All variables were consistent despite the predation event, suggesting tolerance to observers was largely unaffected by the predation and FID procedures are unlikely to be generalizable to other threats when habituation has occurred. FID approaches could be an important tool for assessing how humans influence animal behavior across a range of contexts, but careful planning is required to understand the type of stimuli presented.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.