Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35927829›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of animal ecology2022

Artificial selection in human-wildlife feeding interactions.

Laura L Griffin, Amy Haigh, Bawan Amin, Jordan Faull, Alison Norman, Simone Ciuti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of animal ecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Approaching humans for food is a behavior transmitted from mothers to offspring in a large herbivore.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    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

6 authors.

Laura L GriffinLaboratory of Wildlife Ecology and Behaviour, SBES, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-3501-3392
Amy HaighLaboratory of Wildlife Ecology and Behaviour, SBES, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-7555-5383
Bawan AminLaboratory of Wildlife Ecology and Behaviour, SBES, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-5371-585X
Jordan FaullLaboratory of Wildlife Ecology and Behaviour, SBES, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Alison NormanLaboratory of Wildlife Ecology and Behaviour, SBES, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-2868-4590
Simone CiutiLaboratory of Wildlife Ecology and Behaviour, SBES, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-1052-9509

Funding

Office of Public Works, Ireland.University College Dublin
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The artificial selection of traits in wildlife populations through hunting and fishing has been well documented. However, despite their rising popularity, the role that artificial selection may play in non-extractive wildlife activities, for example, recreational feeding activities, remains unknown. If only a subset of a population takes advantage of human-wildlife feeding interactions, and if this results in different fitness advantages for these individuals, then artificial selection may be at work. We have tested this hypothesis using a wild fallow deer population living at the edge of a capital city as our model population. In contrast to previous assumptions on the randomness of human-wildlife feeding interactions, we found that a limited non-random portion of an entire population is continuously engaging with people. We found that the willingness to beg for food from humans exists on a continuum of inter-individual repeatable behaviour; which ranges from risk-taking individuals repeatedly seeking and obtaining food, to shyer individuals avoiding human contact and not receiving food at all, despite all individuals having received equal exposure to human presence from birth and coexisting in the same herds together. Bolder individuals obtain significantly more food directly from humans, resulting in early interception of food offerings and preventing other individuals from obtaining supplemental feeding. Those females that beg consistently also produce significantly heavier fawns (300-500 g heavier), which may provide their offspring with a survival advantage. This indicates that these interactions result in disparity in diet and nutrition across the population, impacting associated physiology and reproduction, and may result in artificial selection of the begging behavioural trait. This is the first time that this consistent variation in behaviour and its potential link to artificial selection has been identified in a wildlife population and reveals new potential effects of human-wildlife feeding interactions in other species across both terrestrial and aquatic habitats.

Indexed as

Animals, WildDeerAnimalsDietFemaleHumansPhenotypeReproductionamong-individual differencesartificial feedingbirthweightcervidsfitnesshuman-wildlife interactionswelfare

Identifiers

PMID35927829
PMCPMC9546373

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.