ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2023
Sensory integration of danger and safety cues may explain the fear of a quiet coyote.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Sensory integration of danger and safety cues may explain the fear of a quiet coyote.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sensory integration theory predicts natural selection should favour adaptive responses of animals to multiple forms of information, yet empirical tests of this prediction are rare, particularly in free-living mammals. Studying indirect predator cues offers a salient opportunity to inquire about multimodal risk assessment and its potentially interactive effects on prey responses. Here we exposed California ground squirrels from two study sites (that differ in human and domestic dog activity) to acoustic and/or olfactory predator cues to reveal divergent patterns of signal dominance. Olfactory information most strongly predicted space use within the testing arena. That is, individuals, especially those at the human-impacted site, avoided coyote urine, a danger cue that may communicate the proximity of a coyote. By contrast, subjects allocated less time to risk-sensitive behaviours when exposed to acoustic cues. Specifically, although individuals were consistent in their behavioural responses across trials, 'quiet coyotes' (urine without calls) significantly increased the behavioural reactivity of prey, likely because coyotes rarely vocalize when hunting. More broadly, our findings highlight the need to consider the evolution of integrated fear responses and contribute to an emerging understanding of how animals integrate multiple forms of information to trade off between danger and safety cues in a changing world.
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.