Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39006024›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2024

Predator in proximity: how does a large carnivore respond to anthropogenic pressures at fine-scales? Implications for interface area management.

Manu Mohan, Sambandam Sathyakumar, Ramesh Krishnamurthy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

3 authors.

Manu MohanPost-Graduate Programme in Wildlife Science, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.ORCID 0000-0002-1697-6302
Sambandam SathyakumarDepartment of Endangered Species Management, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.ORCID 0000-0003-2027-4706
Ramesh KrishnamurthyDepartment of Landscape Level Planning and Management, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.

Funding

National Water Development Agency, Government of IndiaPost-graduate Programme in Wildlife ScienceWildlife Institute of India
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Driven by habitat loss and fragmentation, large carnivores are increasingly navigating human-dominated landscapes, where their activity is restricted and their behaviour altered. This movement, however, raises significant concerns and costs for people living nearby. While intricately linked, studies often isolate human and carnivore impacts, hindering effective management efforts. Hence, in this study, we brought these two into a common framework, focusing on an interface area between the critical tiger habitat and the human-dominated multiple-use buffer area of a central Indian protected area. Methods: We employed a fine-scale camera trap survey complemented by GPS-collar movement data to understand spatio-temporal activity patterns and adjustments of tigers in response to anthropogenic pressures. We used an occupancy framework to evaluate space use, Bayesian circular GLMs to model temporal activity, and home range and step length analyses to assess the movement patterns of tigers. Further, we used predation-risk models to understand conflict patterns as a function of tiger presence and other habitat variables. Results: Despite disturbance, a high proportion of the sampled area was occupied by 17 unique tigers (ψ = 0.76; CI [0.73-0.92]). The distance to villages (β ± SE = 0.63 ± 0.21) and the relative abundance of large-bodied wild prey (β ± SE = 0.72 ± 0.37) emerged as key predictors of tiger space use probability, indicating a preference for wild prey by tigers, while human influences constrained their habitat utilisation. Distance to villages was also identified as the most significant predictor of the tigers' temporal activity (μ ± σ = 3.03 ± 0.06 rad) that exhibited higher nocturnality near villages. A total of 11% of tiger home ranges were within village boundaries, accompanied by faster movement in these areas (displacement 40-82% higher). Livestock depredation probability by tigers increased with proximity to villages ( Conclusions: Shared space of carnivores and humans requires dynamic site-specific actions grounded in evidence-based decision-making. This study emphasises the importance of concurrently addressing the intricate interactions between humans and large carnivores, particularly the latter's behavioural adaptations and role in conflict dynamics. Such an integrated approach is essential to unravel cause-effect relationships and promote effective interface management in human-dominated landscapes.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemPredatory BehaviorTigersAnimalsAnthropogenic EffectsBayes TheoremHumansIndiaAnthropoceneBayesian circular GLMCamera trappingCoexistenceHuman-carnivore interactionHuman-dominated landscapeHuman-wildlife conflictLivestock depredationPanthera tigrisPredation-risk modelling

Identifiers

PMID39006024
PMCPMC11246029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.