Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40341990›Full record

ArticleEcology2025

Navigating the risks and rewards of scavenging in multipredator, human-impacted landscapes.

Calum X Cunningham, Rebecca Windell, Lauren C Satterfield, Aaron J Wirsing, Thomas M Newsome, Taylor R Ganz, Laura R Prugh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Calum X CunninghamSchool of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1640-2533
Rebecca WindellSchool of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Lauren C SatterfieldSchool of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Aaron J WirsingSchool of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Thomas M NewsomeSchool of Life and Environmental Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3457-3256
Taylor R GanzSchool of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0644-7845
Laura R PrughSchool of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.

Funding

Fulbright AustraliaNational Science Foundation DEB-1652420Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 16-07846Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 17-08960
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large carnivores can influence smaller scavengers through both positive and negative interactions (e.g., carrion provisioning and intraguild killing) and ultimately shape scavenging efficiency. However, we know little about this trade-off in anthropogenic landscapes where humans kill carnivores and provide carrion subsidies. In the context of wolf (Canis lupus) recolonization of human-impacted landscapes in Washington, USA, we investigated how sources of ungulate mortality (wolves, cougars [Puma concolor], and vehicles) shape scavenging efficiency, community-wide carcass visitations, and the strategies used by scavengers to navigate risk-reward trade-offs. Cougar and wolf kills mostly occurred in areas with low-to-moderate human influence, whereas roadkill typically occurred in areas with high human impact. Wolves consumed their kills most rapidly (median <4.7 days), providing fewer scavenging opportunities than cougar- and vehicle-killed ungulates, which persisted longer (median = 8.9 and 12 days, respectively). Roadkill primarily attracted avian scavengers, whereas mammalian scavengers used roadkill to a lesser degree and did so by shifting to more nocturnal foraging. The absence in winter of turkey vultures (Cathartes aura) and black bears (Ursus americanus), which are obligate and apex scavengers, respectively, coincided with a seasonal increase in scavenging by most other species. The two mammalian mesocarnivores exhibited divergent strategies: Coyotes (Canis latrans) frequently scavenged but usually for short durations and with heightened vigilance at predator kills, whereas bobcats (Lynx rufus) visited carcasses less frequently but fed for longer durations and displayed low vigilance while scavenging. These results suggest a hierarchical decision-making process whereby scavengers first choose whether to forage at a carcass before fine-tuning foraging duration, using temporal refugia, or increasing vigilance. Predator recovery in human-dominated landscapes therefore adds complexity to the spatiotemporal landscape of risks and rewards, and outcomes for scavengers will likely depend on their propensity to scavenge and vulnerability to humans and large predators.

Indexed as

Anthropogenic EffectsEcosystemFeeding BehaviorHuman ActivitiesPumaWolvesAnimalsHumansPredatory Behavioranthropogenic landscapecarcassmesocarnivoresmesoscavengerrisk–reward trade‐offscavenging

Identifiers

PMID40341990
PMCPMC12060637

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.