ArticleEcology2026
The influence of predator lethality on prey behavior and growth.
Article in Ecology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Predators are known to impact prey populations through both consumptive and nonconsumptive effects, and the magnitude of prey responses has long been assumed to depend on the lethality of the predator. Yet, there are few, if any studies, that have empirically tested this assumption. While there are studies that have approximated lethality and provide support for this assumption, difficulties arise given there is a need to estimate encounter rates and subsequent predation events while simultaneously separating prey risk responses from such events to truly determine predator lethality. Without the separation of risk responses from predation events, predator lethality may be erroneously assigned; for example, a highly lethal predator may elicit strong and early antipredator responses from prey, reducing actual capture and consumption, making the predators 'seem' less lethal than they actually are. We used a marine crab-snail system consisting of Carcinus maenas or Hemigrapsus sanguineus (crab predators) with Nucella lapillus (snail prey), pairing large and small crabs with large and small snails in a two-phase mesocosm experiment. We first eliminated prey's behavioral risk responses to determine predator lethality and second estimated prey's risk responses after rendering the predators nonlethal. We found that the specific lethality of a predator for a given prey did not drive prey risk responses. Our most lethal treatments (large crabs paired with small snails) had similar risk responses to our least lethal treatments (small crabs paired with large snails). The greatest risk responses came from treatments with large crabs paired with large snails (only medium lethality). Thus, while our results do not support the assumption that lethality itself drives prey risk responses, we did find that overall snails responded the most to the largest predators. This is likely due to the ability of these predators to consume prey over a wide size range and prey's inability to recognize their own relative size. Furthermore, prey state (body size) is clearly an equal if not greater contributor to prey risk responses than a predator's ability to kill.
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.