Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 35, Issue 12, pp 1461–1470

Deer Responses to Repellent Stimuli

Authors

    • United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center
    • USDA/APHIS/WS/NWRC Monell Chemical Senses Center
  • Jimmy Taylor
    • United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center
    • USDA/APHIS/WS/NWRC Olympia Field Station
  • Kelly R. Perry
    • United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center
    • USDA/APHIS/WS/NWRC Olympia Field Station
  • Christina Capelli
    • United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center
    • USDA/APHIS/WS/NWRC Olympia Field Station
Article

DOI: 10.1007/s10886-009-9721-6

Cite this article as:
Kimball, B.A., Taylor, J., Perry, K.R. et al. J Chem Ecol (2009) 35: 1461. doi:10.1007/s10886-009-9721-6
  • 235 Views

Abstract

Four repellents representing different modes of action (neophobia, irritation, conditioned aversion, and flavor modification) were tested with captive white-tailed deer in a series of two-choice tests. Two diets differing significantly in energy content were employed in choice tests so that incentive to consume repellent-treated diets varied according to which diet was treated. When the high-energy diet was treated with repellents, only blood (flavor modification) and capsaicin (irritation) proved highly effective. Rapid habituation to the odor of meat and bone meal (neophobia) presented in a sachet limited its effectiveness as a repellent under conditions with a high feeding motivation. Thiram, a stimulus used to condition aversions, was not strongly avoided in these trials, that included only limited exposures to the repellent. These data support previous studies indicating that habituation to odor limits the effectiveness of repellents that are not applied directly to food, while topically-applied irritants and animal-based products produce significant avoidance.

Keywords

AversionForaging behaviorHerbivoreOdocoileus virginianusWildlife damage management

Copyright information

© US Government 2009