Activity patterns and temporal predator avoidance of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) during the fawning season
In the presence of a predator, prey may alter their temporal activity patterns to reduce the risk of an encounter that may induce injury or death. Prey perception of predation risk and antipredator responses may increase in the presence of dependent offspring. We conducted a camera trap study during summer 2015 in North Carolina and Tennessee, USA to evaluate temporal avoidance of a predator (coyote Canis latrans) by white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). We analyzed activity patterns of bucks, does, and nursery groups (i.e., groups that included fawns) relative to those of coyotes to determine the coefficient of overlap (Δ) using a kernel density estimator. We found that bucks and does had similar Δ with coyotes [Δ1 = 0.729 (0.629–0.890) and Δ1 = 0.686 (0.558–0.816, respectively] and exhibited crepuscular activity patterns comparable to those of coyotes. However, nursery groups displayed a dramatically different activity pattern: unimodal activity was concentrated in the middle of the day with little overlap with coyote activity [Δ1 = 0.362 (0.176–0.491)]. Because adult deer are rarely prey for coyotes, whereas fawns are common prey during summer, the shift in activity patterns of nursery groups demonstrates a behavioral shift likely aimed at avoiding coyote predation on fawns.
KeywordsCamera traps Canis latrans Landscape of fear Reproductive condition Risky time hypothesis Prey–predator interaction
Sheryl Bryan, Marquette Crockett, and Matt McCombs provided logistical support. Housing was provided by the Southern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy. Equipment and supplies used in this project were provided by Southern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy and the US Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. Associate editor Nobuyuki Kuthsukake, as well as Susan Lingle, and L. Mike Conner provided comments that greatly improved this manuscript. The authors declare no conflict of interest in relation to this work. The use of any trade name, product or firm does not imply endorsement by the US government.
- Beier P, McCullough DR (1990) Factors influencing white-tailed deer activity patterns and habitat use. Wildl Monogr 109:3–51Google Scholar
- Brown JS (1999) Vigilance, patch use and habitat selection: foraging under predation risk. Evol Ecol Res 1:49–71Google Scholar
- Core Development Team R (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Core Development Team, ViennaGoogle Scholar
- Daan S (1981) Biological rhythms. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Hill EP, Sumner PW, Wooding JB (1987) Human influences on range expansion of coyotes in the southeast. Wildl Soc Bull 15:521–524Google Scholar
- Meredith MS, Ridout M (2017) Package ‘overlap’. R package version 0.2.3. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/overlap/overlap.pdf. Accessed 2 June 2017
- Moser AM, Diggins CA, Silvis A, Ford WM (2016) Habitat selection and activity patterns of Appalachian cottontail in high-elevation habitats in the southern Appalachians. In: Abstracts of the 23rd Annual Wildlife Society Conference, Raleigh, North Carolina, 15–19 OctoberGoogle Scholar
- Nelson MA, Cherry MJ, Howze MB, Warren RJ, Conner LM (2015) Coyote and bobcat predation on white-tailed deer fawns in a longleaf pine ecosystem in southwestern Georgia. J Southeast Assoc Fish Wildl Agencies 2:208–213Google Scholar
- Parker GR (1995) Eastern coyote. Nimbus, HalifaxGoogle Scholar
- Stiling PD (1999) Ecology: theories and applications. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar