Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Of mice and cats: interspecific variation in prey responses to direct and indirect predator cues

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Prey behavioral responses to predation risk cues may vary between species; moreover, the strength of these behaviors may differ depending on risk cue. In northwestern Taiwan, we used the giving up density (GUD) framework supported with camera trap observations to test how two wild murid rodents that differ by up to fivefold in body size (striped field mouse, Apodemus agrarius, and lesser rice-field rat, Rattus losea) altered their foraging behavior depending on microhabitat characteristics (indirect predator cues) and exposure to predator odors (direct predator cues) of three felids: the native leopard cat (Prionailurus bengalensis), the introduced domestic cat (Felis catus), and the exotic bobcat (Lynx rufus). GUD was not affected by predator odors but rather by microhabitat type; rodents removed more seeds under the cover of vegetation compared to exposed food stations, which may reflect a proactive approach to avoiding high-risk areas in a heterogeneous environment. The smaller mouse, A. agrarius, spent more time foraging in experimental food patches compared to the larger rat, R. losea, irrespective of predator odor. Conversely, R. losea spent more time investigating stations and exhibiting vigilance compared to A. agrarius. Species-level differences are consistent with behavioral phenomenon that smaller, “faster” species confer more boldness compared to larger, “slower” species, which reinforces the connection between behavior and pace of life, and further elucidates how the behavior of different prey species may not be interchangeable in contexts of risk.

Significance statement

In the wild, animals eat while trying not to be eaten. Therefore, prey often change their behavior in response to risk cues, but the intricacies of these behavioral shifts can be complex and vary between species. With the use of camera trap monitoring and experimental food patches, we were able to examine fine-scale species-specific behaviors and test for dissimilarities. Two species of wild rodents did not change their foraging behavior to the addition of predator odors, but we did observe an interspecific behavioral variation. The smaller, “faster” rodent species spent more time foraging, while the larger, “slower” species spent more time vigilant with more thorough investigation. These interspecific behavioral differences likely indicate the smaller species demonstrated more boldness, whereas the larger rodent was more cautious, which is consistent with the association between pace of life (POL) and behavior.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All the data analyzed during this study are included in Supplementary Material [ESM 2_GUD dataset, ESM 3_Camera trap dataset_Experiment 1, ESM 4_Camera trap dataset_Experiment 2].

References

  • Anson JR, Dickman CR, Boonstra R, Jessop TS (2013) Stress triangle: do introduced predators exert indirect costs on native predators and prey? PLoS ONE 8:e60916

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Apfelbach R, Blanchard CD, Blanchard RJ, Hayes RA, McGregor IS (2005) The effects of predator odors in mammalian prey species: a review of field and laboratory studies. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 29:1123–1144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apfelbach R, Parsons MH, Soini HA, Novotny MV (2015) Are single odorous components of a predator sufficient to elicit defensive behaviors in prey species? Front Neurosci 9:263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett SA (2008) The rat: a study in behavior. Routledge Publishers, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) lme4: linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1–8. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4. Accessed 8 Apr 2022

  • Bedoya-Perez MA, Carthey AJ, Mella VS, McArthur C, Banks PB (2013) A practical guide to avoid giving up on giving-up densities. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 67:1541–1553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bedoya-Pérez MA, Smith KL, Kevin RC, Luo JL, Crowther MS, McGregor IS (2019) Parameters that affect fear responses in rodents and how to use them for management. Front Ecol Evol 7:136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger-Tal O, Nathan J, Meron E, Saltz D (2014) The exploration-exploitation dilemma: a multidisciplinary framework. PLoS ONE 9:e95693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Best IN, Shaner PJL, Lo HY, Pei KJC, Kuo CC (2020) Bigger doesn’t mean bolder: behavioral variation of four wild rodent species to novelty and predation risk following a fast-slow continuum. Front Zool 17:27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard RJ, Blanchard DC (1989) Antipredator defensive behaviors in a visible burrow system. J Comp Psychol 103:70–82

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bleicher SS (2017) The landscape of fear conceptual framework: definition and review of current applications and misuses. PeerJ 5:e3772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bramley GN, Waas JR (2001) Laboratory and field evaluation of predator odors as repellents for kiore (Rattus exulans) and ship rats (R. rattus). J Chem Ecol 27:1029–1047

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JS (1988) Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competition. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22:37–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JS, Morgan RA (1995) Effects of foraging behavior and spatial scale on diet selectivity: a test with fox squirrels. Oikos 74:122–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bytheway JP, Carthey AJ, Banks PB (2013) Risk vs. reward: how predators and prey respond to aging olfactory cues. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 67:715–725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caravaggi A, Banks PB, Burton AC, Finlay CMV, Haswell PM, Hayward MW, Rowcliffe MJ, Wood MD (2017) A review of camera trapping for conservation behaviour research. Remote Sens Ecol Conserv 3:109–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Careau V, Bininda-Emonds ORP, Thomas DW, Réale D, Humphries MM (2009) Exploration strategies map along fast-slow metabolic and life-history continua in muroid rodents. Funct Ecol 23:150–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carthey AJ, Banks PB (2016) Naiveté is not forever: responses of a vulnerable native rodent to its long term alien predators. Oikos 125:918–926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carthey AJ, Banks PB (2018) Naïve, bold, or just hungry? An invasive exotic prey species recognises but does not respond to its predators. Biol Invasions 20:3417–3429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carthey AJ, Blumstein DT (2018) Predicting predator recognition in a changing world. Trends Ecol Evol 33:106–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen YC (2005) Comparative thermoregulation of field rodents at different elevations in central Taiwan. Dissertation, Tunghai University, Taichung, Taiwan (Chinese with English Abstract)

  • Chen MT, Liang YJ, Kuo CC, Pei KJC (2016) Home ranges, movements and activity patterns of leopard cats (Prionailurus bengalensis) and threats to them in Taiwan. Mamm Study 41:77–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chuang WC (2012) Food habits of leopard cats (Prionailurus bengelensis) and domestic cats (Felis catus) in Tongxiao, Miaoli. Dissertation, National Pingtung University of Science and Technology, Pingtung, Taiwan (Chinese with English Abstract)

  • Cozzoli F, Gjoni V, Basset A (2019) Size dependency of patch departure behavior: evidence from granivorous rodents. Ecology 100:e02800

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crego RD, Jiménez JE, Rozzi R (2018) Macro-and micro-habitat selection of small rodents and their predation risk perception under a novel invasive predator at the southern end of the Americas. Mammal Res 63:267–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cremona T, Crowther MS, Webb JK (2014) Variation of prey responses to cues from a mesopredator and an apex predator. Austral Ecol 39:749–754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cremona T, Mella VS, Webb JK, Crowther MS (2015) Do individual differences in behavior influence wild rodents more than predation risk? J Mammal 96:1337–1343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dammhahn M, Almeling L (2012) Is risk taking during foraging a personality trait? A field test for cross-context consistency in boldness. Anim Behav 84:1131–1139

  • Dammhahn M, Dingemanse NJ, Niemelä PT, Réale D (2018) Pace-of-life syndromes: a framework for the adaptive integration of behaviour, physiology and life history. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 72:62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Degen AA, Kam M, Khokhlova IS, Krasnov BR, Barraclough TG (1998) Average daily metabolic rate of rodents: habitat and dietary comparisons. Funct Ecol 12:63–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickman CR (1996) Impact of exotic generalist predators on the native fauna of Australia. Wildlife Biol 2:185–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dielenberg RA, McGregor IS (2001) Defensive behavior in rats towards predatory odors: a review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 25:597–609

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dobson FS, Oli MK (2007) Fast and slow life histories of rodents. In: Wolf JO, Sherman PW (eds) Rodent societies: an ecological and evolutionary perspective. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 99–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccard JA, Meißner JK, Heurich M (2017) European roe deer increase vigilance when faced with immediate predation risk by Eurasian lynx. Ethology 123:30–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg JF, Kleiman DG (1972) Olfactory communication in mammals. Annu Rev Ecol Evol S 3:1–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farnworth B, Meitern R, Innes J, Waas JR (2019) Increasing predation risk with light reduces speed, exploration and visit duration of invasive ship rats (Rattus rattus). Sci Rep 9:3739

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farnworth B, Innes J, Davy M, Little L, Cave V, Waas JR (2020) Antipredator responses of ship rats to visual stimuli: combining unimodal predation cues generates risk avoidance. Anim Behav 168:149–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaynor KM, Brown JS, Middleton AD, Power ME, Brashares JS (2019) Landscapes of fear: spatial patterns of risk perception and response. Trends Ecol Evol 34:355–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegab IM, Jin Y, Ye M, Wang A, Yin B, Yang S, Wei W (2014) Defensive responses of Brandt’s voles (Lasiopodomys brandtii) to stored cat feces. Physiol Behav 123:193–199

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hermann SL, Thaler JS (2014) Prey perception of predation risk: volatile chemical cues mediate non-consumptive effects of a predator on a herbivorous insect. Oecologia 176:669–676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong SY, Morrissey C, Lin HS, Lin KS, Lin WL, Yao CT, Lin TE, Chan FT, Sun YH (2019) Frequent detection of anticoagulant rodenticides in raptors sampled in Taiwan reflects government rodent control policy. Sci Total Environ 691:1051–1058

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter L, Barrett P (2011) Carnivores of the world. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter L, Barrett P (2015) Wild cats of the world. Bloomsbury Publishing, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger B (2017) Package ‘r2glmm’. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=r2glmm. Accessed 8 Apr 2022

  • Jolly CJ, Webb JK, Phillips BL (2018) The perils of paradise: an endangered species conserved on an island loses antipredator behaviours within 13 generations. Biol Lett 14:20180222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones ME, Apfelbach R, Banks PB et al (2016) A nose for death: integrating trophic and informational networks for conservation and management. Front Ecol Evol 4:124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kovacs EK, Crowther MS, Webb JK, Dickman CR (2012) Population and behavioural responses of native prey to alien predation. Oecologia 168:947–957

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ku TY, Lin CC (1980) Abundance and distribution of field rodents in Taiwan. Plant Prot Bull 22:397–420

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuo CC, Huang CL, Wang HC (2011) Identification of potential hosts and vectors of scrub typhus and tick-borne spotted fever group rickettsiae in eastern Taiwan. Med Vet Entomol 25:169–177

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Laundré JW, Hernández L, Altendorf KB (2001) Wolves, elk, and bison: reestablishing the “landscape of fear” in Yellowstone National Park, USA. Can J Zool 79:1401–1409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lima SL, Bednekoff PA (1999) Temporal variation in danger drives antipredator behavior: the predation risk allocation hypothesis. Am Nat 153:649–659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lima SL, Dill LM (1990) Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68:619–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin JG, Réale D (2008) Temperament, risk assessment and habituation to novelty in eastern chipmunks, Tamias striatus. Anim Behav 75:309–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mella VS, Ward AJ, Banks PB, McArthur C (2015) Personality affects the foraging response of a mammalian herbivore to the dual costs of food and fear. Oecologia 177:293–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moll RJ, Redilla KM, Mudumba T, Muneza AB, Gray SM, Abade L, Hayward MW, Millspaugh JJ, Montgomery RA (2017) The many faces of fear: a synthesis of the methodological variation in characterizing predation risk. J Anim Ecol 86:749–765

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montiglio PO, Dammhahn M, Messier GD, Réale D (2018) The pace-of-life syndrome revisited: the role of ecological conditions and natural history on the slow-fast continuum. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 72:116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orrock JL, Danielson BJ (2004) Rodents balancing a variety of risks: invasive fire ants and indirect and direct indicators of predation risk. Oecologia 140:662–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orrock JL, Danielson BJ, Brinkerhoff RJ (2004) Rodent foraging is affected by indirect, but not by direct, cues of predation risk. Behav Ecol 15:433–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons MH, Blumstein DT (2010) Familiarity breeds contempt: kangaroos persistently avoid areas with experimentally deployed dingo scents. PLoS ONE 5:e10403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons MH, Apfelbach R, Banks PB et al (2018) Biologically meaningful scents: a framework for understanding predator–prey research across disciplines. Biol Rev 93:98–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patrick SC, Pinaud D, Weimerskirch H (2017) Boldness predicts an individual’s position along an exploration–exploitation foraging trade-off. J Anim Ecol 86:1257–1268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pei KJC, Lu DJ, Hwang MH, Chao JL, Chen MT (2014) Initiating community-involved conservation activities for endangered leopard cats in Miaoli, Taiwan. Forestry Bureau Cons Res 100–02–08–02, Taipei, Taiwan (in Chinese with English abstract)

  • Powell F, Banks PB (2004) Do house mice modify their foraging behaviour in response to predator odours and habitat? Anim Behav 67:753–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preisser EL, Bolnick DI, Benard MF (2005) Scared to death? The effects of intimidation and consumption in predator–prey interactions. Ecology 86:501–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preisser EL, Orrock JL, Schmitz OJ (2007) Predator hunting mode and habitat domain alter nonconsumptive effects in predator–prey interactions. Ecology 88:2744–2751

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price EO (1984) Behavioral aspects of animal domestication. Q Rev Biol 59:1–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price CJ, Banks PB (2017) Food quality and conspicuousness shape improvements in olfactory discrimination by mice. Proc R Soc B 284:20162629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prugh LR, Golden CD (2014) Does moonlight increase predation risk? Meta-analysis reveals divergent responses of nocturnal mammals to lunar cycles. J Anim Ecol 83:504–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pusenius J, Ostfeld RS (2002) Mammalian predator scent, vegetation cover and tree seedling predation by meadow voles. Ecography 25:481–487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qi WL (2008) A field guide to mammals in Taiwan. Tian Xia Wen Hua, Taipei (in Chinese)

  • R Development Core Team (2022) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/

  • Réale D, Reader SM, Sol D, McDougall PT, Dingemanse NJ (2007) Integrating animal temperament within ecology and evolution. Biol Rev 82:291–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Réale D, Garant D, Humphries MM, Bergeron P, Careau V, Montiglio PO (2010) Personality and the emergence of the pace-of-life syndrome concept at the population level. Phil Trans R Soc B 365:4051–4063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricklefs RE, Wikelski M (2002) The physiology/life-history nexus. Trends Ecol Evol 17:462–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royauté R, Berdal MA, Garrison CR, Dochtermann NA (2018) Paceless life? A meta-analysis of the pace-of-life syndrome hypothesis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 72:64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Searle KR, Stokes CJ, Gordon IJ (2008) When foraging and fear meet: using foraging hierarchies to inform assessments of landscapes of fear. Behav Ecol 19:475–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Severinghaus LL, Hsu YC (2015) Study of rodent control by black-winged kite. Research Report of Taiwanese Agricultural Committee, Taipei, Taiwan

  • Severinghaus LL, Ding TS, Fang WH, Lin WH, Tsai MC, Yen CW (2012) The avifauna of Taiwan, 2nd edn. Forestry Bureau, Council of Agriculture, Taipei, Taiwan

  • Shapira I, Walker E, Brunton DH, Raubenheimer D (2013) Responses to direct versus indirect cues of predation and competition in naϊve invasive mice: implications for management. N Z J Ecol 37:33–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Sih A, Bell A, Johnson JC (2004) Behavioral syndromes: an ecological and evolutionary overview. Trends Ecol Evol 19:372–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith JA, Suraci JP, Hunter JS et al (2020) Zooming in on mechanistic predator-prey ecology: integrating camera traps with experimental methods to reveal the drivers of ecological interactions. J Appl Ecol 89:1997–2012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sol D, Maspons J, Gonzalez-Voyer A, Morales-Castilla I, Garamszegi LZ, Møller AP (2018) Risk-taking behavior, urbanization and the pace of life in birds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 72:59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer EE, Crowther MS, Dickman CR (2014) Risky business: do native rodents use habitat and odor cues to manage predation risk in Australian deserts? PLoS ONE 9:e90566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stamps JA (2007) Growth-mortality tradeoffs and ‘personality traits’ in animals. Ecol Lett 10:355–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stearns SC (1983) The influence of size and phylogeny on patterns of covariation among life-history traits in the mammals. Oikos 41:173–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stokes VL, Banks PB, Pech RP, Spratt DM (2009) Competition in an invaded rodent community reveals black rats as a threat to native bush rats in littoral rainforest of south-eastern Australia. J Appl Ecol 46:1239–1247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storsberg S, Stryjek R, Modlińska K, Gottswinter K, D’Hanis W, Kröber A, Wernecke KEA, Roskoden T, Fendt M (2018) Predator odor induced defensive behavior in wild and laboratory rats: a comparative study. Physiol Behav 194:341–347

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stryjek R, Mioduszewska B, Spaltabaka-Gędek E, Juszczak GR (2018) Wild Norway rats do not avoid predator scents when collecting food in a familiar habitat: a field study. Sci Rep 8:9475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takahashi LK, Nakashima BR, Hong H, Watanabe K (2005) The smell of danger: a behavioral and neural analysis of predator odor-induced fear. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 29:1157–1167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorson JM, Morgan RA, Brown JS, Norman JE (1998) Direct and indirect cues of predatory risk and patch use by fox squirrels and thirteen-lined ground squirrels. Behav Ecol 9:151–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verdolin JL (2006) Meta-analysis of foraging and predation risk trade-offs in terrestrial systems. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 60:457–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Merten S, Dingemanse NJ, da Luz MM, Rychlik L (2020) Individual behavior, behavioral stability, and pace of life within and among five shrew species. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 74:15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang PY, Wang ZT (2001) Telemetry-tracked range and movements of Bandicota indica and Rattus losea in sugarcane field. Report of the Taiwan Sugar Research Institute 174:15–34[In Chinese]

  • Welch RJ, Périquet S, Petelle MB, le Roux A (2017) Hunter or hunted? Perceptions of risk and reward in a small mesopredator. J Mammal 98:1531–1537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • While GM, McArthur C (2005) Foraging in a risky environment: a comparison of Bennett’s wallabies Macropus rufogriseus rufogriseus (Marsupialia: Macropodidae) and red-bellied pademelons Thylogale billiardierii (Marsupialia: Macropodidae) in open habitats. Austral Ecol 30:756–764

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikelski M, Ricklefs RE (2001) The physiology of life histories. Trends Ecol Evol 16:479–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikelski M, Spinney L, Schelsky W, Scheuerlein A, Gwinner E (2003) Slow pace of life in tropical sedentary birds: a common-garden experiment on four stonechat populations from different latitudes. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:2383–2388

  • Winter L (2004) Trap-neuter-release programs: the reality and the impacts. J Am Vet Med Assoc 225:1369–1376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf M, van Doorn GS, Leimar O, Weissing FJ (2007) Life-history trade-offs favour the evolution of animal personalities. Nature 447:581–584

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff JO, Sherman PW (2008) Rodent societies: an ecological and evolutionary perspective. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang S, Zhuge Y (2006) Home range of Apodemus agrarius and Suncus murinus and their interspecific relationship on farmland. Acta Theriol Sin 9:186

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the staff of the Formosan Animal Area at Taipei Zoo, as well as Megan Kuo and the staff at Pingtung Rescue Center for Endangered Wild Animals for their help in collecting the leopard cat fecal samples. We would also like to thank the owners of the domestic cat donors for the collection of the odor samples. We extend our gratitude to Dr. Esther van der Meer and Hans Dullemont for their extensive help introducing us to the study area and providing considerable advice. We are also very grateful to the reviewers for their valuable recommendations to improve the quality of this paper. Special thanks are given to the volunteers for their help with the field work.

Funding

This study was funded by Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST 107–2311-B-003–003) awarded to CCK. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Biodiversity Program, Taiwan International Graduate Program, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan

    Ian Nicholas Best

  2. Department of Life Sciences, National Taiwan Normal University, No. 88, Sec. 4, Tingzhou Rd., Taipei City, 116, Taiwan

    Ian Nicholas Best, Pei-Jen Lee Shaner & Chi-Chien Kuo

  3. Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies, National Dong Hwa University, Hualien, Taiwan

    Pei-Jen Lee Shaner

  4. Institute of Wildlife Conservation, College of Veterinary Medicine, National Pingtung University of Science and Technology, Neipu, Pingtung, Taiwan

    Kurtis Jai-Chyi Pei

Authors
  1. Ian Nicholas Best
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pei-Jen Lee Shaner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kurtis Jai-Chyi Pei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chi-Chien Kuo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

INB, CCK, and KCJP conceived and designed the study; INB collected the data and performed the experimentation; INB and PJLS analyzed the data; INB wrote and prepared the first draft of the manuscript. All the authors edited and revised the manuscript. CCK oversaw the study; All the authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chi-Chien Kuo.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

All components of this study were approved by National Taiwan Normal University. Since the experimentation in this study was noninvasive and no live animal trapping was performed, we did not require an animal handling permit from the university. The experimental procedures adhered to the ethical standards of 1964 Declaration of Helsinki, and all researchers involved in this study abided to the legal requirements of animal welfare in Taiwan.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Communicated by A. G Ophir

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Best, I.N., Shaner, PJ.L., Pei, K.JC. et al. Of mice and cats: interspecific variation in prey responses to direct and indirect predator cues. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 77, 3 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-022-03277-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-022-03277-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation