Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Alarm calls or predator calls: which elicit stronger responses in ungulate communities living with and without lions?

  • Behavioral ecology – original research
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Alarm calls and predator vocalizations convey information on predator presence and potential risk. Generally, prey employ anti-predator behaviours more in response to alarm calls. However, occasionally prey respond more to the vocalizations of specific predators. A key question is do prey still respond to alarm calls and predator vocalizations when a dangerous predator is absent? Additionally, would the prey species’ response (e.g. vigilance) differ from prey already living with these predators? Using auditory playbacks, we tested whether four herbivore species living with lions responded more to alarm calls than lion vocalizations compared to a black cuckoo control call. Overall, red hartebeest, wildebeest and zebra had greater vigilance in response to the lion roars compared to the alarm calls. The differences in vigilance suggest that, despite the lion roars not being related to hunting, these herbivores perceived the predator vocalizations as a more immediate indicator of risk than the alarm calls. We then tested whether herbivores living with lions increased their vigilance more in response to the calls than conspecifics in a lion-free section. Despite greater overall vigilance in the lion section, gemsbok and zebra in the lion-free section significantly increased their vigilance in response to the lion roars. This indicates that species under the greatest threat from a predator (e.g. preferred prey) may maintain innate anti-predator responses to an absent but dangerous predator longer than less preferred prey. Ultimately, our results indicate that cues from dangerous predators can have greater effects on anti-predator behaviours than alarm calls for some prey species.

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Altmann J (1974) Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. Behaviour 49:227–266

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ananthakrishnan G, Eklund R, Peters G, Mabiza E (2011) An acoustic analysis of lion roars. II: vocal tract characteristics. In: Proceedings from Fonetik 2011, Fonetik 2011. Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 8–10 June 2011, pp 5–8

  • Banks PB, Norrdahl K, Korpimäki E (2002) Mobility decisions and the predation risks of reintroduction. Biol Conserv 103:133–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrera JP, Chong L, Judy KN, Blumstein DT (2011) Reliability of public information: predators provide more information about risk than conspecifics. Anim Behav 81:779–787

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp G (2015) Animal vigilance: monitoring predators and competitors. Academic Press, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Berger J (2007) Carnivore repatriation and holarctic prey: narrowing the deficit in ecological effectiveness. Conserv Biol 21:1105–1116

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blumstein DT (2006) The multipredator hypothesis and the evolutionary persistence of antipredator behavior. Ethology 112:209–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumstein DT, Daniel JC, Griffin AS, Evans CS (2000) Insular tammar wallabies (Macropus eugenii) respond to visual but not acoustic cues from predators. Behav Ecol 11:528–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumstein DT, Cooley L, Winternitz J, Daniel JC (2008) Do yellow-bellied marmots respond to predator vocalizations? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62:457–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumstein DT, Ferando E, Stankowich T (2009) A test of the multipredator hypothesis: yellow-bellied marmots respond fearfully to the sight of novel and extinct predators. Anim Behav 78:873–878

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caro T (2005) Antipredator defenses in birds and mammals. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Carthey AJ, Blumstein DT (2017) Predicting predator recognition in a changing world. Trends Ecol Evol 33:106–115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chamaillé-Jammes S, Malcuit H, Le Saout S, Martin J-L (2014) Innate threat-sensitive foraging: black-tailed deer remain more fearful of wolf than of the less dangerous black bear even after 100 years of wolf absence. Oecologia 174:1151–1158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Clements HS, Tambling CJ, Hayward MW, Kerley GI (2014) An objective approach to determining the weight ranges of prey preferred by and accessible to the five large African carnivores. PLoS One 9:e101054

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Courbin N et al (2016) Reactive responses of zebras to lion encounters shape their predator–prey space game at large scale. Oikos 125:829–838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creel S, Schuette P, Christianson D (2014) Effects of predation risk on group size, vigilance, and foraging behavior in an African ungulate community. Behav Ecol 25:773–784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalerum F, Belton L (2014) African ungulates recognize a locally extinct native predator. Behav Ecol 26:215–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson Z et al (2013) Seasonal diet and prey preference of the African lion in a waterhole-driven semi-arid savanna. PLoS ONE 8:e55182

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Delm MM (1990) Vigilance for predators: detection and dilution effects. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 26:337–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dinno A, Dinno MA (2017) Dunn’s test of multiple comparisons using rank sums. Package ‘dunn. test’, CRAN repository, R package version 1.3.5

  • Enstam KL, Isbell LA (2004) Microhabitat preference and vertical use of space by patas monkeys (Erythrocebus patas) in relation to predation risk and habitat structure. Folia Primatol 75:70–84

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Estes R (1991) The behavior guide to African mammals. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Furrer RD, Manser MB (2009) The evolution of urgency-based and functionally referential alarm calls in ground-dwelling species. Am Nat 173:400–410

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gil-da-Costa R, Palleroni A, Hauser MD, Touchton J, Kelley JP (2003) Rapid acquisition of an alarm response by a neotropical primate to a newly introduced avian predator. Proc R Soc B 270:605–610

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin AS, Blumstein DT, Evans CS (2000) Training captive-bred or translocated animals to avoid predators. Conserv Biol 14:1317–1326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayward M, Kerley GI (2005) Prey preferences of the lion (Panthera leo). J Zool 267:309–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayward MW, Somers M (2009) Reintroduction of top-order predators. Wiley, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hayward MW, Hofmeyr M, O’Brien J, Kerley GIH (2006a) Prey preferences of the cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) (Felidae: Carnivora): morphological limitations or the need to capture rapidly consumable prey before kleptoparasites arrive? J Zool 270:615–627. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.2006.00184.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayward MW, O’Brien J, Hofmeyr M, Kerley GI (2006b) Prey preferences of the African wild dog Lycaon pictus (Canidae: Carnivora): ecological requirements for conservation. J Mammal 87:1122–1131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hettena AM, Munoz N, Blumstein DT (2014) Prey responses to predator’s sounds: a review and empirical study. Ethology 120:427–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopcraft JGC, Sinclair A, Packer C (2005) Planning for success: serengeti lions seek prey accessibility rather than abundance. J Anim Ecol 74:559–566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hothorn T, Bretz F, Westfall P (2008) Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biom J 50:346–363

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Karpanty SM, Wright PC (2007) Predation on lemurs in the rainforest of Madagascar by multiple predator species: observations and experiments. In: Gursky SL, Nekaris KAI (eds) Primate anti-predator strategies. Springer, New York, pp 77–99

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Khoury RE (2013) Eavesdropping: how do vervet monkeys perceive the alarm calls of other species? MSc thesis, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

  • Kitchen DM, Bergman TJ, Cheney DL, Nicholson JR, Seyfarth RM (2010) Comparing responses of four ungulate species to playbacks of baboon alarm calls. Anim Cogn 13:861–870

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kroodsma DE, Byers BE, Goodale E, Johnson S, Liu W-C (2001) Pseudoreplication in playback experiments, revisited a decade later. Anim Behav 61:1029–1033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leuthold W (2012) African ungulates: a comparative review of their ethology and behavioral ecology. Springer, New York

    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 

  • Magrath RD, Haff TM, Fallow PM, Radford AN (2015) Eavesdropping on heterospecific alarm calls: from mechanisms to consequences. Biol Rev 90:560–586

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Makin DF, Chamaillé-Jammes S, Shrader AM (2017a) Changes in feeding behavior and patch use by herbivores in response to the introduction of a new predator. J Mammal 99:341–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makin DF, Chamaillé-Jammes S, Shrader AM (2017b) Herbivores employ a suite of antipredator behaviours to minimize risk from ambush and cursorial predators. Anim Behav 127:225–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manser MB (2001) The acoustic structure of suricates’ alarm calls varies with predator type and the level of response urgency. Proc R Soc B 268:2315–2324

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McComb K et al (2011) Leadership in elephants: the adaptive value of age. Proc R Soc B 278:3270–3276

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mech LD, Smith DW, Murphy KM, MacNulty DR (2001) Winter severity and wolf predation on a formerly Wolf-free elk herd. J Wildl Manag 65:998–1003. https://doi.org/10.2307/3803048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meise K, Franks DW, Bro-Jørgensen J (2018) Multiple adaptive and non-adaptive processes determine responsiveness to heterospecific alarm calls in African savannah herbivores. Proc R Soc B. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2017.2676

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Owen-Smith N, Mills MG (2008) Predator–prey size relationships in an African large-mammal food web. J Anim Ecol 77:173–183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MS, Gross A (2018) Eavesdropping in an African large mammal community: antipredator responses vary according to signaller reliability. Anim Behav 137:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2017.12.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Périquet S, Valeix M, Loveridge AJ, Madzikanda H, Macdonald DW, Fritz H (2010) Individual vigilance of African herbivores while drinking: the role of immediate predation risk and context. Anim Behav 79:665–671

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfefferle D, West PM, Grinnell J, Packer C, Fischer J (2007) Do acoustic features of lion, Panthera leo, roars reflect sex and male condition? J Acoust Soc Am 121:3947–3953

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pohlert T, Pohlert MT (2018) Calculate pairwise multiple comparisons of mean rank sums. Package ‘PMCMR’, CRAN Repository, R package version 4.3

  • 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  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2014) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. 2013. ISBN 3-900051-07-0

  • Rainey HJ, Zuberbühler K, Slater PJ (2004) The responses of black-casqued hornbills to predator vocalisations and primate alarm calls. Behaviour 141:1263–1277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randler C (2006) Disturbances by dog barking increase vigilance in coots Fulica atra. Eur J Wildl Res 52:265–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roxburgh DJ (2008) Prey and range use of lions on Tswalu Kalahari Reserve. MSc thesis, University of Pretoria, South Africa

  • Sand H, Wikenros C, Wabakken P, Liberg O (2006) Cross-continental differences in patterns of predation: will naive moose in Scandinavia ever learn? Proc R Soc B 273:1421–1427

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schaller GB (2009) The Serengeti lion: a study of predator-prey relations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheel D, Packer C (1991) Group hunting behaviour of lions: a search for cooperation. Anim Behav 41:697–709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt KA, Lee E, Ostfeld RS, Sieving K (2008) Eastern chipmunks increase their perception of predation risk in response to titmouse alarm calls. Behav Ecol 19:759–763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt MH, Stears K, Wilmers CC, Shrader AM (2014) Determining the relative importance of dilution and detection for zebra foraging in mixed-species herds. Anim Behav 96:151–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shriner WM (1998) Yellow-bellied marmot and golden-mantled ground squirrel responses to heterospecific alarm calls. Anim Behav 55:529–536

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sih A et al (2010) Predator–prey naïveté, antipredator behavior, and the ecology of predator invasions. Oikos 119:610–621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner JD, Chimimba CT (2005) The mammals of the southern African sub-region. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stensland E, Angerbjörn A, Berggren P (2003) Mixed species groups in mammals. Mammal Rev 33:205–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunquist M, Sunquist F (2017) Wild cats of the world. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Suraci JP, Clinchy M, Dill LM, Roberts D, Zanette LY (2016) Fear of large carnivores causes a trophic cascade. Nat Commun 7:1–7

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Traill L, Martin J, Owen-Smith N (2016) Lion proximity, not moon phase, affects the nocturnal movement behaviour of zebra and wildebeest. J Zool 299:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valeix M et al (2009) Behavioral adjustments of African herbivores to predation risk by lions: spatiotemporal variations influence habitat use. Ecology 90:23–30

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van der Veen IT (2002) Seeing is believing: information about predators influences yellowhammer behavior. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 51:466–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Rooyen N, van Rooyen G (2017) Ecological evaluation of Tswalu Kalahari Reserve. Management report. http://www.tswalufoundation.org/docs/News/Vegetation-Report-van-Rooyen-and-van%20Rooyen-21Nov-2017%20opt.pdf

  • Venables WN, Ripley BD (2002) Random and mixed effects. In: Venebles WN, Ripley BD (eds) Modern applied statistics with S. Springer, New York, pp 271–300

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Webster H, McNutt JW, McComb K (2012) African wild dogs as a fugitive species: playback experiments investigate how wild dogs respond to their major competitors. Ethology 118:147–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work was supported through a research grant from the College of Agriculture, Engineering, and Science at UKZN awarded to DF Makin, an NRF Research Grant (77582) through AM Shrader, and funding through the Tswalu Foundation. We would like to thank the Oppenheimer family and the Tswalu Foundation for allowing us to conduct this research in Tswalu. DFM was also supported during this research through a personal grant awarded by GreenMatter. Three anonymous referees and Dave Wilson provided constructive comments on the manuscript. The University of KwaZulu-Natal approved all aspects of the research design (Ethics code: 058/14/Animal).

Funding

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Douglas F. Makin

    Present address: Mitrani Department of Desert Ecology, Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Midreshet, Israel

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa

    Douglas F. Makin & Adrian M. Shrader

  2. Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive, UMR 5175, CNRS, Université de Montpellier, Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier-EPHE, Montpellier, France

    Simon Chamaillé-Jammes

  3. Mammal Research Institute, Department of Zoology and Entomology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

    Simon Chamaillé-Jammes & Adrian M. Shrader

Authors
  1. Douglas F. Makin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Simon Chamaillé-Jammes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Adrian M. Shrader
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

DFM, AMS and SCJ designed the study and experimental design. DFM conducted the field work. DFM and SCJ performed the statistical analyses. DFM, AMS and SCJ wrote the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Douglas F. Makin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Communicated by Janne Sundell.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Makin, D.F., Chamaillé-Jammes, S. & Shrader, A.M. Alarm calls or predator calls: which elicit stronger responses in ungulate communities living with and without lions?. Oecologia 190, 25–35 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-019-04391-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-019-04391-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation