Species-specific antipredatory behaviours: effects on prey choice in different habitats

By B. Christensen, Lennart Persson. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 2004

124 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f8985078afa5199d0ba252429278fd035a434b25

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Global and Planetary Change

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

The effects of seafloor habitat complexity on survival of juvenile fishes : Species-specific interactions with structural refuge (2006, background): “Other studies that examined behavior directly have also concluded that increased habitat complexity reduces postencounter capture efficiency by restricting predator pursuit and interrupting predator visual fields, allowing prey individuals to redistribute within the structured habitat and avoid furt”
Testing the effect of habitat structure and complexity on nekton assemblages using experimental oyster reefs (2011, background): “A variety of ecological theories have been suggested to explain demographic patterns in structurally complex habitats (e.g., Christensen and Persson, 1993; Gratwicke and Speight, 2005; Hicks, 1980; MacArthur and MacArthur, 1961).”
A behavioral cascade: Top‐predator induced behavioral shifts in planktivorous fish and zooplankton (2003, background): “Small roach (,25 mm) are gape-limited foragers with an optimal prey size of less than 1mm (Wanzenböck 1995), and roach feeding rates are also known to decrease in structural complexity (Winfield 1986; Christensen and Persson 1993; Schriver et al. 1995; Manatunge et al. 2000).”
Brown bears selectively kill salmon with higher energy content but only in habitats that facilitate choice (2004, background): “…(including access to refuges), morphology (e.g. armor), chemical defenses (e.g. toxins), behavior (e.g. daily movements, escape ability), and other features that influence the effort necessary for predators to capture them (Christensen and Persson 1993, Sih and Christensen 2001).”
Diel horizontal migration of zooplankton: costs and benefits of inhabiting the littoral (2002, background): “Piscivores, as well as planktivores, may further benefit daphnids undergoing DHM if the fish feed on alternative food resources, such as predacious pelagic (Herzig, 1995; Wissel & Benndorf, 1998) or benthic invertebrates (Christensen & Persson, 1993; Blumenshine et al., 1997).”