Nutritional stress and population density influence risk/reward decisions by elk
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Context Optimal foraging strategies can be influenced at the group level by population density, which can increase competition, hunger, and activity levels. Optimal foraging can also be influenced at the individual level by personality, which in part governs how individuals assess risk versus reward. Aims The purpose of this study was to quantify the influence of population density on risk-taking. I focused on captive elk that had previously been studied in tandem with wild elk in order to quantify personality trait characteristics. I hypothesised that risk-taking would be shown to be a density-dependent affect, in addition to varying individually. Methods Automated cameras recorded visitation to four rotating treatments sites in each of high and low density pens, and which had either: forage, a novel object, forage + novel object, or a control site. Novel objects were regularly changed to elicit a spectrum of responses ranging from neofilia to neophobia. Selection or avoidance of sites was determined by comparing elk visitation to visits to control sites. The experiment was done in summer when natural forage was most abundance, and in again in autumn when natural forage was limited. Key results High density elk showed year-round selection for all treatment sites. In summer low density elk showed weak selection for forage and forage + novel and no selection for novel objects, and no selection for any site in autumn. These patterns showed that elk in the high density pen, which were in poorer condition, had to increase their levels of both activity and risk taking. Neither elk pen exhibited any group-wide avoidance of novel objects, indicating a group-wide gradient of neophobia to neofilia, known personality traits in elk. Conclusions These results show that risk-taking behaviour can be a density dependent effect. This increase in neofilia may be driven by hunger stress, but also through increases in competition that may favour elk of certain personalities. Implications Increasing density may increase the prevalence of both neofilia and other personality traits correlated with neofilia, which include aggression, and so may contribute to increasing human–wildlife conflicts in areas where human disturbance has resulted in ungulate hyperabundance.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».