Fear and lethality in snowshoe hares: the deadly effects of non‐consumptive predation risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predators play a critical, top–down role in shaping ecosystems, driving prey population and community dynamics. Traditionally, studies of predator‐prey interactions have focused on direct effects of predators, namely the killing of prey. More recently, the non‐consumptive effects of predation risk are being appreciated; e.g. the ‘ecology of fear’. Prey responses to predation risk can be morphological, behavioural, and physiological, and are assumed to come at a cost to prey fitness. However, few studies have examined the relationship between predation risk and survival in wild animals. We tested the hypothesis that predation risk itself could reduce survival in wild‐caught snowshoe hares. We exposed female snowshoe hares to a simulated predator (a trained dog) during gestation only, and measured adult survival and, in surviving females, their ability to successfully wean offspring. We show for the first time in a wild mammal that the risk of predation can itself be lethal. Predation risk reduced adult female survival by 30%, and had trans‐generational effects, reducing offspring survival to weaning by over 85% – even though the period of risk ended at birth. As a consequence of these effects the predator‐exposed group experienced a decrease in number, while the control group substantially increased. Challenges remain in determining the importance of risk‐induced mortality in natural field settings; however, our findings show that non‐lethal predator encounters can influence survival of both adults and offspring. Future work is needed to test these effects in free‐living animals.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".