Data from: Predicting multi-predator risk to elk (Cervus canadensis) in summer using predator scats ...
1. There is growing evidence that prey perceive the risk of predation and alter their behaviour in response, resulting in changes in spatial distribution and potential fitness consequences. Previous approaches to mapping predation risk across a landscape quantify predator space use to estimate poten...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Dataset |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Dryad
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.2ngf1vhpv https://datadryad.org/stash/dataset/doi:10.5061/dryad.2ngf1vhpv |
| Summary: | 1. There is growing evidence that prey perceive the risk of predation and alter their behaviour in response, resulting in changes in spatial distribution and potential fitness consequences. Previous approaches to mapping predation risk across a landscape quantify predator space use to estimate potential predator-prey encounters, yet this approach does not account for successful predator attack resulting in prey mortality. An exception is a prey kill site that reflects an encounter resulting in mortality, but obtaining information on kill sites is expensive and requires time to accumulate adequate sample sizes. 2. We illustrate an alternative approach using predator scat locations and their contents to quantify spatial predation risk for elk (Cervus canadensis) from multiple predators in the Rocky Mountains of Alberta, Canada. We surveyed over 1300km to detect scats of bears (Ursus arctos/U. americanus), cougars (Puma concolor), coyotes (Canis latrans), and wolves (C. lupus). To derive spatial predation risk, ... : Scat locations and scat contents [YHT_scat_locs_contents.csv] We collected scats using scat-detection dogs along transects randomly located within a systematic grid of 57 5 x 5-km cells during 1 July – 30 September, 2013– 2016. Upon scat detection, we recorded age of scat, scat diameter and physical description to identify scats to species (Weaver & Fritts, 1979; Rezendes, 1992; Elbroch, 2003), and collected DNA on a subsample of scats to assess our species identification accuracy. Age of scats was adapted from Wasser et al. (2004) and included fresh to very old (Spilker 2019). We omitted old scats judged to be deposited prior to 1 May from all analyses. We combined grizzly and black bears into one ursid category because we found low accuracy in our ability to discriminate the two based on DNA (< 65% correctly classified, n = 24; Spilker, 2019). We developed RSFs for predators (Manly et al., 2002), where ‘used’ samples were the locations of predator-specific scats along transect lines and ‘available’ ... |
|---|