Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorScharf, Inon
dc.contributor.authorRuxton, Graeme D.
dc.date.accessioned2023-11-02T14:30:06Z
dc.date.available2023-11-02T14:30:06Z
dc.date.issued2023-10-10
dc.identifier295564865
dc.identifier20f1ff56-1223-430c-8663-9b9456b31acc
dc.identifier85173731589
dc.identifier.citationScharf , I & Ruxton , G D 2023 , ' Four scenarios in which shadow competition should be prominent and factors affecting its strength ' , Oikos , vol. Early View . https://doi.org/10.1111/oik.10214en
dc.identifier.issn0030-1299
dc.identifier.otherJisc: 1391504
dc.identifier.otherpublisher-id: oik13641
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0001-8943-6609/work/146004222
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/28620
dc.description.abstractShadow competition is the interception of moving prey by a predator closer to its arrival source, preventing its availability to predators downstream. Shadow competition is likely common in nature, and unlike some other competition types, has a strong spatial component (with the exception of competition for space, which clearly also has a spatial component). We used an individual‐based spatially‐explicit simulation model to examine whether shadow competition takes place and which factors affect it in four scenarios considering ambush predators and active prey. First, when prey capture is uncertain (‘the ricochet effect'). Here, the strength of shadow competition increases when it is harder to capture prey after the first unsuccessful capture attempt, whereas shadow competition is moderated if capture success is higher in successive attempts. Second, shadow competition becomes stronger when predators can capture prey arriving only from certain directions. Third, when prey tend to move along a barrier after encountering it. Here, predators located along this barrier may be more successful than those at random positions, but shadow competition in this scenario drastically decreases the capture success of predators in central positions along a barrier (i.e. having more than a single neighbor). Finally, in three‐level systems of plants in clusters, herbivores searching for plants, and predators ambushing herbivores inside plant patches, predators with ambush locations in the periphery of plant patches are more successful than those at the patch center, especially at high predator densities. Our simulation indicates that shadow competition is plausibly relevant in various scenarios of ambush predators and prey, and that it varies based on the habitat structure and capture probability of prey by predators as well as the change in capture probability with successive encounters.
dc.format.extent11
dc.format.extent1672523
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofOikosen
dc.subjectSit-and-wait predatorsen
dc.subjectForagingen
dc.subjectRicochet effecten
dc.subjectShadow effecten
dc.subjectThigmotaxisen
dc.subjectMovement ecologyen
dc.subjectQH301 Biologyen
dc.subjectDASen
dc.subject.lccQH301en
dc.titleFour scenarios in which shadow competition should be prominent and factors affecting its strengthen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. School of Biologyen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Centre for Biological Diversityen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Institute of Behavioural and Neural Sciencesen
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/oik.10214
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record