Lions and leopards coexist without spatial, temporal or demographic effects of interspecific competition
1. Although interspecific competition plays a principal role in shaping species behaviour and demography, little is known about the population-level outcomes of competition between large carnivores, and the mechanisms that facilitate coexistence. 2. We conducted a multilandscape analysis of two wide...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of animal ecology 2018-11, Vol.87 (6), p.1709-1726 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1726 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1709 |
container_title | The Journal of animal ecology |
container_volume | 87 |
creator | Miller, Jennifer R. B. Fuller, Angela K. Pitman, Ross T. Mann, Gareth K. H. Balme, Guy A. |
description | 1. Although interspecific competition plays a principal role in shaping species behaviour and demography, little is known about the population-level outcomes of competition between large carnivores, and the mechanisms that facilitate coexistence. 2. We conducted a multilandscape analysis of two widely distributed, threatened large carnivore competitors to offer insight into coexistence strategies and assist with species-level conservation. 3. We evaluated how interference competition affects occupancy, temporal activity and population density of a dominant competitor, the lion (Panthera leo), and its subordinate competitor, the leopard (Panthera pardus). We collected camera-trap data over 3 years in 10 study sites covering 5,070 km² . We used multispecies occupancy modelling to assess spatial responses in varying environmental and prey conditions and competitor presence, and examined temporal overlap and the relationship between lion and leopard densities across sites and years. 4. Results showed that both lion and leopard occupancy was independent of—rather than conditional on-their competitor's presence across all environmental covariates. Marginal occupancy probability for leopard was higher in areas with more bushy, "hideable" habitat, human (tourist) activity and topographic ruggedness, whereas lion occupancy decreased with increasing hideable habitat and increased with higher abundance of very large prey. Temporal overlap was high between carnivores, and there was no detectable relationship between species densities. 5. Lions pose a threat to the survival of individual leopards, but they exerted no tractable influence on leopard spatial or temporal dynamics. Furthermore, lions did not appear to suppress leopard populations, suggesting that intraguild competitors can coexist in the same areas without population decline. Aligned conservation strategies that promote functioning ecosystems, rather than target individual species, are therefore advised to achieve cost- and space-effective conservation. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/1365-2656.12883 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2070803277</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>45024130</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>45024130</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4353-dcd81976806f78ca56874c200a2d94f4e8a2bbcdb160b97bc734711fa0a5a6f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1v1DAQxS0EokvhzAlkiQsH0o7txHaOVVW-tIJL75bjjFmvkjjYjtr-92TZdg9c8MWS_XtvRu8R8pbBBVvPJROyqbhs5AXjWotnZHN6eU42AJxVWrVwRl7lvAcAxUG8JGcCgAFrxYbstiFOmdqppwPG2aY-UxfxPuRC70LZxaXQPNsS7PCJFhznmOxAY6I9jvFXsvMuOIreoyuZRk_DVDDlGV3w64eL44wllHXGa_LC2yHjm8f7nNx-vrm9_lptf375dn21rVwtGlH1rtesVVKD9Eo720itascBLO_b2teoLe8613dMQteqzilRK8a8BdtY6cU5-Xi0nVP8vWAuZgzZ4TDYCeOSDQcFGgRXakU__IPu45KmdTnDGVNQN63UK3V5pFyKOSf0Zk5htOnBMDCHDswhcXNI3PztYFW8f_RduhH7E_8U-grII3AXBnz4n5_5fvXj5sn53VG4zyWmk7BugNdMgPgDjeybLg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2117045968</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Lions and leopards coexist without spatial, temporal or demographic effects of interspecific competition</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library Free Content</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Miller, Jennifer R. B. ; Fuller, Angela K. ; Pitman, Ross T. ; Mann, Gareth K. H. ; Balme, Guy A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Miller, Jennifer R. B. ; Fuller, Angela K. ; Pitman, Ross T. ; Mann, Gareth K. H. ; Balme, Guy A.</creatorcontrib><description>1. Although interspecific competition plays a principal role in shaping species behaviour and demography, little is known about the population-level outcomes of competition between large carnivores, and the mechanisms that facilitate coexistence. 2. We conducted a multilandscape analysis of two widely distributed, threatened large carnivore competitors to offer insight into coexistence strategies and assist with species-level conservation. 3. We evaluated how interference competition affects occupancy, temporal activity and population density of a dominant competitor, the lion (Panthera leo), and its subordinate competitor, the leopard (Panthera pardus). We collected camera-trap data over 3 years in 10 study sites covering 5,070 km² . We used multispecies occupancy modelling to assess spatial responses in varying environmental and prey conditions and competitor presence, and examined temporal overlap and the relationship between lion and leopard densities across sites and years. 4. Results showed that both lion and leopard occupancy was independent of—rather than conditional on-their competitor's presence across all environmental covariates. Marginal occupancy probability for leopard was higher in areas with more bushy, "hideable" habitat, human (tourist) activity and topographic ruggedness, whereas lion occupancy decreased with increasing hideable habitat and increased with higher abundance of very large prey. Temporal overlap was high between carnivores, and there was no detectable relationship between species densities. 5. Lions pose a threat to the survival of individual leopards, but they exerted no tractable influence on leopard spatial or temporal dynamics. Furthermore, lions did not appear to suppress leopard populations, suggesting that intraguild competitors can coexist in the same areas without population decline. Aligned conservation strategies that promote functioning ecosystems, rather than target individual species, are therefore advised to achieve cost- and space-effective conservation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8790</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2656</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/1365-2656.12883</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30010193</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd</publisher><subject>carnivore ; Carnivores ; Coexistence ; Community ecology ; Competition ; Conservation ; Demographics ; Demography ; Ecosystems ; Interspecific ; interspecific competition ; multispecies occupancy model ; Panthera leo ; Panthera pardus ; Population decline ; Population density ; Prey ; Ruggedness ; Species ; species density ; temporal overlap ; Wildlife conservation</subject><ispartof>The Journal of animal ecology, 2018-11, Vol.87 (6), p.1709-1726</ispartof><rights>2018 British Ecological Society</rights><rights>2018 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology © 2018 British Ecological Society</rights><rights>2018 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology © 2018 British Ecological Society.</rights><rights>Journal of Animal Ecology © 2018 British Ecological Society</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4353-dcd81976806f78ca56874c200a2d94f4e8a2bbcdb160b97bc734711fa0a5a6f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4353-dcd81976806f78ca56874c200a2d94f4e8a2bbcdb160b97bc734711fa0a5a6f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9247-7468 ; 0000-0001-6806-392X ; 0000-0002-3844-1720</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/45024130$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/45024130$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,1411,1427,27901,27902,45550,45551,46384,46808,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30010193$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Miller, Jennifer R. B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fuller, Angela K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pitman, Ross T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mann, Gareth K. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balme, Guy A.</creatorcontrib><title>Lions and leopards coexist without spatial, temporal or demographic effects of interspecific competition</title><title>The Journal of animal ecology</title><addtitle>J Anim Ecol</addtitle><description>1. Although interspecific competition plays a principal role in shaping species behaviour and demography, little is known about the population-level outcomes of competition between large carnivores, and the mechanisms that facilitate coexistence. 2. We conducted a multilandscape analysis of two widely distributed, threatened large carnivore competitors to offer insight into coexistence strategies and assist with species-level conservation. 3. We evaluated how interference competition affects occupancy, temporal activity and population density of a dominant competitor, the lion (Panthera leo), and its subordinate competitor, the leopard (Panthera pardus). We collected camera-trap data over 3 years in 10 study sites covering 5,070 km² . We used multispecies occupancy modelling to assess spatial responses in varying environmental and prey conditions and competitor presence, and examined temporal overlap and the relationship between lion and leopard densities across sites and years. 4. Results showed that both lion and leopard occupancy was independent of—rather than conditional on-their competitor's presence across all environmental covariates. Marginal occupancy probability for leopard was higher in areas with more bushy, "hideable" habitat, human (tourist) activity and topographic ruggedness, whereas lion occupancy decreased with increasing hideable habitat and increased with higher abundance of very large prey. Temporal overlap was high between carnivores, and there was no detectable relationship between species densities. 5. Lions pose a threat to the survival of individual leopards, but they exerted no tractable influence on leopard spatial or temporal dynamics. Furthermore, lions did not appear to suppress leopard populations, suggesting that intraguild competitors can coexist in the same areas without population decline. Aligned conservation strategies that promote functioning ecosystems, rather than target individual species, are therefore advised to achieve cost- and space-effective conservation.</description><subject>carnivore</subject><subject>Carnivores</subject><subject>Coexistence</subject><subject>Community ecology</subject><subject>Competition</subject><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>Demographics</subject><subject>Demography</subject><subject>Ecosystems</subject><subject>Interspecific</subject><subject>interspecific competition</subject><subject>multispecies occupancy model</subject><subject>Panthera leo</subject><subject>Panthera pardus</subject><subject>Population decline</subject><subject>Population density</subject><subject>Prey</subject><subject>Ruggedness</subject><subject>Species</subject><subject>species density</subject><subject>temporal overlap</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><issn>0021-8790</issn><issn>1365-2656</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkc1v1DAQxS0EokvhzAlkiQsH0o7txHaOVVW-tIJL75bjjFmvkjjYjtr-92TZdg9c8MWS_XtvRu8R8pbBBVvPJROyqbhs5AXjWotnZHN6eU42AJxVWrVwRl7lvAcAxUG8JGcCgAFrxYbstiFOmdqppwPG2aY-UxfxPuRC70LZxaXQPNsS7PCJFhznmOxAY6I9jvFXsvMuOIreoyuZRk_DVDDlGV3w64eL44wllHXGa_LC2yHjm8f7nNx-vrm9_lptf375dn21rVwtGlH1rtesVVKD9Eo720itascBLO_b2teoLe8613dMQteqzilRK8a8BdtY6cU5-Xi0nVP8vWAuZgzZ4TDYCeOSDQcFGgRXakU__IPu45KmdTnDGVNQN63UK3V5pFyKOSf0Zk5htOnBMDCHDswhcXNI3PztYFW8f_RduhH7E_8U-grII3AXBnz4n5_5fvXj5sn53VG4zyWmk7BugNdMgPgDjeybLg</recordid><startdate>20181101</startdate><enddate>20181101</enddate><creator>Miller, Jennifer R. B.</creator><creator>Fuller, Angela K.</creator><creator>Pitman, Ross T.</creator><creator>Mann, Gareth K. H.</creator><creator>Balme, Guy A.</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9247-7468</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6806-392X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3844-1720</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20181101</creationdate><title>Lions and leopards coexist without spatial, temporal or demographic effects of interspecific competition</title><author>Miller, Jennifer R. B. ; Fuller, Angela K. ; Pitman, Ross T. ; Mann, Gareth K. H. ; Balme, Guy A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4353-dcd81976806f78ca56874c200a2d94f4e8a2bbcdb160b97bc734711fa0a5a6f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>carnivore</topic><topic>Carnivores</topic><topic>Coexistence</topic><topic>Community ecology</topic><topic>Competition</topic><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>Demographics</topic><topic>Demography</topic><topic>Ecosystems</topic><topic>Interspecific</topic><topic>interspecific competition</topic><topic>multispecies occupancy model</topic><topic>Panthera leo</topic><topic>Panthera pardus</topic><topic>Population decline</topic><topic>Population density</topic><topic>Prey</topic><topic>Ruggedness</topic><topic>Species</topic><topic>species density</topic><topic>temporal overlap</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Miller, Jennifer R. B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fuller, Angela K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pitman, Ross T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mann, Gareth K. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balme, Guy A.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of animal ecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Miller, Jennifer R. B.</au><au>Fuller, Angela K.</au><au>Pitman, Ross T.</au><au>Mann, Gareth K. H.</au><au>Balme, Guy A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Lions and leopards coexist without spatial, temporal or demographic effects of interspecific competition</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of animal ecology</jtitle><addtitle>J Anim Ecol</addtitle><date>2018-11-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>87</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1709</spage><epage>1726</epage><pages>1709-1726</pages><issn>0021-8790</issn><eissn>1365-2656</eissn><abstract>1. Although interspecific competition plays a principal role in shaping species behaviour and demography, little is known about the population-level outcomes of competition between large carnivores, and the mechanisms that facilitate coexistence. 2. We conducted a multilandscape analysis of two widely distributed, threatened large carnivore competitors to offer insight into coexistence strategies and assist with species-level conservation. 3. We evaluated how interference competition affects occupancy, temporal activity and population density of a dominant competitor, the lion (Panthera leo), and its subordinate competitor, the leopard (Panthera pardus). We collected camera-trap data over 3 years in 10 study sites covering 5,070 km² . We used multispecies occupancy modelling to assess spatial responses in varying environmental and prey conditions and competitor presence, and examined temporal overlap and the relationship between lion and leopard densities across sites and years. 4. Results showed that both lion and leopard occupancy was independent of—rather than conditional on-their competitor's presence across all environmental covariates. Marginal occupancy probability for leopard was higher in areas with more bushy, "hideable" habitat, human (tourist) activity and topographic ruggedness, whereas lion occupancy decreased with increasing hideable habitat and increased with higher abundance of very large prey. Temporal overlap was high between carnivores, and there was no detectable relationship between species densities. 5. Lions pose a threat to the survival of individual leopards, but they exerted no tractable influence on leopard spatial or temporal dynamics. Furthermore, lions did not appear to suppress leopard populations, suggesting that intraguild competitors can coexist in the same areas without population decline. Aligned conservation strategies that promote functioning ecosystems, rather than target individual species, are therefore advised to achieve cost- and space-effective conservation.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons Ltd</pub><pmid>30010193</pmid><doi>10.1111/1365-2656.12883</doi><tpages>18</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9247-7468</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6806-392X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3844-1720</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0021-8790 |
ispartof | The Journal of animal ecology, 2018-11, Vol.87 (6), p.1709-1726 |
issn | 0021-8790 1365-2656 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2070803277 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals; Wiley Online Library Free Content; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
subjects | carnivore Carnivores Coexistence Community ecology Competition Conservation Demographics Demography Ecosystems Interspecific interspecific competition multispecies occupancy model Panthera leo Panthera pardus Population decline Population density Prey Ruggedness Species species density temporal overlap Wildlife conservation |
title | Lions and leopards coexist without spatial, temporal or demographic effects of interspecific competition |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T21%3A59%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Lions%20and%20leopards%20coexist%20without%20spatial,%20temporal%20or%20demographic%20effects%20of%20interspecific%20competition&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20animal%20ecology&rft.au=Miller,%20Jennifer%20R.%20B.&rft.date=2018-11-01&rft.volume=87&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1709&rft.epage=1726&rft.pages=1709-1726&rft.issn=0021-8790&rft.eissn=1365-2656&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/1365-2656.12883&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E45024130%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2117045968&rft_id=info:pmid/30010193&rft_jstor_id=45024130&rfr_iscdi=true |