The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Ecological Implications of Resource Depression
Abstract
A common but not universal consequence of the foraging activities of a predator is a lowering of capture rates with prey in its immediate vicinity. This may result from a number of different processes and need not require actual harvesting of any prey items by the predator. We term this phenomenon "depression" and its ecological consequences are the focus of this paper. A great deal of attention has been devoted to implications of changes in prey abundances as a result of the activity of predators. We will focus on changes in prey availability strictly in terms of the perspective of actual or potential predators. Potential here refers to predators who may visit the site shortly after "the prey have been depressed." Depression phenomena are familiar to most field ecologists but are seldom incorporated into formal ecological theory. While they are not really separate, it will be useful to divide our discussion into several sections, each focusing on a different question. (1) What are the processes by which prey might be depressed? (2) What are the characteristics of prey which affect their depressability? Their recovery from the depression? (3) Are there prey that cannot be depressed? (4) What are the implications of depression from the viewpoint of a single predator individual? (5) Since prey depressed for one kind of predator are not necessarily depressed for another kind, what are the implications for competition theory? Here we are concerned with the possibility of enhancement of availability, as well as competition.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem
Charnov, E. L. (1976) · Theoretical Population Biology · doi:10.1016/0040-5809(76)90040-x · Cited by 5,374
Self-citationOptimal Foraging: A Selective Review of Theory and Tests
Pyke, G. H., Pulliam, H. R., & Charnov, E. L. (1977) · The Quarterly Review of Biology · doi:10.1086/409852 · Cited by 3,373
Self-citationFood Web Complexity and Community Dynamics
Polis, G. A., & Strong, D. R. (1996) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/285880 · Cited by 2,109
The Ecology of Fear: Optimal Foraging, Game Theory, and Trophic Interactions
Brown, J. S., Laundre, J. W., & Gurung, M. (1999) · Journal of Mammalogy · doi:10.2307/1383287 · Cited by 1,347
Optimal Foraging: Attack Strategy of a Mantid
Charnov, E. L. (1976) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/283054 · Cited by 802
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Charnov, E. L., Orians, G. H., & Hyatt, K.
- Venue
- The American Naturalist
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1976-03
- Volume
- 110
- Issue
- 972
- Pages
- 247-259
- ISSN
- 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5323
- OpenAlex
- W1994270476
- Cited by
- 689
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 18.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ecological Implications of Resource Depression. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/283062
- The paper
- Charnov, E. L., Orians, G. H., & Hyatt, K. (1976). Ecological Implications of Resource Depression. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/283062
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.