Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 428

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The ecological effects of providing resource subsidies to predators

Open access
Newsome, Thomas M., Dellinger, Justin A., Pavey, Chris R., Ripple, William J., Shores, Carolyn R., Wirsing, Aaron J., Dickman, Christopher R.·2015·Global Ecology and Biogeography

Abstract

Aim: Predators often have important roles in structuring ecosystems via their effects on each other and on prey populations. However, these effects may be altered in the presence of anthropogenic food resources, fuelling debate about whether the availability of such resources could alter the ecological role of predators. Here, we review the extent to which human‐provided foods are utilised by terrestrial mammalian predators (> 1 kg) across the globe. We also assess whether these resources have a direct impact on the ecology and behaviour of predators and an indirect impact on other co‐occurring species. Location: Global. Methods: Data were derived from searches of the published literature. To summarise the data we grouped studies based on the direct and indirect effects of resource subsidies on predators and co‐occurring species. We then compared the types of predators accessing these resources by grouping species taxonomically and into the following categories: (1) domesticated species, (2) mesopredators and (3) top predators. Results: Human‐provided foods were reported to be utilised by 36 terrestrial predator species in 34 different countries. In the presence of these resources we found that: (1) predator abundance increased, (2) the dietary preferences of predators altered to include the food subsidy, (3) life‐history parameters such as survival, reproduction and sociality shifted to the benefit or detriment of the predator, and (4) predators changed their home ranges, activity and movements. In some instances, these modifications indirectly affected co‐occurring species via increased predation or competition. Main conclusions: The availability of human‐provided food to predators often results in behavioural or population‐induced changes to predators and trophic cascades. We conclude that there is an urgent need to reduce the access of predators to food subsidies to minimise human–wildlife conflicts and to preserve the integrity of ecosystem functioning in human‐influenced landscapes world‐wide.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/geb.12236

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 52 references

Cited by

See all 428

Metadata

Authors
Newsome, T. M., Dellinger, J. A., Pavey, C. R., Ripple, W. J., Shores, C. R., Wirsing, A. J., & Dickman, C. R.
Venue
Global Ecology and Biogeography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-10-03
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
1-11
ISSN
  • 1466-822X (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-8238
OpenAlex
W2120951980
Cited by
428
References
52
FWCI
19.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: The ecological effects of providing resource subsidies to predators. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/geb.12236
The paper
Newsome, T. M., Dellinger, J. A., Pavey, C. R., Ripple, W. J., Shores, C. R., Wirsing, A. J., & Dickman, C. R. (2015). The ecological effects of providing resource subsidies to predators. Global Ecology and Biogeography. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12236

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.