The DOI matches its Crossref record; 81 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Spatial heterogeneity in the strength of plant-herbivore interactions under predation risk: the tale of bison foraging in Wolf Country.
Open accessAbstract
Spatial heterogeneity in the strength of trophic interactions is a fundamental property of food web spatial dynamics. The feeding effort of herbivores should reflect adaptive decisions that only become rewarding when foraging gains exceed 1) the metabolic costs, 2) the missed opportunity costs of not foraging elsewhere, and 3) the foraging costs of anti-predator behaviour. Two aspects of these costs remain largely unexplored: the link between the strength of plant-herbivore interactions and the spatial scale of food-quality assessment, and the predator-prey spatial game. We modeled the foraging effort of free-ranging plains bison (Bison bison bison) in winter, within a mosaic of discrete meadows. Spatial patterns of bison herbivory were largely driven by a search for high net energy gains and, to a lesser degree, by the spatial game with grey wolves (Canis lupus). Bison decreased local feeding effort with increasing metabolic and missed opportunity costs. Bison herbivory was most consistent with a broad-scale assessment of food patch quality, i.e., bison grazed more intensively in patches with a low missed opportunity cost relative to other patches available in the landscape. Bison and wolves had a higher probability of using the same meadows than expected randomly. This co-occurrence indicates wolves are ahead in the spatial game they play with bison. Wolves influenced bison foraging at fine scale, as bison tended to consume less biomass at each feeding station when in meadows where the risk of a wolf's arrival was relatively high. Also, bison left more high-quality vegetation in large than small meadows. This behavior does not maximize their energy intake rate, but is consistent with bison playing a shell game with wolves. Our assessment of bison foraging in a natural setting clarifies the complex nature of plant-herbivore interactions under predation risk, and reveals how spatial patterns in herbivory emerge from multi-scale landscape heterogeneity.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Bison also modify their environment by moving across the landscape and creating disturbance in the form of stomping, wallowing, seed dispersal, and grazing (Harvey and Fortin, 2013); behavior that results in increased landscape arthropod, amphibian, and plant heterogeneity (Polley and Collins, 1984;Gerlanc and Kaufman, 2003;Nickell et al., 2018).”
From The Potential of Bison Restoration as an Ecological Approach to Future Tribal Food Sovereignty on the Northern Great Plains (2022) · cites this paper as Harvey and Fortin, 2013
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach.
Guthery, F. S., Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2003) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3802723 · Cited by 41,495
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-3338 · Cited by 35,305
Hosmer, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (2000) · doi:10.1002/0471722146 · Cited by 20,302
Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution
Bolker, B. M., Brooks, M. E., Clark, C. J., Geange, S. W., Poulsen, J. R., Stevens, M. H. H., & White, J.-S. S. (2009) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2008.10.008 · Cited by 8,910
A TWO‐STAGE TECHNIQUE FOR THE IN VITRO DIGESTION OF FORAGE CROPS
Tilley, J. M. A., & Terry, R. A. (1963) · Grass and Forage Science · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2494.1963.tb00335.x · Cited by 6,624
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
Kernel Methods for Estimating the Utilization Distribution in Home‐Range Studies
Worton, B. J. (1989) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1938423 · Cited by 4,185
Evaluating resource selection functions
Boyce, M. S., Vernier, P. R., Nielsen, S. E., & Schmiegelow, F. K. A. (2002) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/s0304-3800(02)00200-4 · Cited by 2,628
CONFRONTING MULTICOLLINEARITY IN ECOLOGICAL MULTIPLE REGRESSION
Graham, M. (2003) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/02-3114 · Cited by 2,583
Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competition
Brown, J. S. (1988) · Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology · doi:10.1007/bf00395696 · Cited by 1,397
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Stephens DW, Krebs JR (1986) Foraging theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 247 p.
- KR Searle, 2007, It's the “foodscape”, Isr J Ecol Evol, 53, 297
- Sih A (1987) Predators and prey lifestyles: an evolutionary and ecological overview. In: Kerfoot WC, Sih A, editors. Predation: direct and indirect impacts on aquatic communities. Hanover, N. H.: University Press of New England. pp. 203–224.
- BP Kotler, 2002, Foraging games between gerbils and their predators: temporal dynamics of resource depletion and apprehension in gerbils, Evol Ecol Res, 4, 495
- Vonesh EF, Chinchilli VM (1997) Linear and nonlinear models for analysis of repeated measurements. In: Dekker M, editor. New York. pp. 419–424.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The many faces of fear: a synthesis of the methodological variation in characterizing predation risk
Moll, R. J., Redilla, K. M., Mudumba, T., Muneza, A., Gray, S. M., Abade, L., Hayward, M. W., Millspaugh, J. J., & Montgomery, R. A. (2017) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2656.12680 · Cited by 168
Say‐Sallaz, E., Chamaillé‐Jammes, S., Fritz, H., & Valeix, M. (2019) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2019.03.044 · Cited by 132
A “death trap” in the landscape of fear
Schmidt, K., & Kuijper, D. P. J. (2015) · Mammal Research · doi:10.1007/s13364-015-0229-x · Cited by 99
Wolves for Yellowstone: dynamics in time and space
Boyce, M. S. (2018) · Journal of Mammalogy · doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyy115 · Cited by 72
Fear, foraging and olfaction: how mesopredators avoid costly interactions with apex predators
Haswell, P. M., Jones, K. A., Kusak, J., & Hayward, M. W. (2018) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/s00442-018-4133-3 · Cited by 71
Metadata
- Authors
- Harvey, L., & Fortin, D.
- Affiliations
- Université Laval (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Fortin, Daniel
- ORCID
- Fortin, Daniel
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2013-09-11
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- e73324
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3770655
- OpenAlex
- W1983233034
- Cited by
- 31
- References
- 82
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 2.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Parks Canada
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
- Keywords
- plant-herbivore interactions, predation risk, Bison bison bison, grey wolf, wolf, metabolic cost, foraging effort, spatial heterogeneity, winter grazing, landscape heterogeneity
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Feeding Behavior, Models, Biological, Predatory Behavior, Bison, Ecosystem, Plant Physiological Phenomena, Biomass, Wolves, Food Chain, Herbivory
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
