CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 478Wildlife Ecology and ConservationAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesRangeland and Wildlife Management

Behavioral adjustments of African herbivores to predation risk by lions: Spatiotemporal variations influence habitat use

Open access
Valeix, M., Loveridge, A. J., Chamaillé-Jammes, S., Davidson, Z., Murindagomo, F., Fritz, H., Macdonald, D. W.·2009·Ecology
DOI 10.1890/08-0606.1
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Predators may influence their prey populations not only through direct lethal effects, but also through indirect behavioral changes. Here, we combined spatiotemporal fine‐scale data from GPS radio collars on lions with habitat use information on 11 African herbivores in Hwange National Park (Zimbabwe) to test whether the risk of predation by lions influenced the distribution of herbivores in the landscape. Effects of long‐term risk of predation (likelihood of lion presence calculated over four months) and short‐term risk of predation (actual presence of lions in the vicinity in the preceding 24 hours) were contrasted. The long‐term risk of predation by lions appeared to influence the distributions of all browsers across the landscape, but not of grazers. This result strongly suggests that browsers and grazers, which face different ecological constraints, are influenced at different spatial and temporal scales in the variation of the risk of predation by lions. The results also show that all herbivores tend to use more open habitats preferentially when lions are in their vicinity, probably an effective anti‐predator behavior against such an ambush predator. Behaviorally induced effects of lions may therefore contribute significantly to structuring African herbivore communities, and hence possibly their effects on savanna ecosystems.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1890/08-0606.1

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 19 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    For all water-dependent browsers, site selection was influenced by the interaction between distance to water and long-term predation risk, with the probability of selecting a site decreasing as long-term predation risk increased for a given distance to water.

    “For all water-dependent browsers, site selection was influenced by the interaction between distance to water and long-term predation risk, with the probability of selecting a site decreasing as the long-term predation risk increased for a given distance to water (Table 1, Fig. 2, Appendix).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Predation risk is equated with the probability of lion presence (short-term and long-term).
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The long-term risk index calculated over four months approximates the long-term risk of predation at a location.
  • Findingown data

    Buffalo, giraffe, and to a lesser extent kudu, which are main prey species for lions in HNP, also appeared to avoid bushland when lions were in the vicinity.

    “Buffalo, giraffe, and to a lesser extent kudu, which appear to be the main prey species for lions in HNP (Loveridge et al. 2007a), also appeared to avoid bushland when lions were in the vicinity (Fig. 3).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Loveridge et al. 2007a

      Not checked in the free run.

    • The authors state this as an assumption: Predation risk is equated with the probability of lion presence (short-term and long-term).
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The presence of lions within 2 km in the preceding 24 hours represents short-term risk of predation.
  • Findingown data

    The interaction between long-term predation risk and habitat type did not have a significant effect on site selection for any species.

    “For all species, the interaction between the long-term predation risk and habitat type did not have a significant effect on site selection (Table 1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Predation risk is equated with the probability of lion presence (short-term and long-term).
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The long-term risk index calculated over four months approximates the long-term risk of predation at a location.
  • Findingown data

    For all water-independent browsers, site selection was negatively associated with long-term predation risk.

    “For all water-independent browsers, site selection was negatively associated with the long-term predation risk (Table 1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Predation risk is equated with the probability of lion presence (short-term and long-term).
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The long-term risk index calculated over four months approximates the long-term risk of predation at a location.
  • Findingown data

    Short-term risk of predation by lions (presence in the vicinity in the preceding 24 hours) was associated with all herbivore species shifting to greater use of open grassland habitat.

    “The results also show that all herbivores tend to use more open habitats preferentially when lions are in their vicinity, probably an effective anti-predator behavior against such an ambush predator.”
    • Also stated in: § RESULTS · hedged
      “Manly-Chesson indices suggested that short-term predation risk may influence habitat preference for all species, which appeared to shift to greater use of grassland when lions were in the vicinity (Fig. 3).”
    • Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · hedged
      “Independently from their strategy, most species favored use of open grassland areas when lions were in the vicinity, probably owing to a greater detection of lion movements.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Predation risk is equated with the probability of lion presence (short-term and long-term).
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The presence of lions within 2 km in the preceding 24 hours represents short-term risk of predation.
  • May combine two claims. 9
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 9

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Long-term risk of predation by lions (likelihood of lion presence over four months) negatively influenced the landscape distribution/site selection of all browsers, but not grazers, in Hwange National Park.

    “The long-term risk of predation by lions appeared to influence the distributions of all browsers across the landscape, but not of grazers.”
    • Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
      “For all grazers, site selection was not associated with the long-term predation risk but was mainly influenced by distance to water and/or habitat type.”
    • Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
      “Whereas the distributions of all browsers across the landscape were negatively associated with the longterm risk of lion presence (as assessed by our proxy), those of grazers did not.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Predation risk is equated with the probability of lion presence (short-term and long-term).
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The long-term risk index calculated over four months approximates the long-term risk of predation at a location.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Grazers' antipredator strategy is essentially based on responses to pulses of predation risk (when lions are in the vicinity) because their suitable habitats are mostly restricted to risky environments.

    “Because their suitable habitats are mostly restricted to risky environments, we suggest that grazer's antipredator strategy (use of safer habitat, stronger vigilance behavior) is essentially based on responses to pulses of predation risk; i.e., when lions are in the vicinity (Lima and Bednekoff 1999).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Lima and Bednekoff 1999

      Not checked in the free run.

    • The authors state this as an assumption: Predation risk is equated with the probability of lion presence (short-term and long-term).
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The presence of lions within 2 km in the preceding 24 hours represents short-term risk of predation.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Behaviorally induced effects of lions may contribute significantly to structuring African herbivore communities and possibly their effects on savanna ecosystems.

    “Behaviorally induced effects of lions may therefore contribute significantly to structuring African herbivore communities, and hence possibly their effects on savanna ecosystems.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Predation risk is equated with the probability of lion presence (short-term and long-term).
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The long-term risk index calculated over four months approximates the long-term risk of predation at a location.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The presence of lions within 2 km in the preceding 24 hours represents short-term risk of predation.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Smaller herbivores can be preyed upon by almost all carnivores.

    “Contrary to larger herbivores, smaller herbivores can be preyed upon by almost all carnivores (Owen-Smith and Mills 2008), and the risk of being predated by other predators (spotted hyena, leopard, painted dog, cheetah) may therefore also affect habitat use.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Owen-Smith and Mills 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In HNP, vegetation is primarily woodland and bushland, and open grassland areas are scarce and often associated with waterhole areas.

    “In HNP, the vegetation is primarily woodland and bushland, and open grassland areas are scarce and often associated with waterhole areas (Rogers 1993).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rogers 1993

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Distribution of herbivores in the landscape is constrained by the distribution of surface water, and this constraint is stronger for water-dependent grazers.

    “Additionally, the distribution of herbivores in the landscape is constrained by the distribution of surface water, and this constraint is stronger for water-dependent grazers (Western 1975, Redfern et al. 2003).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Western 1975

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Redfern et al. 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In HNP, the top five species utilized by lions are buffalo (33% of kills), kudu (18%), giraffe (9%), zebra (6%), and elephant calves (6%), accounting together for 72% of lion kills.

    “In HNP, the top five species utilized by lions appear to be buffalo (33% of kills), kudu (18%), giraffe (9%), zebra (6%), and elephant Loxodonta africana calves (6%), accounting together for 72% of lion kills (Loveridge et al. 2007a).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Loveridge et al. 2007a

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    For large herbivores, the long-term costs of anti-predator behavior may lead to decreased body condition, lower fecundity for females or lowered competitive ability for males.

    “For large herbivores, the long-term costs of anti-predator behavior (decrease in feeding activity due to increased level of vigilance, shift to safer but poorer habitats) may lead to decreased bodycondition, lower fecundity for females or lowered competitive ability for males (e.g., Creel et al. 2007).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Creel et al. 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Most lion groups in the study area were collared (80% of lion groups seen included one collared individual during the study period).

    “Most lion groups were collared in the study area (80% of the lion groups seen in the study area included one collared individual during the study period).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    For short-term risk analyses, only areas where the movements of the majority of lion groups could be confidently tracked were considered.

    “For the analyses related to this short-term risk of predation, only areas where we could be confident of the movements of the majority of lion groups were considered.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Contrasting 'lion present' and 'lion not detected' is a conservative approach because the effects of undetected lions work against the hypotheses.

    “We contrasted situations characterized by ''lion present'' and ''lion not detected,'' a conservative approach insofar as the effects of undetected lions work against our hypotheses.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Prey select microhabitats that allow escape from predators.

    “Other studies have already emphasized that prey select microhabitats that allow escape from predators (Wirsing et al. 2007).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wirsing et al. 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the short-term habitat use analysis, only observations further than 1 km from a waterhole were used because habitat availability is strongly modified in the vicinity of waterholes.

    “We used only the observations further than 1km from a waterhole in this approach, because habitat availability is strongly modified in the vicinity of waterholes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    To avoid bias linked to the probability of detection of an animal depending on habitat type, only observations located within 100 m of the transects were used.

    “To avoid any bias linked to the probability of detection of an animal depending on habitat type, we used only the observations located within 100 m of the transects (number of observations for buffalo ¼ 53, for duiker ¼ 103, for giraffe ¼ 347, for impala ¼ 386, for kudu ¼ 311, for roan ¼ 18, for sable ¼ 49, for steenbok ¼ 449, for warthog ¼ 189, for wildebeest ¼ 78, and for zebra ¼ 206).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    All logistic regressions were significant (likelihood ratio test P < 0.05) and provided good fits (Hosmer and Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test P > 0.05) for all species except kudu and warthog (P = 0.004).

    “All logistic regressions were significant (likelihood ratio test: P , 0.05) and they provided good fits (Hosmer and Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test: P .0.05) for all species except kudu and warthog (P ¼ 0.004).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
15 of 15

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Predation risk is equated with the probability of lion presence (short-term and long-term).

    “While there are factors other than lion presence that define the riskiness of a site (e.g., activity of other predators, habitat characteristics), the short-term and long-term risk of predation are here taken to mean the short-term and long-term probability of lion presence.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Control points located every 2 km on all transects represent the range of what was available to herbivores.

    “Control points represent the range of what was available to herbivores.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The long-term risk index calculated over four months approximates the long-term risk of predation at a location.

    “We approximated the long-term risk of predation at a location by an index proportional to the probability of lion presence at this location, calculated over four months.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The presence of lions within 2 km in the preceding 24 hours represents short-term risk of predation.

    “Short-term risk of predation was estimated by the presence of lions in the area of the herbivore sighting (,2 km) in the preceding 24 hours as revealed by fine scale spatiotemporal data collected by the lion GPS radio collars.”
4 of 4

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 hunting habits of predators largely determine their impact on ecosystems, through effects on prey species distributions, abundance and behavior.

    “The hunting habits of such predators are of particular interest because they largely determine the impact predators have on ecosystems, through effects on prey species distributions, abundance and behavior [4,14,15].”

    From Effects of Vegetation Structure on the Location of Lion Kill Sites in African Thicket (2016) · cites this paper as [14]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Predicted risk effect does not decrease at every fixed distance to water

    Minor

    For kudu, the table gives a positive long-term-risk coefficient and a negative interaction with distance to water. At or near a waterhole, the fitted effect of increasing risk is therefore positive, contrary to the unqualified statement that selection decreases for a given distance to water.

1 of 1

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Drouet-Hoguet N., 2007, Influence des activités anthropogéniques sur le régime alimentaire et la réponse numérique de la hyène tachetée en savane arborée dystrophique dominée par l'éléphant
  2. Loveridge A. J., 2007, Hwange Lion Project Annual Report 2007
  3. SAS Institute., 2002, SAS version 9.0
  4. Skinner J. D., 1998, The mammals of the southern African region
  5. South A. B., 2006, Ranges7 v1.0: for the analysis of tracking and location data

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Valeix, M., Loveridge, A. J., Chamaillé-Jammes, S., Davidson, Z., Murindagomo, F., Fritz, H., & Macdonald, D. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Lyon 1 Université (FR)
ORCID
Venue
Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-01
Volume
90
Issue
1
Pages
23-30
ISSN
  • 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-9170
DOI
10.1890/08-0606.1
OpenAlex
W2025752835
Semantic Scholar
8f4db43da13b57c425509b1926a85c973cdade72
Cited by
478
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 45 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 42 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 23
FWCI
18.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Ecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Agence Nationale de la Recherche
  • Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
Keywords
lion predation, predator-prey interactions, antipredator behavior, habitat use, web browsers, grazers, spatiotemporal variation, savanna ecosystems, Hwange National Park
MeSH terms
Africa, Animals, Demography, Female, Lions, Male, Predatory Behavior, Ruminants, Ecosystem, Equidae

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.

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