The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Factors Affecting Gerbil Foraging Behavior and Rates of Owl Predation
Abstract
We experimented on how illumination, habitat structure, and three different species of owls affected the foraging behavior of Gerbillus allenbyi and G. pyramidum, two gerbil species that coexist on sand dune habitats in the Negev Desert, Israel. We also tested how illumination and habitat structure affected rates of predation by owls on the two gerbil species. In a large aviary, we manipulated presence and absence of owls, owl species, presence and absence of illumination, and shrub cover. In response to the presence of owls or to increased illumination, gerbils foraged less, shifted foraging activity to the bush microhabitat, and quit patches at a higher giving—up density of resources. In accord with moonlight avoidance, both gerbil species suffered higher predation rates under illumination than in the absence of illumination. In addition, G. pyramidum distinguished among owl species, as indicated by changes in patch use and habitat selection. Habitat structure also affected foraging behavior and rates of predation. Gerbils foraged less in the open than in the bush microhabitat, foraged less when there was no cover present, and foraged less in the bush microhabitat when patches were encumbered by entangling branches. In accord with avoidance of open areas, both gerbil species suffered higher rates of predation when shrub cover was 0% than when shrub cover was 10%. With 0% cover, G. allenbyi suffered higher predation rates than G. pyramidum, but with 10% cover, rates of owl predation did not differ between gerbil species. Rates of owl predation on the two species corresponded to their natural patterns of macro— and microhabitat partitioning; relative to G. allenbyi, G. pyramidum predominates on open sand dunes and biases its behavior toward the open microhabitat. The results suggest that predation interacts with resource competition to determine the distribution and habitat separation of G. allenbyi and G. pyramidum.
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
Nonlethal Effects in the Ecology of Predator-Prey Interactions
Lima, S. L. (1998) · BioScience · doi:10.2307/1313225 · Cited by 1,852
Hazardous duty pay and the foraging cost of predation
Brown, J. S., & Kotler, B. P. (2004) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00661.x · Cited by 1,121
Self-citationPrey Refuges Affecting Interactions Between Piscivorous Perch and Juvenile Perch and Roach
Persson, L., & Eklov, P. (1995) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1940632 · Cited by 384
Creel, S., Schuette, P., & Christianson, D. (2014) · Behavioral Ecology · doi:10.1093/beheco/aru050 · Cited by 330
Kronfeld-Schor, N., Dominoni, D., de la Iglesia, H., Levy, O., Herzog, E. D., Dayan, T., & Helfrich-Forster, C. (2013) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.3088 · Cited by 245
Metadata
- Authors
- Kotler, B. P., Brown, J. S., & Hasson, O.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1991-12
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2249-2260
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-9170
- OpenAlex
- W2068121738
- Cited by
- 540
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.64
- 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: Factors Affecting Gerbil Foraging Behavior and Rates of Owl Predation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1941575
- The paper
- Kotler, B. P., Brown, J. S., & Hasson, O. (1991). Factors Affecting Gerbil Foraging Behavior and Rates of Owl Predation. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1941575
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.