Savviness of prey to introduced predators

The prey naivety hypothesis posits that prey are vulnerable to introduced predators because many generations in slow gradual coevolution are needed for appropriate avoidance responses to develop. It predicts that prey will be more responsive to native than introduced predators and less responsive to introduced predators that differ substantially from native predators and from those newly established. To test these predictions, we conducted a global meta-analysis of studies that measured the wariness responses of small mammals to the scent of sympatric mammalian mesopredators. We identified 26 studies that met our selection criteria. These studies comprised 134 experiments reporting on the responses of 36 small mammal species to the scent of six introduced mesopredators and 12 native mesopredators. For each introduced mesopredator, we measured their phylogenetic and functional distance to local native mesopredators and the number of years sympatric with their prey. We used predator and prey body mass as a measure of predation risk. Globally, small mammals were similarly wary of the scent of native and introduced mesopredators; phylogenetic and functional distance between introduced mesopredators and closest native mesopredators had no effect on wariness; and wariness was unrelated to the number of prey generations, or years, since first contact with introduced mesopredators. Small mammal wariness was associated with predator-prey body mass ratio, regardless of the nativity. The one thing animals do not seem to recognize is whether their predators are native.     

Knowledge coproduction on the impact of decisions for waterbird habitat in a changing climate

Scientists, resource managers, and decision makers increasingly use knowledge coproduction to guide the stewardship of future landscapes under climate change. This process was applied in the California Central Valley (USA) to solve complex conservation problems, where managed wetlands and croplands are flooded between fall and spring to support some of the largest concentrations of shorebirds and waterfowl in the world. We coproduced scenario narratives, spatially explicit flooded waterbird habitat models, data products, and new knowledge about climate adaptation potential. We documented our coproduction process, and using the coproduced models, we determined when and where management actions make a difference and when climate overrides these actions. The outcomes of this process provide lessons learned on how to cocreate usable information and how to increase climate adaptive capacity in a highly managed landscape. Actions to restore wetlands and prioritize their water supply created habitat outcomes resilient to climate change impacts particularly in March, when habitat was most limited; land protection combined with management can increase the ecosystem's resilience to climate change; and uptake and use of this information was influenced by the roles of different stakeholders, rapidly changing water policies, discrepancies in decision-making time frames, and immediate crises of extreme drought. Although a broad stakeholder group contributed knowledge to scenario narratives and model development, to coproduce usable information, data products were tailored to a small set of decision contexts, leading to fewer stakeholder participants over time. A boundary organization convened stakeholders across a large landscape, and early adopters helped build legitimacy. Yet, broadscale use of climate adaptation knowledge depends on state and local policies, engagement with decision makers that have legislative and budgetary authority, and the capacity to fit data products to specific decision needs.     

Environmentally relevant concentration of caffeine—effect on activity and circadian rhythm in wild perch

Environmental Science and Pollution Research - We studied the ecological consequences of widespread caffeine contamination by conducting an experiment focused on changes in the behavioral traits of...     

Lessons from other disciplines for setting management thresholds for biodiversity conservation

Successful, state-dependent management, in which the goal of management is to maintain a system in a desired state, involves defining the boundaries between different states. Once these boundaries have been defined, managers require a strategic action plan with thresholds that initiate management interventions to either maintain or return the system to a desired state. This approach to management is widely used across diverse industries from agriculture, to medicine, to information technology, but it has only been adopted in conservation management relatively recently. Conservation practitioners have expressed a willingness to integrate this structured approach in their management systems, but they have also voiced concerns, including lack of a robust process for doing so. Given the widespread use of state-dependent management in other fields, we conducted an extensive review of the literature on threshold-based management to gain insight into how and where it is applied and identify potential lessons for conservation management. We identified 22 industries using 75 different methods for setting management thresholds in 843 studies. Methods spanned six broad approaches, including expert driven, statistical, predictive, optimization, experimental, and artificial intelligence methods. The objectives of each of these studies influenced the approaches used, including the methods for setting thresholds and selecting actions, and the number of thresholds set. The role of value judgments in setting thresholds was clear; studies across all industries frequently involved experts in setting thresholds, often accompanied by computational tools to simulate the consequences of proposed thresholds under different conditions. Of the 30 conservation studies examined, two-thirds used expert-driven methods, consistent with prior evidence that experience-based information often drives conservation management decisions. The methods we identified from other disciplines could help conservation decision makers set thresholds for management interventions in different contexts, linking monitoring to management actions and ensuring that conservation interventions are timely and effective.