On the Advantages of Mixed‐Species Groups: Impalas Adjust Their Vigilance When Associated With Larger Prey Herbivores

Citations Over TimeTop 10% of 2014 papers

Abstract

Abstract Prey can obtain valuable benefits from associating with other species if heterospecifics help to detect predators or locate good food patches. In mixed‐species groups, how species respond to the presence of other species remains a poorly explored question although it might give crucial insights into mechanisms underlying the interspecific coexistence. We studied temporary mixed‐species groups of large herbivores in H wange N ational P ark ( Z imbabwe) between the common impala ( A epyceros melampus ), the focal species here, and bigger species including the plains zebra ( E quus quagga ), the greater kudu ( T ragelaphus strepsiceros ) or the blue wildebeest ( C onnochaetes taurinus ). In the H wange savanna, the focal and smaller species are exposed to a larger range of predators than the associated species. In this context, we investigated how impalas adjusted their vigilance with group size comparing impala‐only and mixed‐species groups and whether the identity of heterospecifics affected vigilance of impalas. Our study showed that the time impalas spent in vigilance significantly decreased with group size when they formed impala‐only groups, whereas it did not significantly vary with group size in mixed‐species groups. Moreover, in mixed‐species groups, impalas did not adjust their time spent in vigilance with the proportion of conspecifics and the identity of the associated species. Thus, the mechanism underlying the difference of impalas' behavioural adjustment of vigilance with group size between single‐ and mixed‐species groups seemed to be related to the presence but not to the number and the identity of heteropecifics. Finally, we discuss the concept that larger and dominant heterospecifics were likely to increase competition for food access, thereby forcing higher vigilance of impalas, outweighing any reduction from collective vigilance.

Related Papers

• → Population Consequences of Predation‐Sensitive Foraging: The Serengeti Wildebeest(1995)367 cited
• → The relationship bewteen rainfall , lion predation and population trends in African herbivores.(1995)125 cited
• → Contrasting capabilities of two ungulate species to cope with extremes of aridity(2021)14 cited
• → An investigation of power law distribution in wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus) herds in Serengeti National Park, Tanzania(2020)4 cited
• → Wildebeest Model(1997)