News News

The costs of mischoosing are not uniform across individuals

250

Matching habitat choice is a particular form of habitat selection based on self?assessment of local performance that offers individuals a means to optimize the match of phenotype to the environment. Despite the advantages of this mechanism in terms of increased local adaptation, examples from natural populations are extremely rare. One possible reason for the apparent rarity of matching habitat choice is that it might be manifest only in those segments of a population for which the cost of a phenotype–environment mismatch is high. To test this hypothesis, we used a breeding population of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) exposed to size-dependent predation risk by bears, and evaluated the costs of mischoosing in discrete groups (e.g. male versus females, and ocean?age 2 versus ocean?age 3) using reproductive life span as a measure of individual performance. Bear preference for larger fish, especially in shallow water, translates into a performance trade-off that sockeye salmon can potentially use to guide their settlement decisions. Consistent with matching habitat choice, we found that salmon of similar ocean?age and size tended to cluster together in sites of similar water depth. However, matching habitat choice was only favoured in 3?ocean females – the segment of the population most vulnerable to bear predation. This study illustrates the unequal relevance of matching habitat choice to different segments of a population, and suggests that ‘partial matching habitat choice' could have resulted in an underestimation of the actual prevalence of this mechanism in nature. informacion[at]ebd.csic.es: Camacho & Hendry (2020) Matching habitat choice: it's not for everyone. Oikos DOI 10.1111/oik.06932


https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/oik.06932
Average (0 Votes)

Latest News Latest News

Back

Large carnivore damage in Europe: Analysis of compensation and prevention programs

Large carnivore damage in Europe: Analysis of compensation and prevention programs

The mitigation of conflicts associated with large carnivore damage to livestock and agriculture is pivotal to their conservation. Current programs to compensate and prevent large carnivore damage in 27 European countries and the factors related to the economic costs of these programs are evaluated here. Overall, high compensation costs are associated with free-ranging livestock (68% of total costs) and with national economic wealth. Contrary to general belief, the return of large carnivores does not always translate into higher compensation costs. This study identifies a tendency towards prioritizing compensation over prevention; only a few wealthy countries pay the majority of the money allocated for prevention programs to adapt husbandry practices to the presence of large carnivores. Results show that programs mainly focused on paying large compensation amounts will often fail to build tolerance towards predators. To mitigate conflicts and optimize the cost-effectiveness of publicly funded measures, responsible agencies should be proactive, focus on prevention-based policies and periodically evaluate the effectiveness of compensation and prevention programs in an adaptive manner. With this purpose and to identify further solutions for conflict mitigation, a pan-European database of damage occurrence, management actions and associated costs is called for. informacion[at]ebd.csic.es: Bautista et al (2019) Large carnivore damage in Europe: analysis of compensation and prevention policies. Biol Conserv https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.04.019


https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320718314423