Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Downes, S. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Downes, S. J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Behavioral Ecology Vol. 13 No. 4: 551-560
© 2002 International Society for Behavioral Ecology

Size-dependent predation by snakes: selective foraging or differential prey vulnerability?

Sharon J. Downes

Biological Sciences A08, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia

Address correspondence to S.J. Downes, who is now at the Division of Botany and Zoology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia. E-mail: sharon.downes{at}anu.edu.au .

I staged replicate encounters between unrestrained lizards and snakes in outdoor enclosures to examine size-dependent predation within the common garden skink (Lampropholis guichenoti). Yellow-faced whip snakes (Demansia psammophis) forage widely for active prey and most often consumed large skinks, whereas death adders (Acanthophis antarcticus) ambush active prey and most often consumed small skinks. Small-eyed snakes (Rhinoplocephalus nigrescens) forage widely for inactive prey and consumed both small and large skinks equally often. Differential predation may reflect active choice by the predator, differential prey vulnerability, or both. To test for active choice, I presented foraging snakes with an inert small lizard versus an inert large lizard. They did not actively select lizards of a particular body size. To test for differential prey vulnerability, I quantified variation between small and large lizards in behavior that is important for determining the outcome of predator—prey interactions. Snakes did not differentiate between integumentary chemicals from small and large lizards. Large lizards tend to flee from approaching predators, thereby eliciting attack by the visually oriented whip snakes. Small lizards were more mobile than large lizards and therefore more likely to pass by sedentary death adders. Additionally, small skinks were more effectively lured by this sit-and-wait species and less likely to avoid its first capture attempt. In contrast, overnight retreat site selection (not body size) determined a lizard's chances of being detected by small-eyed snakes. Patterns of size-dependent predation by elapid snakes may arise not because of active choice but as a function of species-specific predator tactics and prey behavior.

Key words: antipredator behavior, body size, foraging mode, lizards, prey selection, prey vulnerability, size-dependent predation, snakes.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.