Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nishimura, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Nishimura, K.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1991 International Society for Behavioral Ecology

research-article

Utilization of different prey type patches in the Ural owl(Strix uralensis): a sit-and-wait predator

Kinya Nishimura

Graduate School of Agricultural Science, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305, Japan

Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305, Japan.

ABSTRACT

To quantify the pattern of allocation of foraging activity of a sit-and-wait forager among feeding sites of different profitability, I conducted an experimental study of patch utilization behavior of Ural owls (Strix uralensis) in an experimental flight cage. The owls were allowed to search among four patches containing equal numbers of mice, two with the large Japanese field mouse (Apodemus speciosus) and two with the small Japanese field mouse (A. argenteus). Patches with A. speciosus were more profitable than those with A. argenteus, and owls visited more profitable patches more frequently. Visiting frequency to richer patches did not increase with experience; however, owls changed search time according to experience. Search time in a patch became longer in later visits than in earlier visits during a given night according to an owl’s sampling experience among patches. Furthermore, owls stayed longer in richer patches than in poor ones if they had caught mice in both types of patches. Search time had great variance. Mean search time that ended with attack was longer than that ended without attack (give up). In effect, Ural owls improved their resource utilization pattern as they accumulated experience in the environment. [Behav Ecol 1991;2:99–105J]


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.