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 Caro, T. M.
Right arrow Articles by Kelly, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Caro, T. M.
Right arrow Articles by Kelly, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1995 International Society for Behavioral Ecology

research-article

Tail-flagging and other antipredator signals in white-tailed deer: new data and synthesis

T. M. Caroa, Leslie Lombardob, A. W. Goldizenc and Marcella Kellyd

aCenter for Population Biology and Department of Wildlife, Fish and Conservation Biology, University of California Davis, CA 95616, USA bDepartment of Biology, Grand Valley State University Allendale, MI 49401, USA cDepartment of Zoology, University of Queensland Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia dEcology Graduate Program and Department of Wildlife, Fish and Conservation Biology, University of California Davis, CA 95616, USA

ABSTRACT

We present a series of predictions concerning the costs and benefits of antipredator behavior in ungulates and then test them with data on white-tailed deer reacting to a human on foot. Costs of tail-flagging were apparently low and no data supported the idea that flagging serves as a warning signal to conspecifics, in either this or in other studies. Flagging deer fled at greater speeds than nonflaggers, indicating that flagging could possibly signal prey's ability to escape. Dropping the tail at the end of the flight may additionally have made deer inconspicuous. Snorting did not appear directed at conspecifics, and comparative data suggest that it signals that the predator has been detected. In contrast, foot-stamping was effective in alerting other deer to the observer's presence. Deer may have bounded to clear obstacles along their flight path. These preliminary data indicate that several aspects of antipredator behavior in white-tailed deer may be pursuit-deterrent signals, and they therefore highlight the necessity of observing natural predators' reactions to signals given by deer in future studies.

Key words: antipredator behavior, bound, foot-stamp, Odocoileus virginianus, pursuit deterrence, signals, snort, tail-fla, tail-flick, white-tailed deer. [Behav Ecol 6: 442–450 (1995)].


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Behav EcolHome page
M. Broom and G. D. Ruxton
You can run--or you can hide: optimal strategies for cryptic prey against pursuit predators
Behav. Ecol., May 1, 2005; 16(3): 534 - 540.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Behav EcolHome page
C. J. Stoner, T. M. Caro, and C. M. Graham
Ecological and behavioral correlates of coloration in artiodactyls: systematic analyses of conventional hypotheses
Behav. Ecol., November 1, 2003; 14(6): 823 - 840.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Integr. Comp. Biol.Home page
J. A. Randall
Evolution and Function of Drumming as Communication in Mammals
Integr. Comp. Biol., October 1, 2001; 41(5): 1143 - 1156.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


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.