![]() Here, there is a need to reconsider how we perceive the benefits and costs of an animal’s habitat, a cognitive map, which may be based on historically-accepted theoretical models assuming little or no association with humans, and to reconsider how our study species interact with human-associated opportunities and costs. Yet, the increasing recognition of the transformative nature of human-induced landscape change is punctuated by the discovery of “novel” impacts on animal behavior and fitness. Much of our body of ecological theory, however, has been formulated from studies conducted on animals living without human association (“apoanthropic”) or under assumptions of negligible anthropogenic impact. During this period of change, free-ranging animals living in association with humans (“synanthropic” animals ) have been exposed to evolutionarily-novel costs and benefits associated with the increasing occurrence of anthropogenic resources, particularly in urban landscapes. Given the global scale of anthropogenic impacts, a majority of free-ranging animals are likely already affected by anthropogenic landscape change. The Anthropocene is identified as a period of significant human influence on Earth’s ecosystems, although humans have been transforming large terrestrial areas and climate to some degree for millennia. Our results and methodology may contribute to understanding effects of anthropogenic landscape change on wildlife populations. There is growing need to explicitly incorporate human–animal interactions into ecological theory and research. In our study, living in association with humans influenced space use patterns that diverged from historically-accepted predictions. ![]() For mongooses living in association with humans, space use was not associated with patch dispersion or group size over both seasons. We found negligible support for predictions of the resource dispersion hypothesis in general or for metabolic theory where seasonality and association with humans were not included. Resource richness factors such as building density were associated with space use only during the dry season. Space use of mongooses living in association with humans was more concentrated in the dry season than the wet season, when historically-accepted ecological theory predicted more dispersed space use. We found support for predictions of the metabolic theory when moderated by seasonality, by association with humans and by their interaction. Seasonality influences this association, reversing seasonal space use predictions historically-accepted by ecologists. Results suggest that space use is strongly associated with variation in the level of overlap that mongoose groups have with humans. We used Bayesian parameter estimation and inference from linear models to test for seasonal differences in space use metrics and to model seasonal effects of space use drivers. In this study, we used data for banded mongooses ( Mungos mungo) in northeastern Botswana, along a gradient of association with humans, to test for effects of space use drivers predicted by these theories. Neither have been evaluated in the context of anthropogenic landscape change. ![]() Full evaluation of the resource dispersion hypothesis requires testing in more species. But, metabolic theory is usually tested in macro-ecological studies and is seldom invoked explicitly in within-species studies. ![]() Associated theories such as the metabolic theory of ecology and the resource dispersion hypothesis generate predictions about what drives variation in animal space use. ![]() Variation in animal space use reflects fitness trade-offs associated with ecological constraints. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |