» Articles » PMID: 26489024

Testing the Prey-Trap Hypothesis at Two Wildlife Conservancies in Kenya

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2015 Oct 22
PMID 26489024
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Protecting an endangered and highly poached species can conflict with providing an open and ecologically connected landscape for coexisting species. In Kenya, about half of the black rhino (Diceros bicornis) live in electrically fenced private conservancies. Purpose-built fence-gaps permit some landscape connectivity for elephant while restricting rhino from escaping. We monitored the usage patterns at these gaps by motion-triggered cameras and found high traffic volumes and predictable patterns of prey movement. The prey-trap hypothesis (PTH) proposes that predators exploit this predictable prey movement. We tested the PTH at two semi-porous reserves using two different methods: a spatial analysis and a temporal analysis. Using spatial analysis, we mapped the location of predation events with GPS and looked for concentration of kill sites near the gaps as well as conducting clustering and hot spot analysis to determine areas of statistically significant predation clustering. Using temporal analysis, we examined the time lapse between the passage of prey and predator and searched for evidence of active prey seeking and/or predator avoidance. We found no support for the PTH and conclude that the design of the fence-gaps is well suited to promoting connectivity in these types of conservancies.

Citing Articles

Temporal clustering of prey in wildlife passages provides no evidence of a prey-trap.

Martinig A, Riaz M, St Clair C Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):11489.

PMID: 32661272 PMC: 7359302. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-67340-8.


Borrowing from Peter to pay Paul: managing threatened predators of endangered and declining prey species.

Davidson Z, Dupuis-Desormeaux M, Dheer A, Pratt L, Preston E, Gilicho S PeerJ. 2019; 7:e7916.

PMID: 31637142 PMC: 6798864. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7916.


A ghost fence-gap: surprising wildlife usage of an obsolete fence crossing.

Dupuis-Desormeaux M, Kaaria T, Mwololo M, Davidson Z, MacDonald S PeerJ. 2018; 6:e5950.

PMID: 30515359 PMC: 6266906. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.5950.

References
1.
Bode M, Wintle B . How to build an efficient conservation fence. Conserv Biol. 2009; 24(1):182-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01291.x. View

2.
Ford A, Clevenger A . Validity of the prey-trap hypothesis for carnivore-ungulate interactions at wildlife-crossing structures. Conserv Biol. 2010; 24(6):1679-85. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01564.x. View

3.
Clements H, Tambling C, Hayward M, Kerley G . An objective approach to determining the weight ranges of prey preferred by and accessible to the five large African carnivores. PLoS One. 2014; 9(7):e101054. PMC: 4079238. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0101054. View

4.
Davidson Z, Valeix M, van Kesteren F, Loveridge A, Hunt J, Murindagomo F . Seasonal diet and prey preference of the African lion in a waterhole-driven semi-arid savanna. PLoS One. 2013; 8(2):e55182. PMC: 3566210. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0055182. View

5.
Packer C, Loveridge A, Canney S, Caro T, Garnett S, Pfeifer M . Conserving large carnivores: dollars and fence. Ecol Lett. 2013; 16(5):635-41. DOI: 10.1111/ele.12091. View