Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:41:38.657Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - The role of animal sensory perception in behavior-based management

from Part III - Behavior-based management: using behavioral knowledge to improve conservation and management efforts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2016

Esteban Fernández-Juricic
Affiliation:
Purdue University, USA
Oded Berger-Tal
Affiliation:
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
David Saltz
Affiliation:
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

At the core of the conservation behavior framework is behavior-based management, which takes into consideration animal behavior in making conservation decisions (Chapter 1). Often, behavior-based management requires manipulation of the behavior of a species in order to accomplish specific conservation or management goals (Sutherland 1998) or avoiding actions producing stimuli that may elicit unwanted behavioral responses. Manipulating behavior may involve repelling an invasive nest parasite from a breeding site, attracting a species to a restored habitat, or sensitizing newly re-introduced individuals to predators. Obviously, the specific means of manipulating behavior will be a function of the biology of the species.

One strategy to modify the behavior of animals is to develop stimuli (visual, auditory, olfactory, etc.) intended to grab their attention and generate a specific type of response. For instance, songs of conspecifics have been used successfully to attract individuals of the endangered Cape Sable seaside sparrow (Ammodramus maritimus mirabilis) to suitable breeding areas in the Florida Everglades (Virzi et al. 2012). But, some situations can be more challenging. For example, in trying to cause aversive responses in rabbits close to agricultural fields, Wilson and McKillop (1986) tested the effectiveness of a commercially available scaring device that would broadcast sounds at high frequencies (9–15 kHz). They found that the device effect was limited to only 3 m and only while it was playing back the sounds, but most importantly animals habituated after just a few days. Despite the different characteristics of the acoustic stimuli and the different taxa, these opposite results suggest that some species may perceive our stimuli, but that perception alone does not guarantee a response. Is there any strategy to increase the success of stimuli developed for conservation or wildlife management purposes?

The first limitation we should acknowledge is that there may be a discrepancy between the perceptual world of the biologists and that of the target species (Lim et al. 2008, Blumstein & Fernández-Juricic 2010). To illustrate this, let us think of the following hypothetical example. Imagine that in a large exhibition tank in an aquarium, we need to attract spotted wobbegong sharks (Orectolobus maculatus) to one part of the tank to feed them and avoid interactions with other species. So, we decide to use yellow LED lights to attract wobbegongs to the feeding portion of the tank, and blue LED lights to discourage them from going to other parts of the tank.

Type
Chapter
Information
Conservation Behavior
Applying Behavioral Ecology to Wildlife Conservation and Management
, pp. 149 - 175
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arnold, S.E.J., Faruq, S., Savolainen, V., McOwan, P.W. and Chittka, L. 2010. FReD: the floral reflectance database – a web portal for analyses of flower colour. PLoS ONE, 5(12):e14287.Google Scholar
Atema, J., Kingsford, M.J. and Gerlach, G. 2002. Larval reef fish could use odour for detection, retention and orientation to reefs. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 241:151–160.Google Scholar
Baumhardt, P.E., Moore, B.A., Doppler, M. and Fernández-Juricic, E. 2014. Do American goldfinches see their world like passive prey foragers? A study on visual fields, retinal topography, and sensitivity of photoreceptors. Brain, Behavior and Evolution, 83:181–198.Google Scholar
Bélisle, M. and St. Clair, C.C. 2001. Cumulative effects of barriers on the movement of forest birds. Conservation Ecology, 5(2):9.Google Scholar
Bernhardt, G.E., Blackwell, B.F., DeVault, T.L. and Kutschbach-Brohl, L. 2010. Fatal injuries to birds from collisions with aircraft reveal anti-predator behaviours. Ibis, 152:830–834.Google Scholar
Blackwell, B.F, Fernández-Juricic, E., Seamans, T.W. and Dolan, T. 2009. Avian visual system configuration and behavioural response to object approach. Animal Behaviour, 77:673–684.Google Scholar
Blackwell, B.F. and Fernández-Juricic, E. 2013. Visual deterrents at airports. In DeVault, T.L., Blackwell, B.F. and Belant, J.L. (eds.), Wildlife Management in Airport Environments, pp. 11–22. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Blackwell, B.F., DeVault, T.L., Seamans, T.W., Lima, S.L., Baumhardt, P. and Fernández-Juricic, E. 2012. Exploiting avian vision with aircraft lighting to reduce bird strikes. Journal of Applied Ecology, 49:758–766.Google Scholar
Catania, K.C. 2011. The sense of touch in the star-nosed mole: from mechanoreceptors to the brain. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 366:3016–3025.Google Scholar
Collin, S.P. 2008. A web-based archive for topographic maps of retinal cell distribution in vertebrates. Australian Journal of Optometry, 91:85–95.Google Scholar
Dolan, T. and Fernández-Juricic, E. 2010. Retinal ganglion cell topography of five species of ground foraging birds. Brain, Behavior and Evolution, 75:111–121.Google Scholar
Dolbeer, R.A., Wright, S.E., Weller, J. and Begier, M.J. 2012. Wildlife strikes to civil aircraft in the United States, 1990–2011. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Airport Safety and Standards, Serial Report No. 18, Washington, DC, USA
Dolbeer, R.A. 2011. Increasing trend of damaging bird strikes with aircraft outside the airport boundary: implications for mitigation measures. Human–Wildlife Interactions, 5:235–248.Google Scholar
Doppler, M., Blackwell, B.F., DeVault, T.L. and Fernández-Juricic, E. 2015. Cowbird responses to aircraft with lights tuned to the avian visual system: implications for bird-aircraft collisions. The Condor 117:165–177.Google Scholar
Dusenbery, D.B. 1992. Sensory Ecology: How Organisms Acquire and Respond to Information. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Egri, A., Blaho, M., Szaz, D., Kriska, G., Majer, J., Herczeg, T., Gyurkovszky, M., Farkas, R. and Horvath, G. 2013. A horizontally polarizing liquid trap enhances the tabanid-capturing efficiency of the classic canopy trap. Bulleting of Entomological Research 103:665–674.Google Scholar
Ellenberg, U., Setiawan, A.N., Cree, A., Houston, D.M. and Seddon, P.J. 2007. Elevated hormonal stress response and reduced reproductive output in yellow-eyed penguins exposed to unregulated tourism. General and Comparative Endocrinology, 152:54–63.Google Scholar
Ellenberg, U., Mattern, T. and Seddon, P.J. 2013. Heart rate responses provide an objective evaluation of human disturbance stimuli in breeding birds. Conservation Physiology, 1: cot013.Google Scholar
Endler, J.A. 1997. Light, behavior and conservation of forest-dwelling organisms. In Clemmons, J.R. and Buchholz, (eds.), Behavioral Approaches to Conservation in the Wild, pp. 330–356. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.
Endler, J.A. and Mielke, P.W. 2005. Comparing entire colour patterns as birds see them. Biological Journal of the Linnaean Society, 86:405–431.Google Scholar
Farmer, R.G. and Brooks, R.J. 2012. Integrated risk factors for vertebrate roadkill in Southern Ontario. Journal of Wildlife Management, 76:1215–1224.Google Scholar
Feinkohl, A. and Klump, G.. 2011. Processing of transient signals in the visual system of the European starling (Sturnus vulgaris) and humans. Vision Research, 51:21–25.Google Scholar
Fernández-Juricic, E., Moore, B.A., Doppler, M., Freeman, J., Blackwell, B.F., Lima, S.L. and DeVault, T.L. 2011. Testing the terrain hypothesis: Canada geese see their world laterally and obliquely. Brain, Behavior & Evolution, 77:147–158.Google Scholar
Gaffney, M.F. and Hodos, W. 2003. The visual acuity and refractive state of the American kestrel (Falco sparverius). Vision Research, 43:2053–2059.Google Scholar
Gamberale-Stille, G., Hall, K.S.S. and Tullberg, B.S. 2007. Signals of profitability? Food colour preferences in migrating juvenile blackcaps differ for fruits and insects. Evolutionary Ecology, 21:99–108.Google Scholar
Gillies, C.S. and St Clair, C.C. 2010. Functional responses in habitat selection by tropical birds moving through fragmented forest. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47:182–190.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, T.H. 1990. Optimization, constraint, and history in the evolution of eyes. Quarterly Review of Biology, 65:281–322.Google Scholar
Guilleman, M., Martin, G.R. and Fritz, H. 2002. Feeding methods, visual fields and vigilance in dabbling ducks (Anatidae). Functional Ecology, 16: 522–529.Google Scholar
Greenwood, V.J., Smith, E.L., Goldsmith, A.R., Cuthill, I.C., Crisp, L.H., Walter-Swan, M.B. and Bennett, A.T.D. 2004. Does the flicker frequency of fluorescent lighting affect the welfare of captive European starlings?Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 86:145–159.Google Scholar
Hagura, N., Kanai, R., Orgs, G. and Haggard, P. 2012. Ready steady slow: action preparation slows the subjective passage of time. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 279:4399–4406.Google Scholar
Hart, N.S. and Hunt, D.M. 2007. Avian visual pigments: characteristics, spectral tuning, and evolution. American Naturalist, 169:S7–S26.Google Scholar
Hart, N.S., Partridge, J.C. and Cuthill, I.C. 1998. Visual pigments, oil droplets and cone photoreceptor distribution in the European starling (Sturnus vulgaris). Journal of Experimental Biology, 201:1433–1446.Google Scholar
Healy, K., McNally, L., Ruxton, G.D., Cooper, N. and Jackson, A.L. 2013. Metabolic rate and body size are linked with perception of temporal information. Animal Behaviour, 86:685–696.Google Scholar
Knoche, H.O. and Sasse, M.A. 2008. The sweet spot: how people trade off size and definition on mobile devices. MM ’08 Proceedings of the 16th ACM international conference on Multimedia 21–30.
Henry, K.S. and Lucas, J.R. 2010. Auditory sensitivity and the frequency selectivity of auditory filters in the Carolina chickadee, Poecile carolinensis. Animal Behaviour, 80:497–507.Google Scholar
Hodos, W. 2012. What birds see and what they don't. In Lazareva, O.F., Shimizu, T. and Wasserman, E.A. (eds.), How Animals See The World: Comparative Behavior, Biology, and Evolution of Vision, pp. 5–24. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Horváth, G., Blahó, M., Egri, A.Kriska, G., Seres, I. and Robertson, B.A. 2010. Reducing the maladaptive attractiveness of solar panels to insects.Conservation Biology, 24:1644–1653.Google Scholar
Horváth, G., Kriska, G., Malik, P. and Robertson, B.A. 2009. Polarized light pollution: a new kind of ecological photopollution. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7:317–325.Google Scholar
Kiltie, R.A. 2000. Scaling of visual acuity with body size in mammals and birds.Functional Ecology, 14:226–234.Google Scholar
Kriska, G., Horvath, G. and Andrikovics, S. 1998. Why do mayflies lay their eggs en masse on dry asphalt roads? Water-imitating polarized light reflected from asphalt attracts Ephemeroptera. Journal of Experimental Biology, 201:2273–2286.Google Scholar
Land, M.F. and Nilsson, D.-E. 2012. Animal Eyes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Marra, P.P., Dove, C.J., Dolbeer, R., Faridah Dahlan, N., Heacker, M., Whatton, J.F., Diggs, N.E., France, C. and Henkes, G.A. 2009. Migratory Canada geese cause crash of US Airways Flight 1549. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7:297–301.Google Scholar
Martin, G.R. and Shaw, J.M. 2010. Bird collisions with power lines: failing to see the way ahead?Biological Conservation, 143:2695–2702.Google Scholar
Martin, G.R. 1986. The eye of a Passeriform bird, the European starling (Sturnus vulgaris) – eye-movement amplitude, visual fields and schematic optics. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 159:545–557.Google Scholar
Martin, G.R. 2007. Visual fields and their functions in birds. Journal of Ornithology, 148:S547–S562.Google Scholar
Martin, G.R. 2011. Understanding bird collisions with man-made objects: a sensory ecology approach. Ibis, 153:239–254.Google Scholar
Martin, G.R., Wilson, K.J., Wild, J.M., Parsons, S., Kubke, M.F. and Corfield, J. 2007. Kiwi forego vision in the guidance of their nocturnal activities. PLoS ONE, 2(2):e198.Google Scholar
Montgomerie, R. 2006. Analyzing colors. In Hill, G.E. and McGraw, K.J. (eds.), Bird Coloration: Mechanisms and Measurements (Vol 1), pp. 90–147. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Moore, B.A, Doppler, M., Young, J.E. and Fernández-Juricic, E. 2013. Interspecific differences in the visual system and scanning behavior of three forest passerines that form heterospecific flocks. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 199:263–277.Google Scholar
Nawroth, J.C., Greer, C.A., Chen, W.R., Laughlin, S.B. and Shepherd, G.M. 2007. An energy budget for the olfactory glomerulus. Journal of Neuroscience, 27:9790–9800.Google Scholar
Neumeyer, C. 1992. Tetrachromatic color vision in goldfinch: evidence from color mixture experiments. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 171:639–649.Google Scholar
Niven, J.E. and Laughlin, S.B. 2008. Energy limitation as a selective pressure on the evolution of sensory systems. Journal of Experimental Biology, 211:1792–1804.Google Scholar
O'Rourke, C.T., Hall, M.I., Pitlik, T. and Fernández-Juricic, E. 2010. Hawk eyes I: diurnal raptors differ in visual fields and degree of eye movement. PLoS ONE, 5(9):e12802.Google Scholar
Paris, C.B., Atema, J., Irisson, J.-O., Kingsford, M., Gerlach, G. and Guigand, C.M. (2013) Reef odor: a wake up call for navigation in reef fish larvae. PLoS ONE, 8(8):e72808.Google Scholar
Rash, C.E. 2004. Awareness and causes and symptoms of flicker vertigo can limit ill effects. Human Factors & Aviation Medicine, 51(2):1–6.Google Scholar
Reymond, L. 1987. Spatial visual acuity of the falcon, Falco berigora: a behavioural, optical and anatomical investigation. Vision Research, 27:1859–1874.Google Scholar
Robertson, B.A., Kriska, G., Horváth, V. and Horváth, G. 2010. Glass buildings as bird feeders: urban birds exploit an ecological trap. Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 56:283–293.Google Scholar
Rubene, D., Håstad, O., Tauson, R., Wall, H.and Ödeen, A.. 2010. The presence of UV wavelengths improves the temporal resolution of the avian visual system. Journal of Experimental Biology, 213:3357–3363.Google Scholar
Schlaepfer, M.A., Runge, M.C. and Sherman, P.W. 2002. Ecological and evolutionary traps. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 17:474–480.Google Scholar
Schmidt, V. and Schaefer, H.M. 2004. Unlearned preference for red may facilitate recognition of palatable food in young omnivorous birds. Evolutionary Ecology, 6:919–925.Google Scholar
Schwind, R. 1991. Polarization vision in water insects and insects living on a moist substrate. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 169:531–540.Google Scholar
Siddiqi, A., Cronin, T.W., Loew, E.R., Vorobyev, M. and Summers, K. 2004. Interspecific and intraspecific views of color signals in the strawberry poison frog Dendrobates pumilio.Journal of Experimental Biology, 207:2471–2485.Google Scholar
St. Clair, C.C., Bélisle, M., Desrochers, A. and Hannon, S.J. 1998. Winter responses of forest birds to habitat corridors and gaps. Conservation Ecology, 2(2):13.Google Scholar
Stevens, M. 2013. Sensory Ecology, Behaviour, & Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stoddard, M.C. and Prum, R.O. 2008. Evolution of avian plumage color in a tetrahedral color space: a phylogenetic analysis of New World buntings. American Naturalist, 171:755–776.Google Scholar
Stone, P.T. 1990. Fluorescent lighting and health. Lighting Research and Technology, 24:55–61.Google Scholar
Sutherland, W.L. 1998. The importance of behavioural studies in conservation biology. Animal Behaviour, 56:801–809.Google Scholar
Theiss, S.M., Davies, W.I.L., Collin, S.P., Hunt, D.M. and Hart, N.S. 2012. Cone monochromacy and visual pigment spectral tuning in wobbegong sharks. Biology Letters, 8:1019–1022.Google Scholar
Van Dyck, H. 2012. Changing organisms in rapidly changing anthropogenic landscapes: the significance of the “Umwelt”-concept and functional habitat for animal conservation. Evolutionary Applications, 5:144–153.Google Scholar
Virzi, T., Boulton, R.L., Davis, M.J., Gilroy, J.J. and Lockwood, J.L. 2012. Effectiveness of artificial song playback on influencing the settlement decisions of an endangered resident grassland Passerine. Condor, 113:846–855.Google Scholar
Vorobyev, M. and Osorio, D. 1998. Receptor noise as a determinant of colour thresholds. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 265:351–358.Google Scholar
Whitmore, A.V. and Bowmaker, J.K. 1989. Seasonal variation in cone sensitivity and short wavelength absorbing visual pigments in the rudd Scardinius erythrophthalmus. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 166:103–115.Google Scholar
Wilson, C.J. and McKillop, I.G. 1986. An acoustic scaring device tested against European rabbits. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 14:409–411.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×