Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of procbThe Royal Society PublishingProceedings BAboutBrowse by SubjectAlertsFree Trial
Proc Biol Sci. 2004 April 7; 271(1540): 725–732.
PMCID: PMC1691645

A community-level evaluation of the impact of prey behavioural and ecological characteristics on predator diet composition.


Although predation avoidance is the most commonly invoked explanation for vertebrate social evolution, there is little evidence that individuals in larger groups experience lower predation rates than those in small groups. We compare the morphological and behavioural traits of mammal prey species in the Taï forest, Ivory Coast, with the diet preferences of three of their non-human predators: leopards, chimpanzees and African crowned eagles. Individual predators show marked differences in their predation rates on prey species of different body sizes, but clear patterns with prey behaviour were apparent only when differences in prey habitat use were incorporated into the analyses. Leopard predation rates are highest for terrestrial species living in smaller groups, whereas eagle predation rates are negatively correlated with group size only among arboreal prey. When prey predation rates are summed over all three predators, terrestrial species incur higher predation rates than arboreal species and, within both categories, predation rates decline with increasing prey group size and decreasing density of groups in the habitat. These results reveal that it is necessary to consider anti-predator strategies in the context of a dynamic behavioural interaction between predators and prey.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (130K).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Blomberg Simon P, Garland Theodore, Jr, Ives Anthony R. Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: behavioral traits are more labile. Evolution. 2003 Apr;57(4):717–745. [PubMed]
  • Carbone Chris, Gittleman John L. A common rule for the scaling of carnivore density. Science. 2002 Mar 22;295(5563):2273–2276. [PubMed]
  • COLE LC. The population consequences of life history phenomena. Q Rev Biol. 1954 Jun;29(2):103–137. [PubMed]
  • Elgar MA. Predator vigilance and group size in mammals and birds: a critical review of the empirical evidence. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 1989 Feb;64(1):13–33. [PubMed]
  • McGraw WS. Comparative locomotion and habitat use of six monkeys in the Tai Forest, Ivory Coast. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1998 Apr;105(4):493–510. [PubMed]
  • Noë R, Bshary R. The formation of red colobus-diana monkey associations under predation pressure from chimpanzees. Proc Biol Sci. 1997 Feb 22;264(1379):253–259. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Pagel MD, Harvey PH. Comparative methods for examining adaptation depend on evolutionary models. Folia Primatol (Basel) 1989;53(1-4):203–220. [PubMed]
  • Pulliam HR. On the advantages of flocking. J Theor Biol. 1973 Feb;38(2):419–422. [PubMed]
  • Shultz S. Notes on interactions between monkeys and African crowned eagles in Taï National Park, Ivory Coast. Folia Primatol (Basel) 2001 Jul-Aug;72(4):248–250. [PubMed]
  • Shultz Susanne, Noë Ronald. The consequences of crowned eagle central-place foraging on predation risk in monkeys. Proc Biol Sci. 2002 Sep 7;269(1502):1797–1802. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Vine I. Risk of visual detection and pursuitby a predator and the selective advantage of flocking behaviour. J Theor Biol. 1971 Feb;30(2):405–422. [PubMed]
  • Zuberbühler Klaus, Jenny David. Leopard predation and primate evolution. J Hum Evol. 2002 Dec;43(6):873–886. [PubMed]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society