Abstract
Many studies document that individuals visually scan for predators less frequently when in the safety of larger groups. This widely replicated effect has generally been explained in terms of distinct predator detection and risk-dilution effects. We show that a strict distinction between detection and dilution disappears when information about attacks is imperfectly shared (as it is in reality). Furthermore, dilution and detection effects change depending on when during an attack the predator targets a particular prey individual for pursuit. Realistic detection and dilution effects probably interact with each other and also with the targeting behaviour of predators. Instead of considering detection and dilution effects on vigilance, it may be more profitable to consider each prey's probability of being targeted during an attack and its probability of escaping if attacked. This perspective emphasizes that a full understanding of safety in numbers requires an understanding of predator targeting strategies.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (150.3 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Elgar M. A. 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. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185x.1989.tb00636.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hamilton W. D. Geometry for the selfish herd. J Theor Biol. 1971 May;31(2):295–311. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(71)90189-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Krause J. Differential fitness returns in relation to spatial position in groups. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 1994 May;69(2):187–206. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185x.1994.tb01505.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pulliam H. R. On the advantages of flocking. J Theor Biol. 1973 Feb;38(2):419–422. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(73)90184-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]