Table 1.

Determinants of prey naiveté and the eight hypotheses tested in this study.

eco-evolutionary theme	potential determinants of prey naiveté	hypotheses tested	predictions	references supporting predictions	did findings support predictions?
biogeographic isolation	system type	H1: Prey naiveté differs among system types (e.g. terrestrial, freshwater, or marine)	freshwater systems will experience higher levels of prey naiveté than terrestrial or marine systems, owing to higher biogeographic isolation	[13,22]	partially
	insularity	H2: Prey naiveté differs between islands and continental mainlands	prey species on islands are more naive to novel terrestrial predators than on continents	[23–25]	yes
	archetype hypothesis	H3: Prey recognize introduced predators that are the same archetype as familiar local predators	predators introduced in locations that contain native congeners will encounter less naive prey	[10,16,26,27,59]	yes
	geographical scale	H4: The geographical scale of the predator introduction mediates prey naiveté	predators introduced in a foreign biogeographic realm will encounter prey species with higher levels of naiveté	[10]	yes
adaptation	number of prey generations	H5: Prey naiveté varies with time of exposure to a novel predator	prey naiveté will decrease with the number of prey generations since the introduction of a predator	[28–30]	yes
latitude/biodiversity	latitude of the introduction	H6: Prey naiveté varies across latitudes	prey naiveté is less pronounced at low latitudes, which are more biodiverse and contain a broader range of predator types	[31–33]	no
taxonomic attribute	taxonomic group of the predator	H7: Prey naiveté differs among predator taxa	certain taxa of predators will be recognized by prey more than others	[38]	yes
	taxonomic group of the prey	H8: Prey naiveté differs among prey taxa	some taxa of prey will recognize novel predators better than others	[34]	yes