Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(13)
We created food patches to reveal monkeys' foraging cost of predation.
Our results demonstrate that foxes treat the foraging cost arising from the risk of injury in a similar manner to which other foragers treat the foraging cost arising from the risk of predation.
This result strongly suggests that foragers treat risk of injury as a foraging cost.
Despite the larger group sizes in open scrub habitat, females of both species avoided this high resource area, resulting in a potential foraging cost associated with minimizing predation risk.
However, the relationship between body size and the relative rarity of high-quality forage in most ecosystems and its associated foraging cost is also documented in mammals [129], [135], [136], providing some evidence for an upper size limit on selective browsing in sauropods.
This is the first study, to our knowledge, which explicitly tests and shows that risk of injury is indeed a foraging cost.
Similar(47)
Conflict management is often directed at humans (e.g., education) to reduce attractants, or foraging benefits to wildlife, or at wildlife (e.g., hazing) to increase foraging costs; but strategies can be expensive and ineffective.
As a result of the different food distribution, associating with capuchin monkeys would impose higher foraging costs for the Central American squirrel monkey than for their South American counterparts.
Since the squirrel monkeys generally initiate interactions with the capuchins in South America, the fact that similar associations would impose higher foraging costs and impart fewer predator detection benefits to the Central American squirrel monkey leads to fewer associations with the white-headed capuchin.
In this sense, the risk of injury should be similar to the risk of predation: It gives rise to foraging costs.
Thus, the increase in foraging costs in the risky patch is likely due to elevated searching and handling time in that patch, i.e., the fox reduced its intake rate in order to decrease the chances of injuring itself.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com