Non‐exploitative human disturbance provides shelter for prey from predator

• Published in: Ecology and evolution 2023-06, Vol.13 (6), p.e10200-n/a
• Main Authors: Lamichhane, Saneer, Lamichhane, Babu Ram, Gurung, Aasish, Rayamajhi, Trishna, Dahal, Tulasi Prasad, Regmi, Pramod Raj, Pokheral, Chiranjibi Prasad, Pathak, Abhinaya, Panta, Ganesh, Kandel, Ram Chandra, Oli, Madan K.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Activity patterns; Behavior; Behavioural Ecology; Cameras; Deer; Diel activity; Forests; human disturbance; Human impact; human shield hypothesis; human–prey–predator relationship; Hypotheses; multispecies occupancy model; National parks; Predation; Predator-prey interactions; Predators; Prey; Roads & highways; spatial refugia; spatiotemporal overlap
• ISSN: 2045-7758; 2045-7758
• DOI: 10.1002/ece3.10200

Human activities can influence behaviors of predators and prey, as well as predator–prey interactions. Using camera trap data, we investigated whether or to what extent human activities influenced behaviors of predators (tigers and leopards) and prey (sambar deer, spotted deer, wild boar, and barking deer), and predator–prey interactions in the Barandabhar Corridor Forest (BCF), Chitwan District, Nepal. A multispecies occupancy model revealed that the presence of humans altered the conditional occupancy of both prey and predator species. Specifically, the conditional occupancy probability of prey was substantially higher (ψ = 0.91, CI = 0.89–0.92) when humans were present than when humans were absent (ψ = 0.68, CI = 0.54–0.79). The diel activity pattern of most prey species overlapped strongly with humans, whereas predators were generally more active when humans were absent. Finally, the spatiotemporal overlap analysis revealed that human–prey interactions (i.e., the probability that both humans and prey species being present on the same grid at the same hourly period) was ~3 times higher (10.5%, CI = 10.4%–10.6%) compared to spatiotemporal overlap between humans and predators (3.1%, CI = 3.0%–3.2%). Our findings are consistent with the human shield hypothesis and suggest that ungulate prey species may reduce predation risk by using areas with high human activities. The conditional occupancy probability of prey was substantially higher (ψ = 0.91, CI = 0.89–0.92) when humans were present than when humans were absent (ψ = 0.68, CI = 0.54–0.79). The diel activity pattern of most prey species overlapped strongly with humans, whereas predators were generally more active when humans were absent. Finally, the spatio‐temporal overlap analysis revealed that human‐prey interactions was ~3 times higher (10.5%, CI = 10.4–10.6%) compared to spatio‐temporal overlap between humans‐predators (3.1%, CI = 3.0–3.2%).