ライフサイエンスコーパス: prey

1 n two different forms, usually a "bait" and "prey".

2 ation when the spider uses its silk to catch prey.

3 al shift in diet from principal to secondary prey.

4 ather information about the profitability of prey.

5 oragers as an aesthetic sense for evaluating prey.

6 DslA strains exhibit a delay in leaving from prey.

7 ifferent types of odours associated with its prey.

8 l deficits caused by eating sterol-deficient prey.

9 reserve an efficient shape for grasping hard prey.

10 encies in harmony with flight tones of known prey.

11 also has potential consequences for defended prey.

12 , and the locations and properties of nearby prey.

13 ient outcome for predators at the expense of prey.

14 s), all of which were competing for the same prey.

15 dors did not affect biases for/against green prey.

16 and dire wolves did not compete for similar prey.

17 te and a physical size that mimics bacterial prey.

18 ries, which would enable tracking of evasive prey.

19 edator distribution and encounter rates with prey.

20 are not applicable for directionally moving prey.

21 monitoring the abundance and distribution of prey.

22 ss the shared ranges of Th. couchii and newt prey.

23 turing free interaction between predator and prey.

24 ultaneously avoid apex predators and acquire prey.

25 catapult both the spider and the web towards prey [1-3].

26 t can reveal animals to visual predators and prey [1-4].

27 roportion of marine and higher trophic level prey, (2) they have higher energy requirements and highe

28 largely passive overlap between predator and prey, a positive, energy-efficient outcome for predators

29 the multiple facets of climate interact with prey abundance and demography to influence the compositi

30 Prey abundance and habitat was sampled across a 30 x 15

31 Although leopard prey access was not affected by humans, lion and spotted

32 rly among species that feed on highly mobile prey across broad landscapes.

33 rey, predation risk increases with increased prey activity, and rapid locomotion reduces attack rates

34 its and great tits consumed fewer aposematic prey after observing a negative foraging experience of a

35 both the slugs (>500 individuals) and their prey algae, we show that the plastoquinone pool of slug

36 s that were highly sensitive to the nematode prey also developed traps faster.

37 positively associated with an index of seal prey (Ammodytes spp) abundance at Isle of May, Firth of

38 The ability to sense prey among wild isolates of Arthrobotrys oligospora vari

39 n distinguish between odours of prey and non-prey and (c) can differentiate between different types o

40 ng specific prey stimuli to detect potential prey and direct their foraging.

41 Prey and habitat sampling coincided with bio-logging of

42 with consumption of clams and soft-sediment prey and is temporally associated with runoff events.

43 dours, (b) can distinguish between odours of prey and non-prey and (c) can differentiate between diff

44 Odour treatments were tested for both prey and non-prey ants.

45 e human phagocyte THP-1 cells with different prey and opsonization conditions to compare the persiste

46 s were omnivores, relying on a mix of animal prey and plant-based resources.

47 We quantified prey and predator traits from hundreds of individuals ac

48 ing an important chemical difference between prey and self walls and implying usage of a putative dea

49 d changes in both the motivation to hunt for prey and the accuracy of motor sequences during hunting.

50 We demonstrate that the initial turn to prey and the final capture manoeuvre of the hunting sequ

51 te social information about novel aposematic prey and then compared birds' foraging choices in 'a sma

52 g predators can reduce attacks on aposematic prey and therefore influence selection for prey defences

53 ical interactions between a consumer and its prey and, when they contain plant material, can also gui

54 attacking predators use to intercept mobile prey, and coordinated neural and biomechanical mechanism

55 n they are able to effectively find and hunt prey, and show that spatial drivers of survival for meso

56 s of IAC baits that link to common groups of prey, and which therefore may represent functional modul

57 l aspect of the ecology and evolution of all prey animals.

58 In response to live prey, animals with and without prior experience of live

59 We elucidate prey (Antarctic silverfish[Pleuragramma antarctica] and

60 Accordingly, focusing on plasticity in prey anti-predator behaviours, we conceptualise the mult

61 Odours from non-prey ants were largely ignored.

62 ts responded strongly to odours derived from prey ants, which triggered both increased localized recr

63 treatments were tested for both prey and non-prey ants.

64 tand when the phylogenetic relations between prey are accounted for when measuring dietary breadth.

65 Conspicuous aposematic prey are assumed to be an easy target for naive predator

66 ive performance capabilities of predator and prey as well as the availability and abundance of refuge

67 es seemed to be buffering against changes in prey availability by modulating their strength and densi

68 ea after 2010, matching documented shifts in prey availability in this region.

69 etic demands of lactation in years of poorer prey availability rather than solely an inability to bec

70 ted to spatial influences of predation risk, prey availability, and vegetation complexity, on mesopre

71 ut not AmpD or AmpDh2) to the periplasm of a prey bacterium upon contact.

72 nown to deacetylate the peptidoglycan of the prey bacterium, generating an important chemical differe

73 ydrolyzes the cell wall peptidoglycan of the prey bacterium, which leads to its killing, thereby prov

74 nnial question in predator-prey ecology: how prey balance foraging and safety, as formalized by the r

75 Predation often has consistent effects on prey behavior and morphology, but whether the physiologi

76 othesized mechanisms that drive predator and prey behaviour, incorporating environmental realism not

77 alyzed movement data of concurrently tracked prey, bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus; n = 7), and pr

78 y predators might further benefit aposematic prey, but this remains untested.

79 Predators can shape genetic correlations in prey by altering prey perception of risk.

80 Prey capture behavior among spiders varies greatly from

81 ce angel sharks display a highly specialized prey capture behaviour, we suggest that the morphologica

82 ter maneuverability that may be important in prey capture efficacy, (2) does not provide significant

83 poralis are specifically tuned for UV-bright prey capture in their upper frontal visual field, which

84 in the acute zone, likely to support visual prey capture of UV-bright zooplankton.

85 ving auditory target's trajectory and enable prey capture under conditions of uncertainty.

86 d bilateral eye movements in mice performing prey capture, an ethological behavior that engages visio

87 f behaviors, including navigation, foraging, prey capture, and conspecific interactions, which vary o

88 ked responses to light and acoustic stimuli, prey-capture deficits, and a failure to habituate to aco

89 detecting initial attacks by other bacterial prey cells; this targeted attack strategy has been terme

90 However, the mechanisms of prey choice are unknown.

91 ing otherwise hidden aversions to particular prey colors.

92 he tropics can have consequential impacts on prey communities through discrete effects on early life

93 We find that experience of live prey compared to inert food increases capture success by

94 dors, spiders were less likely to attack red prey (compared to no odor).

95 negative fitness effects (e.g. predation for prey, competition) generally decrease diversification ra

96 ecessary to determine how predators regulate prey competitive interactions.

97 Wolf prey composition was influenced by a complex set of clim

98 rt that larvae with prior experience of live prey consume considerably more prey than naive larvae.

99 We compared the size and species of prey consumed by predators to see if resource partitioni

100 y have higher energy requirements and higher prey consumption, (3) they forage in the marginal ice zo

101 studies show that predators can learn about prey defences by observing the negative foraging experie

102 c prey and therefore influence selection for prey defences.

103 the lowest survival during months with high prey densities and low lion densities.

104 6) to explore how temperature, body-size and prey density alter gecko predatory impacts in ecosystems

105 dataset of lion density, cheetah density and prey density from the Mun-Ya-Wana Conservancy in South A

106 d cheetah, we estimated lion encounter risk, prey density, and vegetation complexity within their hom

107 uring times with low cheetah density and low prey density.

108 ouch" system to locally sense and respond to prey-derived chemicals and movement.

109 Prey-derived chemosensory signals are synaptically trans

110 Rather than traditional pairwise predator-prey diel comparisons, we considered spatiotemporally ex

111 Although dragonflies attack prey dorsally, we show that demoiselles attack prey fron

112 y because they could access a wider range of prey due to larger body size.

113 rt behaviour in line with search for primary prey during summer and fall, and ease-of-travel during s

114 atterns may help to explain complex predator-prey dynamics and cascading indirect effects.

115 llustrate a potential decoupling of predator-prey dynamics, with impacts likely cascading to populati

116 e fundamental mechanisms underlying predator-prey ecology and present a conceptual guide for designin

117 Only 9% of camera trap studies on predator-prey ecology in our review use experimental methods, but

118 important role in understanding the predator-prey ecology of free-living animals, and such methods wi

119 (NCEs), are an important feature of predator-prey ecology, but their significance has had little impa

120 ues to test a perennial question in predator-prey ecology: how prey balance foraging and safety, as f

121 As well as learning from prey encounters, recent studies show that predators can

122 bundance of obstacles; however, if detected, prey escape probability was dependent on both the abunda

123 Prey evaluate risk and make decisions based on the balan

124 synthetic approach through a simple predator-prey example.

125 r snakes (Th. sirtalis) and their toxic newt prey exhibiting hotspots of newt tetrodotoxin (TTX) leve

126 However, prey-experienced animals more readily initiate capture i

127 nular neurons reduces capture performance in prey-experienced fish.

128 ogy, which in turn, may cause a reduction in prey fitness components (i.e. growth rate, survival and

129 ation risk affects prey traits, which affect prey fitness components and population growth rate, whic

130 tuitive expectation is that NCEs that reduce prey fitness will extend to alter population growth rate

131 TP could feed upon dead prey floating at the surface while WTS preyed mainly upo

132 a joystick-controlled pursuit task in which prey follow intelligent escape algorithms.

133 , cephalopods are likely to remain important prey for top predators in Southern Ocean food webs, desp

134 response to changes in preferred habitat or prey, for example, the decrease in abundance and southwa

135 cene pre-GABI endemic sparassodonts consumed prey from C(3) environments, whereas immigrant carnivora

136 nts, whereas immigrant carnivorans preferred prey from mixed C(3)-C(4) areas.

137 egs, these spiders lunge downward to ensnare prey from off the ground beneath them.

138 onship was also observed when distinguishing prey from predators.

139 ey dorsally, we show that demoiselles attack prey frontally.

140 ealed pronounced predator-mediated shifts in prey habitat use and behavior over much larger spatiotem

141 ionary arms race between predators and their prey has led to complex signalling, especially in groups

142 betularia that test the long-held view that prey have evolved postures that enhance their camouflage

143 (in subgroups of preferred associates) when prey herds were abundant, dispersed or small bodied.

144 er when prey herds were large and lower when prey herds were dispersed or are large bodied.

145 ndividuals within subgroups was greater when prey herds were large and lower when prey herds were dis

146 equally across all members of the pride when prey herds were scarce, aggregated or large bodied, and

147 duced cavitation to cause physical damage on prey hiding in narrow refuges, therefore facilitating ca

148 Neurons in anterior tectum, where the prey image is represented shortly before the capture str

149 ases (SVMPs) that play key roles in subduing prey in many vipers.

150 cating exposure risks for top predators that prey in riparian zones.

151 preyed on naturally occurring local wildlife prey in the CHs.

152 ncreasing SST or the proportion of principal prey in the diet, as would be expected if trophic mismat

153 hills landscape, and with search for primary prey in the more-industrialized boreal landscape.

154 ratory activity and were more attracted to a prey in the personality tests became the new tool users

155 trimaculatus the choice between red or black prey in the presence or absence of defensive odors secre

156 ee prey species significantly increased when prey increased their nocturnal activity to avoid humans.

157 eights and biomimetic frog tongues which can prey insects.

158 or simulating escape probabilities when live prey interact with ballistic attacking predators, and fi

159 n fish production, while changes in predator-prey interactions cannot.

160 Whereas direct observations of predator-prey interactions in nature are rare, insight can be gai

161 Our results suggest that predator-prey interactions may not always result in strong spatio

162 Predator-prey interactions play important roles in the cycling of

163 n overview of enemy-risk effects in predator-prey interactions, discuss ways in which risk effects ma

164 We show that in visually guided predator-prey interactions, planning provides a significant advan

165 s on the spatiotemporal outcomes of predator-prey interactions, the capacity for observational studie

166 ding how future land-use may impact predator-prey interactions.

167 ghtly coupled, indicating potential predator-prey interactions.

168 den decreases, similar to models of predator-prey interactions; these dynamic patterns were absent in

169 urfaces where the concentration of bacterial prey is high).

170 genic linear features (LFs) by predators and prey is hypothesized to increase predator hunting effici

171 ing the 1990s, South African SRWs foraged on prey isotopically similar to South Georgia/Islas Georgia

172 m passive entrapment in webs to running down prey items on foot.

173 ng stingrays may be forced to rely on native prey items to supplement the decreased amount of provisi

174 hat contained novel palatable and aposematic prey items.

175 with respect to both the species and size of prey killed.

176 trap formation correlated with competency in prey killing, as well as with the phylogeny of A. oligos

177 0% greater overall biomass) than the shallow prey layer.

178 The OPC data revealed two prey layers comprised almost exclusively of lipid-rich c

179 surfactant solutions can result in predator-prey-like non-reciprocal chasing interactions.

180 the marginal ice zones, and (4) they feed on prey located closer to pollutant emission sources/transp

181 se saccades do not preferentially target the prey location.

182 dead prey floating at the surface while WTS preyed mainly upon fish species that generally move in s

183 predator behaviour slows travel speed, while prey may also speed up to reduce predator-prey overlap.

184 reliant on chemosensory cues to locate their prey may be at an increased risk of ingesting aged micro

185 known about how the quality and quantity of prey might influence their feeding behaviours.

186 follow the winter migration of their staple prey, moose (Alces alces), to lower altitudes.

187 normalization, in which the multiplicity of prey (MOP) ratio needed to elicit half of the phagocytes

188 how these intense storms alter oceanography, prey movements, and the behavior of top predators.

189 A zebrafish larva typically detects a prey object in its peripheral visual field.

190 t social transmission about novel aposematic prey occurs in multiple predator species and across spec

191 e ability to initiate hunts based on distant prey odors.

192 ant Eciton hamatum: (a) can detect potential prey odours, (b) can distinguish between odours of prey

193 uction and the availability of the principal prey of cooperatively breeding Kalahari meerkats, Surica

194 ate has a strong influence on whether wolves prey on cows (who, depending on their age, are the key r

195 Triatomines are blood-feeding insects that prey on vertebrate hosts.

196 heetahs did not follow the herds but instead preyed on naturally occurring local wildlife prey in the

197 rotus ostreatus is a carnivorous fungus that preys on nematodes to supplement its nitrogen intake und

198 on in a visual scene allows the detection of prey or predator and predicts their future positions.

199 ns and other primates did not feature in the prey or predator spectrum during evolution of these spid

200 ator adjusting its speed to intercept moving prey, or a tool-user exerting the perfect amount of forc

201 esence and consequential changes in predator-prey overlap using 11,111 detections of 3 large carnivor

202 le prey may also speed up to reduce predator-prey overlap.

203 f habitat on survival for different predator-prey pairs.

204 ent internal states during foraging for live prey (Paramecia).

205 o prematurely liberate B. bacteriovorus from prey, part-way through the predatory lifecycle.

206 The latter suggests that some prey, particularly iridescent ones, can increase their c

207 These findings suggest that aposematic prey patterns with a high luminance contrast can benefit

208 ement and increase hunting efficiency, while prey perceive such features as risky.

209 ape genetic correlations in prey by altering prey perception of risk.

210 lasticity was insufficient to keep pace with prey phenology.

211 e scant evidence for risk-induced changes on prey population size have been generated from studies th

212 the process of how predation risk influences prey population size into a chain of events (predation r

213 nts and population growth rate, which affect prey population size), and highlight the complexity of e

214 h likely that predation risk alone can alter prey population size, there is little direct empirical e

215 claim that predation risk effects extend to prey population size.

216 rajectories and showed that our subjects use prey position, velocity and acceleration to make predict

217 with similar visual area retinotopic maps of prey position.

218 k that incentivizes the prediction of future prey positions.

219 that crypsis reduces attack rates on resting prey, predation risk increases with increased prey activ

220 into three key categories (properties of the prey, predator and setting), and then provide a general

221 be able to track the trajectory of a target (prey, predator, cospecific) or to control the course of

222 l aspects of life history, such as to detect prey, predators and mates as well as to orientate and mi

223 ct small moving objects, which may represent prey, predators, or conspecifics.

224 vative dynamics, from reaction-diffusion and prey-predators models to multispecies mixtures of microo

225 A drug-like prey provides extreme reward with no nutritive value, in

226 dividual-based model of terrestrial predator-prey pursuits in habitats with programmable features.

227 seals (Pusa hispida) have a strong predator-prey relationship and are facing climate-associated Arct

228 sting a possible weakening of their predator-prey relationship in western Hudson Bay.

229 We demonstrate that the predator-prey relationship is highly conserved between multiple P

230 he coevolution of this interkingdom predator-prey relationship, we investigated natural populations o

231 lysis provided evidence of expected predator-prey relationships, trophic linkages, and seasonal shift

232 onses to environmental extremes and distinct prey resource availability rather than absolute thermal

233 mporally explicit predator access to several prey resources to evaluate community-level trophic respo

234 rse predator assemblages partition available prey resources.

235 Predators and prey responded less strongly and consistently to natural

236 Indeed, the high variance in prey responses is reflected in the variance of results r

237 imental methods in the study of predator and prey responses to humans, synanthropic and invasive spec

238 next because of the interplay between risk, prey responses, and the environment.

239 al context interacts with predation risk and prey responses.

240 apparent (visual) size does not cross their prey's response threshold until after rapid jaw expansio

241 Combining behavioural recordings with prey sampling showed a more complex feeding ecology than

242 Here we adapt a classic prey selection task from foraging theory to examine how

243 ion of available prey, with implications for prey selection, demonstrating how humans perturb ecologi

244 mmals to climate change due to their limited prey selection, strict migratory patterns and high site

245 fect on oxylipin pathways play a key role in prey selection.

246 on in the arms race that drives the predator-prey shell game.

247 ls with and without prior experience of live prey show activity in visual areas (pretectum and optic

248 ent inactivation to inhibit responses to non-prey signals, such as mechanical water turbulence.

249 served negative scaling relationship between prey size and evasive ability, with larger fish benefiti

250 allest predator, the jaeger, with respect to prey size and nesting area used.

251 tors is spatial segregation, and secondarily prey size and species.

252 cently (<5 Ma) and exploits extreme predator/prey size ratios to overcome the maneuverability advanta

253 the total catch per effort) of GRD-preferred prey sizes, indicating risks of high resource competitio

254 The extent to which prey space use actively minimizes predation risk continu

255 h cusps of Port Jackson sharks, hard-shelled prey specialists, possess unusual microarchitecture that

256 lemming mandibles, which were used to infer prey species and size.

257 eafloor by affecting secondary production of prey species and/or carrion availability for example.

258 intimidation on habitat use and behavior of prey species are rarely quantified for large marine vert

259 ars were also attracted towards LFs, whereas prey species avoided them.

260 d changes in the behaviour and physiology of prey species even if predator encounters are infrequent.

261 d their niche to survive, and became a major prey species for humans.

262 mans, lion and spotted hyena access to three prey species significantly increased when prey increased

263 ollections to identify and enumerate copepod prey species through the water column.

264 ry and distribution models of their dominant prey species to relate bird movements to changes in fora

265 boring communities of bonobos hunt different prey species, despite extensive overlaps in where they l

266 but several predators often feed on the same prey species, lemmings, known for their large-amplitude

267 altered distributions and behavior of their prey species, which are prone to responding to environme

268 of pangolin habitat based on the location of prey species.

269 he value of mapping both habitat domains and prey-specific patterns of evasion success ('evasion land

270 egree to which E. hamatum are using specific prey stimuli to detect potential prey and direct their f

271 aneuverability advantages of swarms of small prey, such as krill.

272 uals that encountered a greater diversity of prey tended to be more specialized.

273 ience of live prey consume considerably more prey than naive larvae.

274 mysticetus) must routinely locate patches of prey that are energy-rich enough to meet their metabolic

275 could also generate phenotypic selection on prey that determines the strength of competition, thus c

276 ter snake (Thamnophis couchii) and sympatric prey, the rough-skinned newt (Taricha granulosa), Sierra

277 As it turns and swims towards the prey, the stimulus enters the central, binocular area, a

278 tenets of ecology-niche theory and predator-prey theory-provides an opportunity to understand how bi

279 a occurred indirectly by viral transfer from prey to predator, through D. magna feeding on virus-load

280 tors influence the ability of range-shifting prey to successfully establish in newly available habita

281 xtent to which bottom-up forces (i.e., coral prey), top-down forces (i.e., predators), and marine pro

282 Here, we examine geographic patterns of prey traits and predator traits in the relatively unstud

283 In studying the influence of prey traits on predation risk, previous researchers have

284 hows that predation risk directly influences prey traits, such as behaviour, morphology and physiolog

285 to a chain of events (predation risk affects prey traits, which affect prey fitness components and po

286 eby some dolphins in this population feed on prey trapped inside large marine gastropod shells.

287 ggest that the capacity to exploit different prey types enables species to thrive in more distinct en

288 that of N. exornata included many different prey types.

289 in understanding the responses of stationary prey under predation risk; however, current models are n

290 Bacteria, bacteriophages that prey upon them, and mobile genetic elements (MGEs) compe

291 Prey were more likely to avoid detection in complex habi

292 the capacity to exploit scent trails left by prey which can be tracked to a final source, though we f

293 iginates from the consumption of mesopelagic prey, while a maximum of 25% derives from pinnipeds.

294 pparently fed on aquatic animals by grabbing prey whilst flying directly above, or floating upon (les

295 med to understand whether both predators and prey with constraint-breaking adaptations actually manif

296 chicks were less likely to approach and eat prey with high contrast compared to low contrast pattern

297 rina preferentially grazed on P. tricornutum prey with lower levels of NO, suggesting that this molec

298 hypothesis to our model, which predicts that prey with more predator experience should engage in more

299 ably influenced the composition of available prey, with implications for prey selection, demonstratin

300 of overlap between predators and threatened prey within different landscapes.