Resilient foragers: the behavioral adaptability of Pseudomyrmex termitarius to fire-driven landscape changes

Recent trends in the European Black Stork Ciconia nigra population are geographically distinct: range expansion and adaptation to human activity dominate in western and central Europe, while declines—probably induced by landscape change—are reported in the east. We studied the large Lithuanian Black Stork population in the transition zone to explore whether, and how, the detrimental influences of recent Baltic landscape changes are balanced by the West European tendency of behavioural adaptation to human activity. Based on monitoring in sample plots, the current population was estimated at 650–950 pairs, indicating a significant decrease (possibly over 20%) during the last two decades. In comparison to the Latvian and Estonian populations, however, this decline is smaller, and the reproductive success remains at a high level [66% breeding success and 2.99 ± 0.97 (SD) fledglings per successful attempt, 2000–2006]; this north–south gradient suggests a climate-mediated impact of habitat degradation in the Baltic countries. The storks are also nesting closer to forest edges and in younger stands than 15–30 years ago, which has probably reduced the nest-tree limitation, as indicated by an increased use of large oaks. Thus, habitat degradation and adaptation seem to be taking place simultaneously in the Lithuanian Black Stork population, as was expected from its geographical location. In general, our study supports the view that, whenever possible, species conservation strategies and the use of indicator species should be geographically explicit.

1.6 - North of the East European Plain

Oligodendrocyte progenitors as environmental biosensors

CONTEXT: Habitat loss and fragmentation threaten species not only through structural landscape changes and resource reduction, but also through modifications to species’ interactions. In particular, the observed consequences of landscape changes for predator–prey interactions often lack a clear pattern, indicating a range of complex behavioral adaptations and interactions. One potentially important contributing factor shaping these consequences is perceived predation risk and hence fear, which is rarely explicitly addressed in studies on habitat modification. OBJECTIVES: We investigated how fear changes prey community structures under habitat loss and fragmentation and identified habitat properties driving these changes. METHODS: We applied a spatially-explicit, individual-based model which simulates home range formation of a mammalian prey community based on food availability and perceived predation risk. With the model we predicted prey community structures under different landscape scenarios. RESULTS: Fear intensified the negative effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on prey communities, causing a non-proportional diversity loss of up to 30%. Shifts in community composition from large to small animals were reinforced. The highest prey diversity was supported in landscapes with non-fragmented safe areas. Our findings highlight the importance of fear in shaping prey community structures under conditions of landscape change. CONCLUSIONS: Our modelling approach addresses the mechanisms that link individual space use with community structure. It reveals the key role played by the spatial distribution of safe patches in mitigating the negative effects of landscape changes. Thereby, it supports modern conservation efforts that go beyond single-species approaches by taking changes in community structure into account.

Studying the evolution of nesting behavior within the human-chimpanzee clade is problematic because evidence is sparse and difficult to interpret. Lacking a fossil or archaeological record for proto-chimpanzees, reconstructions of the antecedents of modern chimp nesting patterns can be reconstructed only from careful studies of variation in current chimpanzee and bonobo nesting patterns within the context of spatial and temporal landscape parameters. The ethology of nesting also provides an important frame of reference for reconstructions of early hominid nesting behavior. If the contemporary contrast between human and chimpanzee nesting patterns is seen as an evolutionary dichotomy, then African prehistoric landmarks that mark the origin of this split might include bipedalism and the origins of the hominidae, the first stone tools and the origins of Homo, the developmental and behavioral adaptations of Homo ergaster, shifts in Late Acheulian settlement patterns, and the origins of anatomically modern humans and the Middle Stone Age. The issue of whether Early Stone Age archaeological sites were used for nesting is unresolved because potential markers of such behavior, such as hearths, structures, or bedding, are not unambiguously recognizable in the archaeological record until the Middle Stone Age.

Studying the evolution of nesting behavior within the human–chimpanzee clade is problematic because evidence is sparse and difficult to interpret. Lacking a fossil or archaeological record for proto-chimpanzees, reconstructions of the antecedents of modern chimp nesting patterns can be reconstructed only from careful studies of variation in current chimpanzee and bonobo nesting patterns within the context of spatial and temporal landscape parameters. The ethology of nesting also provides an important frame of reference for reconstructions of early hominid nesting behavior. If the contemporary contrast between human and chimpanzee nesting patterns is seen as an evolutionary dichotomy, then African prehistoric landmarks that mark the origin of this split might include bipedalism and the origins of the hominidae, the first stone tools and the origins of Homo, the developmental and behavioral adaptations of Homo ergaster, shifts in Late Acheulian settlement patterns, and the origins of anatomically modern humans and the Middle Stone Age. The issue of whether Early Stone Age archaeological sites were used for nesting is unresolved because potential markers of such behavior, such as hearths, structures, or bedding, are not unambiguously recognizable in the archaeological record until the Middle Stone Age. Am. J. Primatol. 46:85–101, 1998. © 1998 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Previous articleNext article No AccessReportsNests: Living Artefacts of Recent Apes?Barbara Fruth and Gottfried HohmannBarbara Fruth Search for more articles by this author and Gottfried Hohmann Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Current Anthropology Volume 35, Number 3Jun., 1994 Sponsored by the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/204281 Views: 6Total views on this site Citations: 17Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1994 The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological ResearchPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Mattia Bessone, Lambert Booto, Antonio R. Santos, Hjalmar S. Kühl, Barbara Fruth, Frank H. Koch No time to rest: How the effects of climate change on nest decay threaten the conservation of apes in the wild, PLOS ONE 16, no.66 (Jun 2021): e0252527.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252527R. Adriana Hernandez-Aguilar, Trond Reitan Deciding Where to Sleep: Spatial Levels of Nesting Selection in Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) Living in Savanna at Issa, Tanzania, International Journal of Primatology 41, no.66 (Dec 2020): 870–900.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-020-00186-zAlejandra Pascual-Garrido Scars on plants sourced for termite fishing tools by chimpanzees: Towards an archaeology of the perishable, American Journal of Primatology 80, no.99 (Oct 2018): e22921.https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.22921Barbara Fruth, Nikki Tagg, Fiona Stewart Sleep and nesting behavior in primates: A review, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 166, no.33 (Jul 2018): 499–509.https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.23373Michael Petraglia Hominins on the move: An assessment of anthropogenic shaping of environments in the Palaeolithic, (May 2017): 90–118.https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316686942.005David Morgan, Crickette Sanz, Jean Robert Onononga, Samantha Strindberg Factors Influencing the Survival of Sympatric Gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) and Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes troglodytes) Nests, International Journal of Primatology 37, no.66 (Dec 2016): 718–737.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-016-9934-9F.A. Stewart, A.K. Piel, W.C. McGrew Living archaeology: Artefacts of specific nest site fidelity in wild chimpanzees, Journal of Human Evolution 61, no.44 (Oct 2011): 388–395.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2011.05.005Russell N. James The Origin of Spaces: Understanding Residential Satisfaction from Ape Nests, Human Cultures and the Hierarchy of Natural Housing Functions, Housing, Theory and Society 27, no.44 (Oct 2009): 279–295.https://doi.org/10.1080/14036090903160018J.D. Pruetz, S.J. Fulton, L.F. Marchant, W.C. McGrew, M. Schiel, M. Waller Arboreal nesting as anti-predator adaptation by savanna chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) in southeastern Senegal, American Journal of Primatology 70, no.44 (Jan 2008): 393–401.https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.20508Jamie L. Horvath, Megan Croswell, Robert C. O’Malley, W. C. McGrew Plant Species with Potential as Food, Nesting Material, or Tools at a Chimpanzee Refuge Site in Caddo Parish, Louisiana, International Journal of Primatology 28, no.11 (Feb 2007): 135–158.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-006-9106-4Jessica M. Rothman, Alice N. Pell, Ellen S. Dierenfeld, Colleen M. Mccann Plant choice in the construction of night nests by gorillas in the Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda, American Journal of Primatology 68, no.44 (Jan 2006): 361–368.https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.20230Chris Herzfeld, Dominique Lestel Knot tying in great apes: etho-ethnology of an unusual tool behavior, Social Science Information 44, no.44 (Dec 2005): 621–653.https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018405058205James R. Anderson Sleep-related behavioural adaptations in free-ranging anthropoid primates, Sleep Medicine Reviews 4, no.44 (Aug 2000): 355–373.https://doi.org/10.1053/smrv.2000.0105Dominique Lestel, Emmanuelle Grundmann Tools, techniques and animals: the role of mediations of actions in the dynamics of social behaviours, Social Science Information 38, no.33 (Sep 1999): 367–407.https://doi.org/10.1177/053901899038003002Jeanne Sept Shadows on a changing landscape: Comparing nesting patterns of hominids and chimpanzees since their last common ancestor, American Journal of Primatology 46, no.11 (Jan 1998): 85–101.https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2345(1998)46:1<85::AID-AJP7>3.0.CO;2-RTONY L GOLDBERG, RICHARD W WRANGHAM Genetic correlates of social behaviour in wild chimpanzees: evidence from mitochondrial DNA, Animal Behaviour 54, no.33 (Sep 1997): 559–570.https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1996.0450B. Thierry, G. Theraulaz, J.Y. Gautier, B. Stiegler Joint memory, Behavioural Processes 35, no.1-31-3 (Dec 1995): 127–140.https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-6357(95)00039-9

Movement, both within an individual’s home range and at the scale of dispersal, is a fundamental aspect of an animal’s life. The field of movement ecology has established a conceptual framework to analyze the lifetime movement of an organism, offering a sound basis for conservation actions since the movement range of many species has been altered by habitat fragmentation and degradation. An organism’s lifetime movement is organized around three main functions – exploitation, exploration, and relocation – which are associated with specific behavioral mechanisms and spatio-temporal scales. The movement ecology framework is a valuable tool as applied to amphibians, as managing these spatially structured populations requires in-depth knowledge of the behavioral mechanisms that determine movement. In terms of exploitation, these animals have a complex lifecycle, which involves migrating between different types of habitat, thus requiring them to cross a landscape matrix that may be more or less inhospitable. In terms of exploration and relocation, between-pond movements within the pond archipelagoes of a given population are frequent and strongly contribute to population resilience. Relocation also occurs at a larger scale, through long-distance dispersal to colonize new patches, exposing the individuals to unknown environments. Each function, at each scale, involves specific interactions between individual motivation (phenotype dependence) and environmental quality (context dependence) that determine decision-making and fitness outputs. Long-term exposure to local selective pressures can lead to differentiation in coping types that could be considered as Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) for conservation. At the scale of a patch, the optimal direction of migration can be inherited, thus allowing the optimization of migration routes for juveniles. At the regional scale, a dispersal syndrome resulting in a greater propensity for boldness and exploration could be a response to unpredictable breeding sites or the high benefits of colonizing a rich habitat. Greater knowledge about such behavioral adaptations to specific situations would allow more targeted development of conservation measures or help to stop the spread of invasive species. The evolutionary context of movement behavior is thus of primary interest in designing effective conservation actions in a changing world.

Oldest human occupation of Wallacea at Laili Cave, Timor-Leste, shows broad-spectrum foraging responses to late Pleistocene environments

The central nervous system (CNS) integrates intrinsic molecular cues with sensory experience to shape synaptic connectivity between neurons. Once established, these emergent neural circuits remain plastic into adulthood to facilitate behavioral adaptations to changes in the sensory landscape. While sensory experience has been recognized as a major contributor to synaptic wiring since the foundational work of Hubel and Wiesel in the mid-1900s, the field has only recently begun to uncover the roles of nonneuronal cells, or glia, in experience-dependent aspects of synaptic refinement and remodeling. Herein, we review recent work demonstrating that many glial cell types-including invertebrate glia, astrocytes, microglia, and oligodendrocyte-lineage cells-participate in the experience-dependent remodeling of neural circuits across the lifespan.

Underwater and inundated prehistoric archaeology is usually celebrated because it highlights unique cultural behaviors (e.g., Windover and Old World bogs), preserves organic materials exceptionally well (e.g., Little Salt Springs and Bouldnor Cliff), or identifies early human presence (e.g., Page Ladson and Hoyo Negro). However, as research has progressed, it is increasingly clear that underwater archaeology is an essential tool for understanding how humans adapt to changing landscapes and the water/land boundaries around them. When appropriate, archaeologists should consider the dynamics of changing water levels, where nearby human occupations may preserve, and whether terrestrial or inundated landforms may help answer research questions. In the Great Basin USA, Nevada’s Walker Lake is an ideal location for applying this approach. As a lake that has undergone repeated rise and fall over the last 15,000 years, research on human behavior and regional adaptations must consider landforms that have been subject to inundation and are now above and/or below the current waterline. This paper discusses identification and analyses of sites around Walker Lake, investigations revealing intact buried terrestrial landforms under the lake, and how this research provides an improved picture of human behavior and landscape adaptations in the Western Great Basin.

<em>The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America</em> is the official record of business of the Ecological Society of America, publishing non-refereed articles that cover ecological events, news and reports.

Wind farms are positioned in open landscapes and may cause loss of wildlife habitat due to disturbance, fragmentation, and infrastructure development. Especially flocking geese, swans, ducks and waders are regarded as vulnerable to wind farm development. We compared past and current displacement effects of two onshore wind farms and a line of land-based turbines on spring-staging pink-footed geese (Anser brachyrhynchus) to see if there was evidence of habituation. In one wind farm area, geese previously (1998) (Larsen and Madsen 2000) kept a distance of c. 200 m (the distance at which 50% of peak densities is reached) and they did not go between the turbines; today (2008) they keep a distance of c. 100 m, but do still not enter the wind farm area. In another wind farm, where foraging geese previously (2000) kept a distance of more than 100 m and did not enter the wind farm, they now (2008) forage between the wind turbines and keep a distance of c. 40 m to turbines. In 1998, geese kept a distance of 125 m to a line of turbines, compared to 50 m now. We conclude that geese have behaviorally adapted to changing landscapes created by wind farms. The difference in avoidance between the sites may be due to the sizes of the turbines which in this study were small in both rotor-swept area and in height compared to more recent “industry standard” of 2.5 and 3.0 MW turbines. The study points to the need for longer term studies to properly assess the impact of wind farms on wildlife, including consequent increased risks from inclement weather events of feeding, rafting, and migrating waterfowl.