Summary
Territory size is usually explained by balancing the benefits of increased size against the costs of defense. An alternative hypothesis for animals that maintain refuges is that the costs of large territories lie in the predation risk associated with leaving the refuge. An optimum territory size is discovered, given only this cost and no cost of defense. Predation risk is also considered a determinant of the value of a territory's location within a colony. Risk relative to location is discovered to be a binary variable, either low or high, depending upon the speed of the predator.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Covich, A. P. (1976) Analyzing shapes of foraging areas: some ecological and economic theories.Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 7, 235–57.
Hamilton, W. D. (1971) Geometry for the selfish herd.J. Theor. Biol. 31, 12–45.
Lotka, A. J. (1932) Contributions to the mathematical theory of capture.Pr. Nat. Acad. Sci. (US) 18, 172–8.
Myers, J. P. (1984) Spacing behavior of nonbreeding shorebirds.Behavior of Marine Animals, Vol. 6. (J. Burger and B. L. Olla, eds) pp. 271–321. Plenum Press, NY, USA.
Sherman, P. W. (1985) Alarm calls of Belding's ground squirrels to aerial predators: nepotism or self-preservation?Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 17, 313–23.
Vine, I. (1971) Risk of visual detection and pursuit by a predator and the selective advantage of flocking behaviour.J. Theor. Biol. 30, 405–22.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Taylor, R.J. Territory size and location in animals with refuges: influence of predation risk. Evol Ecol 2, 95–101 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02067270
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02067270