Elton, C. S. Animal Ecology (Sidgwick and Jackson, 1927).
Curio, E. The Ethology of Predation (Springer, 1976).
Stephens, D. W., Brown, J. S. & Ydenberg, R. C. Foraging: Behavior and Ecology (The University of Chicago Press, 2007).
Holling, C. S. The components of predation as revealed by a study of small mammal predation of the European pine sawfly. Can. Entomol. 91, 293–320 (1959).
Google Scholar
Hassell, M. P. & Varley, G. C. New inductive population model for insect parasites and its bearing on biological control. Nature 223, 1133–1137 (1969).
Google Scholar
Beddington, J. R. Mutual interference between parasites or predators and its effect on searching efficiency. J. Anim. Ecol. 44, 331–340 (1975).
Google Scholar
DeAngelis, D. L., Goldstein, R. A. & O’Neill, R. V. A model for tropic interaction. Ecology 56, 881–892 (1975).
Google Scholar
Stephens, D. W. & Krebs, J. R. Foraging Theory (Princeton University Press, 1986).
Murdoch, W. W., Avery, S. & Smyth, M. E. B. Switching in predatory fish. Ecology 56, 1094–1105 (1975).
Google Scholar
Akre, B. G. & Johnson, D. M. Switching and sigmoid functional response curves by damselfly naiads with alternative prey available. J. Anim. Ecol. 48, 703–720 (1979).
Google Scholar
Benhadi-Marín, J., Pereira, J. A., Sousa, J. P. & Santos, S. A. P. Functional responses of three guilds of spiders: comparing single- and multiprey approaches. Ann. Appl. Biol. 175, 202–214 (2019).
Google Scholar
Tschanz, B., Bersier, L. F. & Bacher, S. Functional responses: a question of alternative prey and predator density. Ecology 88, 1300–1308 (2007).
Google Scholar
Sih, A. & Christensen, B. Optimal diet theory: when does it work, and when and why does it fail?. Anim. Behav. 61, 379–390 (2001).
Google Scholar
Nakano, S., Fausch, K. D. & Kitano, S. Flexible niche partitioning via a foraging mode shift: a proposed mechanism for coexistence in stream-dwelling charrs. J. Anim. Ecol. 68, 1079–1092 (1999).
Google Scholar
Kullberg, C. Strategy of the Pygmy Owl while hunting avian and mammalian prey. Ornis Fenn. 72, 72–78 (1995).
Oaten, A. & Murdoch, W. W. Switching, functional response, and stability in predator-prey systems. Am. Nat. 109, 299–318 (1975).
Google Scholar
Abrams, P. A. The adaptive dynamics of consumer choice. Am. Nat. 153, 83–97 (1999).
Google Scholar
Abrams, P. A. & Kawecki, T. J. Adaptive host preference and the dynamics of host–parasitoid interactions. Theor. Popul. Biol. 56, 307–324 (1999).
Google Scholar
van Baleen, M., Krivan, V., van Rijn, P. & Sabelis, M. Alternative food, switching predators and the persistence of predator-prey systems. Am. Nat. 157, 512–524 (2001).
Google Scholar
Formanowicz, D. R. & Bradley, P. J. Fluctuations in prey density: effects on the foraging tactics of scolopendrid centipedes. Anim. Behav. 35, 453–461 (1987).
Google Scholar
Hirvonen, H. Shifts in foraging tactics of larval damselflies: effects of prey density. Oikos 86, 443–452 (1999).
Google Scholar
Hassell, M. P. The Dynamics of Arthropod Predator–Prey Systems (Princeton University Press, 1978).
Arditi, R. & Akçakaya, H. R. Underestimation of mutual interference of predators. Oecologia 83, 358–361 (1990).
Google Scholar
Abrams, P. A. & Ginzburg, L. R. The nature of predation: prey dependent, ratio dependent or neither?. Trends Ecol. Evol. 15, 337–341 (2000).
Google Scholar
Arditi, R. & Ginzburg, L. R. How Species Interact: Altering the Standard View of Trophic Ecology (Oxford University Press, 2012).
Chan, K. et al. Improving the assessment of predator functional responses by considering alternate prey and predator interactions. Ecology 98, 1787–1796 (2017).
Google Scholar
Tyutyunov, Y. V. & Titova, L. I. From Lotka-Volterra to Arditi-Ginzbug: 90 years of evolving trophic functions. Biol. Bull. Rev. 10, 167–185 (2020).
Google Scholar
Novak, M. & Stouffer, D. B. Systematic bias in studies of consumer functional responses. Ecol. Lett. 24, 580–593 (2020).
Google Scholar
Schenk, D., Bersier, L. F. & Bacher, S. An experimental test of the nature of predation: neither prey- nor ratio-dependent. J. Anim. Ecol. 74, 86–91 (2005).
Google Scholar
Hossie, T. J. & Murray, D. L. Spatial arrangement of prey affects the shape of ratio-dependent functional responses in strongly antagonistic predators. Ecology 97, 834–841 (2016).
Google Scholar
Pulliam, H. R. On the theory of optimal diets. Am. Nat. 108, 59–74 (1974).
Google Scholar
Charnov, E. L. Optimal foraging: attack strategy of a mantid. Am. Nat. 110, 141–151 (1976).
Google Scholar
Baudrot, V., Perasso, A., Fritsch, C., Giraudoux, P. & Raoul, F. The adaptation of generalist predators’ diet in a multi-prey context: insights from new functional responses. Ecology 97, 1832–1841 (2016).
Google Scholar
Palma, L., Beja, P., Pais, M. & Da Fonseca, L. C. Why do raptors take domestic prey? The case of Bonelli’s eagles and pigeons. J. Appl. Ecol. 43, 1075–1086 (2006).
Google Scholar
Hossie, T. J. & Murray, D. L. You can’t run but you can hide: refuge use in frog tadpoles elicits density-dependent predation by dragonfly larvae. Oecologia 163, 395–404 (2010).
Google Scholar
Hossie, T. J. & Murray, D. L. Assessing behavioural and morphological responses of frog tadpoles to temporal variability in predation risk. J. Zool. 288, 275–282 (2012).
Google Scholar
Relyea, R. A. Morphological and behavioral plasticity of larval anurans in response to different predators. Ecology 82, 541–554 (2001).
Google Scholar
Hossie, T. J., Landolt, K. & Murray, D. L. Determinants and co-expression of anti-predator responses in amphibian tadpoles: a meta-analysis. Oikos 126, 20. https://doi.org/10.1111/oik.03305 (2017).
Google Scholar
Relyea, R. A. The relationship between predation risk and antipredator responses in larval anurans. Ecology 82, 541–554 (2001).
Google Scholar
Shine, R. The ecological impact of invasive cane toads (Bufo marinus) in Australia. Quart. Rev. Biol. 85, 253–291 (2010).
Google Scholar
Üveges, B. et al. Age- and environment-dependent changes in chemical defences of larval and post-metamorphic toads. BMC Evol. Biol. 17, 137 (2017).
Google Scholar
Jeschke, J. M. Density-dependent effect of prey defences and predator offences. J. Theor. Biol. 242, 900–907 (2006).
Google Scholar
Holt, R. D. Predation, apparent competition, and the structure of prey communities. Theor. Popul. Biol. 12, 197–229 (1977).
Google Scholar
Chaneton, E. J. & Bonsall, M. B. Enemy-mediated apparent competition: empirical patterns and the evidence. Oikos 88, 380–394 (2000).
Google Scholar
Holt, R. D. & Kotler, B. P. Short-term apparent competition. Am. Nat. 130, 412–430 (1987).
Google Scholar
Abrams, P. A. Effect of increased productivity on the abundances of trophic levels. Am. Nat. 141, 351–371 (1993).
Google Scholar
Jara, F. G. & Perotti, M. G. Toad tadpole responses to predator risk: ontogenetic change between constitutive and inducible defenses. J. Herpetol. 43, 82–88 (2009).
Google Scholar
Murdoch, W. W. Switching in general predators: experiments on predator specificity and stability of prey populations. Ecol. Monogr. 39, 335–354 (1969).
Google Scholar
Chesson, P. L. Variable predators and switching behavior. Theor. Popul. Biol. 26, 1–26 (1984).
Google Scholar
Gende, S. M., Quinn, T. P. & Willson, M. F. Consumption choice by bears feeding on salmon. Oecologia 127, 372–382 (2001).
Google Scholar
Skelhorn, J. & Rowe, C. Predator avoidance learning of prey with secreted or stored defences and the evolution of insect defences. Anim. Behav. 72, 827–834 (2006).
Google Scholar
Vucetich, J. A., Vucetich, L. M. & Peterson, R. O. The causes and consequences of partial prey consumption by wolves preying on moose. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 66, 295–303 (2012).
Google Scholar
Sih, A. Optimal foraging: partial consumption of prey. Am. Nat. 116, 281–290 (1980).
Google Scholar
Lucas, J. R. & Grafen, A. Partial prey consumption by ambush predators. Theor. Popul. Biol. 113, 455–473 (1985).
Google Scholar
Halliday, D. C. et al. Cane toad toxicity: an assessment of extracts from early developmental stages and adult tissues using MDCK cell culture. Toxicon 53, 385–391 (2009).
Google Scholar
Toledo, R. C. & Jared, C. Cutaneous granular glands and amphibian venoms. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. Part A Mol. Integr. Physiol. 111, 1–29 (1995).
Google Scholar
Parrott, M. L., Doody, J. S., McHenry, C. & Clulow, S. Eat your heart out: choice and handling of novel toxic prey by predatory water rats. Aust. Mammal. 42, 235–239 (2019).
Google Scholar
Ruxton, G. D., Allen, W. L., Sherratt, T. N. & Speed, M. P. Avoiding Attack: The Evolutionary Ecology of Crypsis, Aposematism, and Mimicry 2nd edn. (Oxford University Press, 2018).
Sherratt, T. N. The optimal strategy for sampling unfamiliar prey. Evolution 65, 2114–2025 (2011).
Google Scholar
Skelhorn, J. & Rowe, C. Predators’ toxin burdens influence their strategic decisions to eat toxic prey. Curr. Biol. 17, 1479–1483 (2007).
Google Scholar
Barnett, C. A., Skelhorn, J., Bateson, M. & Rowe, C. Educated predators make strategic decisions to eat defended prey according to their toxin content. Behav. Ecol. 23, 418–424 (2012).
Google Scholar
Nonacs, P. Foraging in a dynamic mimicry complex. Am. Nat. 126, 165–180 (1985).
Google Scholar
Sherratt, T. N. State-dependent risk-taking by predators in systems with defended prey. Oikos 103, 93–100 (2003).
Google Scholar
Jeschke, J. M., Kopp, M. & Tollrian, R. Consumer-food systems: why type I functional responses are exclusive to filter feeders. Biol. Rev. 79, 337–349 (2004).
Google Scholar
Wilbur, H. M. Density-dependent aspects of growth and metamorphosis in Bufo americanus. Ecology 58, 196–200 (1977).
Google Scholar
Loman, J. Density regulation in tadpoles of Rana temporaria: a full pond experiment. Ecology 85, 1611–1618 (2004).
Google Scholar
Yagi, K. T. & Green, D. M. Mechanisms of denity-dependent growth and survival in tadpoles of Fowler’s Toad, Anaxyrus fowleri: volume vs. abundance. Copeia 104, 942–951 (2016).
Google Scholar
Marshal, J. P. & Boutin, S. Power analysis of wolf-moose functional responses. J. Wild. Manag. 63, 396–402 (1999).
Google Scholar
Novak, M. & Stouffer, D. B. Systematic bias of consumer functional responses. Ecol. Lett. 24, 580–593 (2020).
Google Scholar
Hossie, T. J. & Murray, D. L. Effects of structural refuge and density on foraging behaviour and mortality of hungry tadpoles subject to predation risk. Ethology 117, 777–785 (2011).
Google Scholar
Burnham, K. P. & Anderson, D. R. Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach (Springer, 2002).
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/ (2019).
Source: Ecology - nature.com
