Context. Potential mammalian prey commonly use the odours of their co-evolved predators to manage their risks of predation. But when the risk comes from an unknown source of predation, odours might not be perceived as dangerous, and anti-predator responses may fail, except possibly if the alien predator is of the same archetype as a native predator.
Aims. In the present study we examined anti-predator behavioural responses of voles from the outer archipelagos of the Baltic Sea, south-western Finland, where they have had no resident mammalian predators in recent history.
Methods. We investigated responses of field voles (Microtus agrestis) to odours of native least weasels (Mustela nivalis) and a recently invading alien predator, the American mink (Mustela vison), in laboratory. We also studied the short-term responses of free-ranging field voles and bank voles (Myodes glareolus) to simulated predation risk by alien mink on small islands in the outer archipelago of the Baltic Sea.
Key results. In the laboratory, voles avoided odour cues of native weasel but not of alien mink. It is possible that the response to mink is a context dependent learned response which could not be induced in the laboratory, whereas the response to weasel is innate. In the field, however, voles reduced activity during their normal peak-activity times at night as a response to simulated alien-mink predation risk. No other shifts in space use or activity in safer microhabitats or denser vegetation were apparent.
Conclusions. Voles appeared to recognise alien minks as predators from their odours in the wild. However, reduction in activity is likely to be only a short-term immediate response to mink presence, which is augmented by longer-term strategies of habitat shift. Because alien mink still strongly suppresses vole dynamics despite these anti-predator responses, we suggest that behavioural naiveté may be the primary factor in the impact of an alien predator on native prey.
Implications. Prey naiveté has long been considered as the root cause of the devastating impacts of alien predators, whereby native prey simply fail to recognise and respond to the novel predation risk. Our results reveal a more complex form of naiveté whereby native prey appeared to recognise alien predators as a threat but their response is ultimately inadequate. Thus, recognition alone is unlikely to afford protection for native prey from alien-predator impacts. Thus, management strategies that, for example, train prey in recognition of novel threats must induce effective responses if they are expected to succeed.
The cost of safety: Refuges increase the impact of predation risk in aquatic systems
