Anthropogenic activities and age class mediate carnivore habitat selection in a human-dominated landscape

•Urban caracals select to be close urban areas at night; wildland do not•Subadult the matrix and marginal habitat more than adults•Urban use microhabitat refugia mitigate risk of human detection•Caracals not become nocturnal in Human activities increasingly challenge wild animal populations by disrupting ecological connectivity population persistence. Yet, human-modified habitats can provide resources, resulting selection disturbed generalist species. To investigate spatial temporal responses a carnivore disturbance, we investigated diel activity patterns (Caracal caracal). We GPS-collared 25 adults subadults wildland-dominated subregions Cape Town, South Africa. Selection for landscape variables were dependent on subregion, age class, period. Contrary expectations, did areas. Caracals increased their proximity as proportion area increased. Differences between suggest that individuals this species exhibit high behavioral flexibility response anthropogenic disturbances emerge function context. affect nearly every terrestrial system earth.1Venter O. Sanderson E.W. Magrach A. Allan J.R. Beher J. Jones K.R. Possingham H.P. Laurance W.F. Wood P. Fekete B.M. et al.Sixteen years change global footprint implications biodiversity conservation.Nat. Commun. 2016; 712558https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12558Crossref PubMed Scopus (902) Google Scholar Diverse consequences include loss, altered structure connectivity,2Kareiva Watts S. McDonald R. Boucher T. Domesticated nature: shaping landscapes ecosystems welfare.Science. 2007; 316: 1866-1869https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1140170Crossref (662) shifted ecosystem processes, disturbance regimes,3Alberti M. Correa C. Marzluff J.M. Hendry A.P. Palkovacs E.P. Gotanda K.M. Hunt V.M. Apgar T.M. Zhou Y. Global signatures phenotypic plant populations.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2017; 114: 8951-8956https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1606034114Crossref (252) resource availability.4Rebele F. Urban ecology special features ecosystems.Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 1994; 4: 173-187Crossref (345) infrastructure impedes movement,5Tucker M.A. Böhning-Gaese K. Avgar Fagan Fryxell Van Moorter B. Alberts S.C. Ali A.H. Allen A.M. al.Moving Anthropocene: reductions mammalian movements.Science. 2018; 359: 466-469https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aam9712Crossref (618) while elicit fear wildlife individuals, causing them further modify movement behavior selection.6Frid Dill L.M. Human-caused stimuli form predation risk.Conserv. 2002; 6: 11https://doi.org/10.5751/es-00404-060111Crossref (1335) Scholar,7Suraci J.P. Frank L.G. Oriol-Cotterill Ekwanga Williams Wilmers C.C. Behavior-specific African lions may promote persistence human-dominated landscape.Ecology. 2019; 100e02644Crossref (57) Wild live human-impacted are also confronted with vehicles, poisons, pathogens increase mortality8Collins Kays Causes mortality North American large medium-sized mammals.Anim. Conserv. 2011; 14: 474-483https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1795.2011.00458.xCrossref reduce fitness.9Flesch A.D. Influence local factors distributional dynamics: species-centred, fitness-based approach.Proc. Biol. 28420171001https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2017.1001Crossref (8) Scholar,10Johnson H.E. Lewis D.L. Breck S.W. Individual fitness associated residential development.Ecosphere. 2020; 11e03098https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.3098Crossref (12) However, addition introducing novel threats, humans such food, shelter, refuge from predation.11Gámez Harris N.C. Living concrete jungle: parks.Ecol. Appl. 2021; 31e02393https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2393Crossref Scholar,12Newsome Dellinger J.A. Pavey C.R. Ripple W.J. Shores Wirsing A.J. Dickman The effects providing subsidies predators.Global 2015; 24: 1-11https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12236Crossref (233) As such, animals living challenged take advantage these benefits mitigating suite threats. Thus, optimize resource-risk tradeoffs near adapt, persist, even thrive landscapes.13Lowry H. Lill Wong B.B.M. Behavioural environments.Biol. Rev. 2013; 88: 537-549https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12012Crossref (504) Scholar,14Suraci Gaynor M.L. Alexander Brashares J.S. Cendejas-Zarelli Crooks Elbroch Forrester Green al.Disturbance type life history predict mammal humans.Global Change 27: 3718-3731https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15650Crossref (34) Scholar,15Rodewald Gehrt Wildlife dynamics landscapes.in: McCleery Moorman Peterson conservation: Theory practice. Springer, 2014: 117-148https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7500-3Crossref (41) Understanding mechanisms facilitate is critical informing conservation strategies our modified world.16Matthews Narwani Hausch Nonaka E. Peter Yamamichi Sullam K.E. Bird K.C. Thomas M.K. Hanley T.C. Turner C.B. Toward an integration evolutionary biology science.Ecol. Lett. 690-701https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01627.xCrossref (158) An animal’s immediate typically (e.g., selection, activity, or vigilance);17Tuomainen U. Candolin human-induced environmental change.Biol. 86: 640-657https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185x.2010.00164.xCrossref (0) plasticity thus central rapidly changing environments.18Wong Behavioral environments.Behav. 26: 665-673https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/aru183Crossref (544) elicits anti-predator behaviors equal exceeding those caused non-human predators.19Ciuti Northrup Muhly T.B. Simi Musiani Pitt Boyce M.S. Effects behaviour exceed natural predators fear.PLoS One. 2012; 7e50611https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0050611Crossref (271) Scholar,20Clinchy Zanette L.Y. Roberts D. Suraci Buesching C.D. Newman Macdonald D.W. Fear “super predator” far exceeds carnivores model mesocarnivore.Behav. 27 (arw117–1832)https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arw117Crossref Consequent changes have important communities processes.21Suraci Clinchy apex has landscape-scale impacts mountain mice.Ecol. 22: 1578-1586https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13344Crossref (157) Animal space known built environment, particularly carnivores.19Ciuti Scholar,22Nickel B.A. presence non-equivalent spatiotemporal use.Biol. 241108383https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108383Crossref (78) Scholar,23Wilmers Wang Nickel Houghtaling Shakeri Kermish-Wells Yovovich V. Scale development predator, puma.PLoS 8e60590Crossref (144) Resource-specific functional (adjustments availability)24Mysterud Ims R.A. Functional use: availability influences relative trade-off situations.Ecology. 1998; 79: 1435-1441Crossref reveal perception, cumulative roads,25Mumma Gillingham M.P. Johnson C.J. Parker K.L. linear complex predator-multi-prey system.Landsc. 34: 2575-2597https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-019-00905-9Crossref (19) predator-prey dynamics26Pigeon MacNearney Hebblewhite Neufeld L. Cranston Stenhouse G. Schmiegelow Finnegan density explains seasonal behaviour-based social predator.Sci. Rep. 1011437https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68151-7Crossref (6) Scholar), species’ distributions.27Duparc Garel Marchand Dubray Maillard Loison Revisiting herbivores: matter variation distribution?.Behav. 30: 1725-1733https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arz141Crossref Scholar,28Mason T.H.E. Fortin explain heterogeneity animal-habitat relationships.J. Anim. 960-971https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12682Crossref (26) Furthermore, attraction avoidance mediated microhabitats refuges.22Nickel Scholar,29Gaynor Hojnowski C.E. Carter N.H. influence nocturnality.Science. 360: 1232-1235https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar7121Crossref (554) Scholar,30Grilo Lucas P.M. Fernández-Gil Seara Costa Roque Rio-Maior Nakamura Álvares Petrucci-Fonseca Revilla Refuge major driver wolf landscapes.Anim. 59-71https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12435Crossref (21) complexity necessitates evaluation cross-scale adaptations coexistence humans.31Reilly C.M. Smith Mesopredators retain across gradient.Behav. 2022; 33: 428-435https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arab150Crossref (4) Examining heterogeneous is, therefore, essential defining requirements species; knowledge incorporated into land-use planning.32Wittemyer Bastille-Rousseau valuation using data.Philos. Trans. Soc. 37420180046Crossref (33) Studies examining occupancy, found spatially temporally avoiding structures, through refugia.22Nickel By segregating spatially, highly sensitive achieve complete stressors.33Martin Basille Kindberg Allainé Swenson J.E. Coping disturbance: tactics brown bear (Ursus arctos).Can. Zool. 2010; 875-883https://doi.org/10.1139/z10-053Crossref Scholar,34Lesmerises Déry St-Laurent M.-H. Spatiotemporal caribou intensity backcountry skiing.Biol. 217: 149-156https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.10.030Crossref higher tolerance instead fine scale avoid direct overlap conceal themselves humans.7Suraci Scholar,35Muhly Semeniuk Massolo Hickman helps prey win race.PLoS 6e17050https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0017050Crossref (203) Scholar,36Schuette Creel Christianson Coexistence lions, livestock, people variable land movements.Biol. 157: 148-154https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.09.011Crossref (68) Increasingly, studies demonstrate vegetated provides size arrangement vegetation patches landscapes.22Nickel Scholar,37Suraci Fine-scale decisions inform planning landscapes.Landsc. 35: 1635-1649https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-01052-2Crossref When cannot they employ becoming nocturnal.29Gaynor (i.e., selection) pattern) carnivore, caracal caracal), interrelated fragmented isolated dense urbanization City Town (CoCT), monitored adult subadult two differ background level exposure separated road straddled (Figure 1A, Kommetjie Road): urban-dominated subregion northern section study largely intact, southern 1A). understand uses patterns, tested three hypotheses, which consider whether environments entirely (hypothesis 1 below) alter encounters still taking developed (hypotheses 2 3). hypotheses are: (1) Complete-avoidance hypothesis, both (2) Spatial-refuge whereby selecting safe within interface, (3) Temporal-avoidance increasing during periods low nocturnality). test 2, examined coarse (3-hr) (20-min) scales step-selection functions (SSFs) because hierarchical process generate differing depending assessed, management.7Suraci Scholar,38Rettie Messier Hierarchical woodland caribou: its relationship limiting factors.Ecography. 2000; 23: 466-478https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.2000.tb00303.xCrossref (367) Scholar,39Bastille-Rousseau Murray Schaefer Mahoney S.P. Potts Spatial decisions: telemetry-based modelling.Ecography. 41: 437-443https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.02655Crossref (24) Scholar,40Nisi A.C. Ranc N. Temporal carnivores: balancing energetics, finding prey.J. 91: 182-195https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13613Crossref (9) Within framework, period, class scales. hypothesis 3, potential differences quantified rates, subregions. Our work illustrates how coexists intraspecific disturbances. This addresses gaps guide management objectives. Individuals 1) primarily Table Mountain National Park (TMNP). subregions, located Peninsula, other Western 2445 km2 CoCT 1). Subregions defined degree fragmentation, extent boundaries, north (urban-dominated subregion) south (wildland-dominated 1A: Road) (STAR Methods). 630 m was observed cross section. captured 29 collared 26 but used data Methods) one individual opportunistically outside area. One male first subadult, later adult. Therefore, GPS collar 9 males, 10 females, 7 males (Figures S1–S3) yielded 17,424 3-hr steps 8,962 20-min analyses 1B). Subadults only detected subregion. divided dataset subgroups based stage (adult vs. subadult) sampled wildland-dominated). included: (n = 14), 7), 5). In median distance boundary 335.3 (mean 458.4, SD 443.4) 71.4 43.7, 552.8); 8049.9 8057.5, 5515.9) (Table S1). These findings differential respective boundary. SSF models fit examine revealed among subgroup interaction term performed better without, S2; data, ΔQIC 395.2; 52.7). period S3) pooled resolutions (3-hr 31.4, 69.3), (ΔQIC 14.5). For (using data) only), fits improved individually modeling thus, composite day night datasets analyses. probability best described quadratic-transformed caracals, segmented regression subgroups. approach split covariates different slopes either side optimal breakpoint Figure 2).41Kohl M.T. Stahler D.R. Metz M.C. Forester J.D. Kauffman M.J. Varley White P.J. MacNulty Diel predator drives dynamic fear.Ecol. Monogr. 638-652https://doi.org/10.1002/ecm.1313Crossref (131) Scholar,42Smith Duane T.P. Moving matrix: promoting permeability landscape.Landsc. Plann. 183: 50-58https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.11.003Crossref (35) Breakpoint values ranged 46 144 (varying datasets; indicated there exists narrow (natural area) buffer zone around perceived itself 1, 2; average width 118.8 m, 74.8 m). hereafter refer surrounding “urban interface.”Table 1Optimal results 5-fold validation all modeled (when warranted)5-fold ValidationDemographicDiel periodMovement datasetBreakpoint distanceObserved Mean (SD)Random (SD)Urban adultsComposite3-hr650.97 (0.12)0.001 (0.23)Day3-hr560.95 (0.02)0.01 (0.22)Night3-hr960.94 (0.03)−0.03 (0.21)Composite20-min540.88 (0.04)−0.02 (0.25)Day20-min460.88 (0.05)−0.04 (0.21)Night20-min1320.78 (0.09)0.01 (0.24)Urban malesComposite3-hr1320.92 (0.03)−0.001 (0.22)Day3-hr1440.89 (0.02)0.04 (0.25)Night3-hr1110.83 (0.07)−0.02 (0.23)Composite20-min880.73 (0.09)−0.02 (0.22)Wildland adultsComposite3-hrNA0.62 (0.08)−0.06 (0.25)Composite20-minNA0.62 (0.13)−0.03 (0.21)Optimal breakpoints (represented boundary) determined regressions shift avoidance-selection trends interface Open table new tab Optimal supported effect allowed us separately analyze when next considered resources (Tables S4 S5) encountered areas; selected candidate (“split” covariates; pine, burn ratio, cover, elevation, freshwater coast; STAR Methods; e.g., Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), dunes, vineyards, eucalyptus, roads Habitat unique 4, 5, 6, Tables S6–S14). Observed cross-validation scores (rs, calculated spearman rank correlations) high, Although rs best-fit lower (possibly artifact smaller sample homogeneity), outperformed expected under random selection.Figure 5The coast datasetsShow full captionRelative strength represented lines, shading represents +/- standard error.Wildland maximum approximately 4.4 km coast. Their profile plotted accordingly.View Large Image ViewerDownload Hi-res image Download (PPT)Figure 6Avoidance burned (measured index normalized ratio [NBR2]) depended region, where situated areas)Show error.Figure each group. More severe fire damage NBR2 values.View