Hypothesis background
The hypothesis attempts to explain how animals demonstrate anti-predator behaviours in different environments depending on risk factors, i.e. predatory threats. Threat levels can vary among different habitats, depending on the type of terrain and other animals inhibiting that zone. There are two main predictions used in the predation risk allocation hypothesis. The first assumes that animals will increase foraging in safer environments, at times when predators are not present. The predicted advantage of foraging while predators are absent allows animals to eat and gain energy to then fight against predators upon their arrival. The second prediction anticipates that animals will demonstrate less anti-predator behaviours when they have been in a high-risk environment for a long period of time.Buskirk, J. V., Muller, C., Portmann, A., & Surbeck, M. (2002) A test of the risk allocation hypothesis: Tadpole responses to temporal change in predation risk. ''Ecology, 13'', 526-530. When significant time has passed in the same environmental location, the animal needs to eat to survive, therefore they are more likely to forage and spend less energy defending against predators when they have been in the same environment for a long period of time. These animals have to be less selective over their foraging times since they are not left with many options. The model cannot be used for animals that exhibit control over their predation risk. These animals would not demonstrate the anticipated behavioural responses in accordance with the hypothesis predictions. For instance, if animals could control their predation risk, they would not exhibit avoidance behaviours in response to predation in safer situations and therefore not supporting the hypothesis. Another observation found animals with more time to learn about risk factors in their habitats were then better able to demonstrate behaviours found to be consistent with this hypothesis.Ferrari, M. C. O., Rive, A. C., MacNaughton, C. J., Brown, G. E., & Chivers, D. P. (2008) Fixed vs. random temporal predictability of predation risk: An extension of the risk allocation hypothesis. ''Ethology, 114'', 238-244. Likewise, those animals without sufficient time to learn or understand the risk factors in their area will not display behaviours that support the hypothesis.Case studies
Various studies have observed the effectiveness of the predation risk allocation hypothesis for both vertebrate and invertebrate animals. The results both support and refute the hypothesis.Snails
Freshwater physid snails ''(Fish
Tadpoles
Tadpoles of the pool frog ''( Rana lessonae)'' do not follow the predictions risk allocation hypothesis with their foraging behaviours. Tadpoles were observed and these animals did not increase their foraging behaviours in zones with less threat. Instead, they continued a constant feeding pattern, not dependent on their living condition.Voles
Hypothesis application
The predation risk allocation hypothesis can help researchers learn how animals make behavioural responses to predators, since it is the first research that observes temporal variation in different risk situations. Animals' responses to predators can be better understood by observing behaviour adjustments to modified risk levels. The hypothesis however, does not explain behaviour in all types of variable risk situations, since this concept assumes that risk levels in every environment will change over time. The risk allocation hypothesis best supports observations of animal behaviour for those animals that developed and evolved in the same environments where they received information about that zone's local predators. These animals would therefore be most informed on what to expect and how to react in their environments. Animals that are exposed to risky situations i.e. predation, more frequently, may demonstrate similar behaviours in both high-risk and safe situations due to habituation.Mirza, R. S., Mathis, A., Chivers, D. P. (2005). Does Temporal Variation in Predation Risk Influence the Intensity of Antipredator Responses? A Test of the Risk Allocation Hypothesis. ''Ethology, 112,'' 44-51. These animals become used to the constant threat and therefore would not act the same compared to animals who are not used to high-risk situations since they have become more immune to these instances.References
{{reflist Predation