Search for: All records

ABSTRACT Prey depletion threatens many carnivore species across the world and can especially threaten low‐density subordinate competitors, particularly if subordinates are limited to low densities by their dominant competitors. Understanding the mechanisms that drive responses of carnivore density to prey depletion is not only crucial for conservation but also elucidates the balance between top‐down and bottom‐up limitations within the large carnivore guild. To avoid predation, competitively subordinate African wild dogs typically avoid their dominant competitors (lions) and the prey rich areas they are associated with, but no prior research has tested whether this pattern persists in ecosystems with anthropogenically‐reduced prey density, and reduced lion density as a result. We used spatial data from wild dogs and lions in the prey‐depleted Greater Kafue Ecosystem to test if wild dogs continue to avoid lions (despite their low density), and consequently avoid habitats with higher densities of their dominant prey species. We found that although lion density is 3X lower than comparable ecosystems, wild dogs continue to strongly avoid lions, and consequently avoid habitats associated with their two most important prey species. Although the density of lions in the GKE is low due to prey depletion, their competitive effects on wild dogs remain strong. These effects are likely compounded by prey‐base homogenization, as lions in the GKE now rely heavily on the same prey preferred by wild dogs. These results suggest that a reduction in lion density does not necessarily reduce competition, and helps explain why wild dogs decline in parallel with their dominant competitors in ecosystems suffering from anthropogenic prey depletion. Protecting prey populations within the few remaining strongholds for wild dogs is vitally important to avoid substantial population declines. Globally, understanding the impacts of prey depletion on carnivore guild dynamics should be an increasingly important area of focus for conservation. 

Organizational climate is a key determinant of diverse aspects of success in work settings, including in academia. Power dynamics in higher education can result in inequitable experiences of workplace climate, potentially harming the well-being and productivity of employees. Quantifying experiences of climate across employment categories can help identify changes necessary to create a more equitable workplace for all. We developed and administered a climate survey within our academic workplace—the Department of Zoology and Physiology at the University of Wyoming—to evaluate experiences of climate across three employment categories: faculty, graduate students, and staff. Our survey included a combination of closed-response (e.g., Likert-scale) and open-ended questions. Most department members (82%) completed the survey, which was administered in fall 2021. Faculty generally reported more positive experiences than staff. Graduate students often fell between these two groups, though in some survey sections (e.g., mental health and well-being) students reported the most negative experiences of departmental climate. Three common themes emerged from the analysis of open-ended responses: equity, community, and accountability. We discuss how these themes correspond to concrete action items for improving our departmental climate, some of which have been implemented already, while others constitute future initiatives and/or require a collective push towards systemic change in academia. Finally, service work of this type often falls outside of job descriptions, requiring individuals to either work more or trade-off productivity in other areas that are formally evaluated. With the goal of minimizing this burden for others, we detail our process and provide the materials and framework necessary to streamline this process for other departments aiming to evaluate workplace climate as a key first step in building a positive work environment for all employees. 

Extreme weather events perturb ecosystems and increasingly threaten biodiversity1. Ecologists emphasize the need to forecast and mitigate the impacts of these events, which requires knowledge of how risk is distributed among species and environments. However, the scale and unpredictability of extreme events complicate risk assessment1–4—especially for large animals (megafauna), which are ecologically important and disproportionately threatened but are wide-ranging and difficult to monitor5. Traits such as body size, dispersal ability and habitat affiliation are hypothesized to determine the vulnerability of animals to natural hazards1,6,7. Yet it has rarely been possible to test these hypotheses or, more generally, to link the short-term and long-term ecological effects of weather-related disturbance8,9. Here we show how large herbivores and carnivores in Mozambique responded to Intense Tropical Cyclone Idai, the deadliest storm on record in Africa, across scales ranging from individual decisions in the hours after landfall to changes in community composition nearly 2 years later. Animals responded behaviourally to rising floodwaters by moving upslope and shifting their diets. Body size and habitat association independently predicted population-level impacts: five of the smallest and most lowland-affiliated herbivore species declined by an average of 28% in the 20 months after landfall, while four of the largest and most upland-affiliated species increased by an average of 26%. We attribute the sensitivity of small-bodied species to their limited mobility and physiological constraints, which restricted their ability to avoid the flood and endure subsequent reductions in the quantity and quality of food. Our results identify general traits that govern animal responses to severe weather, which may help to inform wildlife conservation in a volatile climate.