Training barn owls: a powerful tool in ecological experiments

References

• Abrahams MV, Dill LM. 1989. A determination of the energetic equivalence of the risk of predation. Ecology. 70:999–1007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abramsky Z, Pinshow B. 1989. Changes in foraging effort in two gerbil species correlate with habitat type and intra- and interspecifc activity. Oikos. 56:43–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abramsky Z, Rosenzweig ML, Pinshow B, Brown JS, Kotler BP, Mitchell WA. 1990. Habitat selection: an experimental field test with two gerbil species. Ecology. 71:2358–2369.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abramsky Z, Strauss E, Subach A, Kotler BP, Riechman A. 1996. The effect of barn owls (Tyto alba) on the activity and microhabitat selection of Gerbillus allenbyi and G. pyrmaidum. Oecologia. 105:313–319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown JS. 1988. Patch use and indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competition. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 22:37–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown JS, Alkon PU. 1990. Testing values of crested porcupine habitats by experimental food patches. Oecologia. 83:512–518.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown JS, Kotler BP, Mitchell WA. 1994. Foraging theory, patch use, and the structure of a Negev desert granivore. Ecology. 75:2286–2300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caraco T, Marindale S, Pulliam HR. 1980. Avian flocking in the presence of a predator. Nature. 285:400–401.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danin A. 1978. Plant species diversity and plant succession in a sandy area in northern Negev. Flora. 167:409–422.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt RD. 1977. Predation, apparent competition, and structure of prey communities. Theor Popul Biol. 12:197–229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konishi M. 1973. How the owl tracks its prey: experiments with trained barn owls reveal how their acute sense of hearing enables them to catch prey in the dark. Am Sci. 61:414–424.
   Google Scholar
• Kotler BP. 1984. Risk of predation and the structure of desert rodent communities. Ecology. 65:689–701.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotler BP. 1991. Factors affecting gerbil foraging behavior and rates of owl predation. Ecology. 72:2249–2260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotler BP, Ayal Y, Subach A. 1994. Effects of predatory risk and resource renewal on the timing of foraging activity in a gerbil community. Oecologia. 100:391–396.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotler BP, Brown JS, Oldfield A, Thorson J, Cohen D. 2001. Foraging substrate and escape substrate: patch use by three species of gerbils. Ecology. 82:1781–1790.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotler BP, Brown J, Shomen M, Berger-Tal O, Bouskila A. 2010. Moonlight avoidance in gerbils reveals a sophisticated interplay among time allocation, vigilance and state-dependent foraging. Proc R Soc Lond B. 277:1469–1474.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lima SL. 1998. Stress and decision making under the risk of predation: recent developments from behavioral, reproductive, and ecological perspectives. Adv Study Behav. 27:215–290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lima SL, Dill LM. 1991. Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool. 68:619–640.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyrom K, Motro Y, Leshem Y, Aviel S, Izhaki I, Argyle F, Charter M. 2009. Nest-box use by the Barn Owl Tyto alba in a biological pest control program in the Beit She'an valley, Israel. Ardea. 97:463–467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell WA, Abramsky Z, Kotler BP, Pinshow B, Brown JS. 1990. The effect of competition on foraging activity in desert rodents – theory and experiments. Ecology. 71:884–854.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paine RT. 1966. Food web complexity and species diversity. Am Nat. 100:65–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenzweig ML, Abramsky Z. 1997. Two gerbils of the Negev: a long-term investigation of optimal habitat selection and its consequences. Evol Ecol. 11:733–756.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenzweig ML, Abramsky Z, Subach A. 1997. Safety in numbers: sophisticated vigilance by Allenby's gerbil. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 94:5713–5715.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenzweig ML, MacArthur RH. 1963. Graphical representation and stability conditions of predator-prey interactions. Am Nat. 97:209–223.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scharf I, Lubin Y, Ovadia O. 2011. Foraging decisions and behavioural flexibility in trap-building predators: a review. Biol Rev. 86:626–639.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seligmann H, Anderson SC, Autumn K, Bouskila A, Saf R, Tuniyev BS, Werner YL. 2007. Analysis of the locomotor activity of a nocturnal desert lizard (Reptilia: Gekkonidae: Teratoscincus scincus) under varying moonlight. Zoology. 110:104–117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor I. 1994. Barn owls: predator-prey relationships and conservation. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Werner EE, Gilliam JF. 1984. The ontogenetic niche and species interactions in size-structured populations. Annu Rev Ecol Syst. 15:393–425.
   Google Scholar
• Werner EE, Peacor SD. 2003. A review of trait-mediated interactions in ecological communities. Ecology. 84:1083–1100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ricklefs RE 1968 Patterns of growth in birds. Ibis. 110:419–451.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziv Y, Abramsky Z, Kotler BP, Subach A. 1993. Interference competition and temporal and habitat partitioning in 2 gerbil species. Oikos. 66:237–246.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar