DOI: 10.5061/dryad.xgxd254nn
title: White-tailed deer responses to predator cues depend upon past land use and contemporary fire regime

description: Prey can assess immediate risk of predation by detecting cues of predator
 presence, and it is expected that prey should invest in costly
 antipredator behaviors when a cue of predator presence is detected.
 Features of the habitat in which the cue is detected, such as vegetative
 concealment, serve as indirect cues of risk and can mediate how prey
 respond to direct cues of predator presence. Past agricultural land use
 and contemporary fire regime are common disturbances that may modify prey
 perceptions of risk and could therefore alter prey responses to direct
 cues of predator presence. We examined whether the overlap of these two
 disturbances affected white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) responses
 to cues of predator presence by measuring deer vigilance and foraging bout
 duration in response to coyote (Canis latrans) vocalizations across 20
 woodlands that varied in past land use and contemporary fire regime.
 Frequent fire regimes consistently increased deer visibility to predators
 across both land-use history contexts. Deer exhibited no behavioral
 response to the predator cue in habitats containing infrequent fire
 regimes or agricultural legacies. Deer responded to the cue in frequently
 burned woodlands without agricultural legacies through increased vigilance
 and duration spent at a foraging location. These findings reveal that
 land-use legacies and contemporary fire regimes can mediate how prey
 respond to direct cues of risk. They also suggest that prey may balance
 the uncertainty associated with cues of predation risk with the urgency of
 responding to a potential attack by being vigilant and remaining in place.
description: This study was conducted at the Savannah River Site (SRS; Aiken,
 SC). The number of fires since 1991 was determined from annual fire
 records, and sites were characterized as low (five or less burns) or high
 (more than five burns) fire frequency. Sites were not burned the year of
 the study. Sites that were that were forested in 1951 were classified as
 “nonagricultural woodlands," and sites that were farmland in 1951
 were classified as “post-agricultural woodlands.” 
 Photos collected from remote wildlife cameras placed at each site
 were scored for white-tailed deer vigilance behavior. We used remote
 cameras to measure deer responses to experimental predator cue (coyote
 howl). For each day of the 12-day experiment, one location with a camera
 received one of three treatments: silence, control sound, or predator cue.
 Vigilance was treated as a binary variable. Raw photo data was summarized
 by each independent detection of individual deer. Independent detections
 are referred to as bouts (i.e., foraging bouts) in the dataset. Each
 independent bout is given a unique ID in the dataset. For each independent
 bout, we summarized the total number of photos where deer were vigilant.
 We also recorded the start and end time of each bout. We recorded the
 individual's sex and whether or not the individual was foraging in a
 group (i.e., with one or more individual deer). If the individual was
 foraging in a group, each group member was given a unique identifying
 letter. The treatment for each day at each location is provided in a
 separate dataset that is provided here. Deer visibility was measured by a
 single observer using a density board that estimated percent visibility
 across 1 x 1 foot quadrats. The density board was placed 15-m from the
 observer standing at the camera-trap station. The observer took four
 measurements (one in each cardinal direction from the station) at each
 site.
description: #Title: White-tailed deer responses to predator cues depend upon past land
 use and contemporary fire regime Authors: Savannah L. Bartel\*, John
 Kilgo, and John L. Orrock \*Corresponding author: savannah.bartel@wsu.edu
 Affiliation: Washington State University Location of data collection:
 Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC, USA ##SERDP\_2019Howl.csv This file
 contains all data on white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) foraging
 activity and behavior within the experimental contexts described in the
 Data Description section of the Dryad repository. Each row represents one
 independent deer foraging bout (see Data Description). Columns Site: This
 is the name of the experimental site where one single camera trap was
 deployed. BoutID: This is the unique name for each independent deer
 foraging bout. Day: This is the day of the experiment (1-12 days). Date:
 This is the date that the foraging bout was captured, mm/dd/yy.
 Bout\_start: This is the timestamp of the first photo of the bout,
 hh:mm:ss. Bout\_end: This is the timestamp of the last phot of the bout,
 hh:mm:ss. Bout\_duration: This is the length of the bout, hh:mm:ss. Sex:
 This is the sex of the individual measured during the foraging bout.
 "F" indicates adult female, "m" indicates adult male,
 "juvenile" indicates juvenile individuals with indistinguishable
 sex, and unknown indicates that the sex of the individual was
 indistinguishable. Foraging: the number of photos captured of the
 individual during the bout with its head down, foraging. Total: the total
 number of photos captured of the individual during the bout and scored for
 vigilance behavior. Vigilant: the number of photos captured of the
 individual during the bout with its head up, vigilant. Group: whether or
 not the individual was foraging alone (no) or with one or more individuals
 (yes). Member: if the individual was foraging with one or more
 individuals, each individual was given a unique letter to identify each
 member of the group. NA was entered for detections of individuals that
 were not foraging in a group and therefore did not require a unique letter
 to distinguish between group members. ##SERDP\_2019HowlDays.csv This file
 contains the information on which treatments were deployed at each site on
 each day. Columns Site: name of experimental site where treatments were
 deployed. Day: day of the experiment (1-12 days). Treatment: identifier of
 the treatment deployed at that site on that day. T1 means silence, T2
 means control, and T3 means coyote cue. ##SERDP\_2019\_visibility.csv This
 file contains the vertical vegetation cover data (i.e., estimates of deer
 visibility) for each experimental site. Columns Site: name of experimental
 site where measurements were made. Perc\_visible: the average amount of
 the vertical board that was visible to the observer.