Data from: Factors influencing foraging search efficiency: Why do scarce lappet-faced vultures outperform ubiquitous white-backed vultures? (V2)

When using this dataset, please cite the original article.

Spiegel O, Getz WM, Nathan R (2013) Factors influencing foraging search efficiency: Why do scarce lappet-faced vultures outperform ubiquitous white-backed vultures? The American Naturalist 181(5), E102-115. doi:10.1086/670009

Additionally, please cite the Movebank data package:

Spiegel O, Getz WM, Nathan R (2014) Data from: Factors influencing foraging search efficiency: Why do scarce lappet-faced vultures outperform ubiquitous white-backed vultures? (V2). Movebank Data Repository. doi:10.5441/001/1.mf903197
Cite | Share
Download the data package citation in the following formats:
   RIS (compatible with EndNote, Reference Manager, ProCite, RefWorks)
   BibTex (compatible with BibDesk, LaTeX)

Package Identifier doi:10.5441/001/1.mf903197  
 
Abstract The search phase is a critical component of foraging behavior, affecting interspecific competition and community dynamics. Nevertheless, factors determining interspecific variation in search efficiency are still poorly understood. We studied differences in search efficiency between the lappet-faced vulture (Torgos tracheliotus; LFV) and the white-backed vulture (Gyps africanus; WBV) foraging on spatiotemporally unpredictable carcasses in Etosha National Park, Namibia. We used experimental food supply and high-resolution GPS tracking of free-ranging vultures to quantify search efficiency and elucidate the factors underlying the observed interspecific differences using a biased correlated random walk simulation model bootstrapped with the GPS tracking data. We found that LFV’s search efficiency was higher than WBV’s in both first-to-find, first-to-land, and per-individual-finding rate measures. Modifying species-specific traits in the simulation model allows us to assess the relative role of each factor in LFV’s higher efficiency. Interspecific differences in morphology (through the effect on perceptual range and motion ability) and searchers’ spatial dispersion (due to different roost arrangements) are in correspondence with the empirically observed advantage of LFV over WBV searchers, whereas differences in other aspects of the movement patterns appear to play a minor role. Our results provide mechanistic explanations for interspecific variation in search efficiency for species using similar resources and foraging modes.
Keywords animal tracking, Etosha National Park, Gyps africanus, interspecific competition, lappet-faced vulture, movement ecology, Namibia, optimal foraging, Torgos tracheliotus, vulture conservation, white-backed vulture,

HUJ MoveEcol Lab Israel_ Foraging search efficiency in white backed & lappet-faced vultures, Namibia (data from Spiegel et al. 2013) V2 View File Details
Download: README.txt ( 11.13Kb )
Download: HUJ MoveEcol Lab Israel_ Foraging search efficiency in white backed & lappet-faced vultures, Namibia (data from Spiegel et al. 2013) V2.csv ( 121.1Mb )
To the extent possible under law, the authors have waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this data.  



HUJ MoveEcol Lab Israel_ Foraging search efficiency in white backed & lappet-faced vultures, Namibia (data from Spiegel et al. 2013)-reference-data V2 View File Details
Download: README.txt ( 11.13Kb )
Download: HUJ MoveEcol Lab Israel_ Foraging search efficiency in white backed & lappet-faced vultures, Namibia (data from Spiegel et al. 2013)-reference-data V2.csv ( 4.272Kb )
To the extent possible under law, the authors have waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this data.  


Submission