Question

You need to read the paper " Landscape and anthropogenic features influence the use of auditory vigilance by mule deer" and answer the following questions

What are the Predictions

Methods

1. Was the method used to test the predictions experimental? Explain.

2. If the method was experimental, for each prediction tested, what experimental treatments were used, why, and what results were predicted?

3. If the method was non-experimental, were predictions tested using direct observation or comparative data from other species? Explain.

4. If direct observation was used, for each hypothesis/prediction tested, what aspects of behaviour were observed and why, and what results were predicted?

5. If comparative data were used, for each prediction tested, how did the animals whose behaviours were compared differ? Also, why did the investigator feel that these differences would provide a test of that prediction?

Answer 1

- What are the Predictions?

Mule deers will present more mastication pauses when visual vigilange is limited due to landscape obstacle, as a response to increase auditory vigilance

- Methods?

An area was chosen, in which mule deer occurs naturally and we can find both areas with and without human activity. Randomly 10 deers were selected and auditory devices were positiones in their throats to register environmental sounds and the own animal's mastication sounds. Spectograms were built registering periods of mastication and periods of pausing, and specific pause detector software was applied to process data like beggin time, end time and duration. The difference between natural and antropogenic landscapes were analyzed and modelled.

- Was the method used to test the predictions experimental? Explain

No, the researchers did not undergo experiments, they just observed the natural occurrence of such mastication and pause events

- If the method was experimental, for each prediction tested, what experimental treatments were used, why, and what results were predicted?

It was not experimental

- If the method was non-experimental, were predictions tested using direct observation or comparative data from other species? Explain

Direct observation, other species data was not required

- If direct observation was used, for each hypothesis/prediction tested, what aspects of behaviour were observed and why, and what results were predicted?

The predictions were confirmed, the pausing duration was longer in environmental conditions in which more visual obstacles were found, like in the night (low visibility) or in areas where a lot of concealment cover was available for predators.

- If comparative data were used, for each prediction tested, how did the animals whose behaviours were compared differ? Also, why did the investigator feel that these differences would provide a test of that prediction?

Comprative data was not used