Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Aug 3;3(8):160252.
doi: 10.1098/rsos.160252. eCollection 2016 Aug.

Prey depletion as a threat to the world's large carnivores

Christopher Wolf  1 , William J Ripple  1
Affiliations

Prey depletion as a threat to the world's large carnivores

Christopher Wolf et al. R Soc Open Sci. .

Abstract

Large terrestrial carnivores are an ecologically important, charismatic and highly endangered group of species. Here, we assess the importance of prey depletion as a driver of large carnivore endangerment globally using lists of prey species for each large carnivore compiled from the literature. We consider spatial variation in prey endangerment, changes in endangerment over time and the causes of prey depletion, finding considerable evidence that loss of prey base is a major and wide-ranging threat among large carnivore species. In particular, the clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa), Sunda clouded leopard (Neofelis diardi), tiger (Panthera tigris), dhole (Cuon alpinus) and Ethiopian wolf (Canis simensis) all have at least 40% of their prey classified as threatened on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List and, along with the leopard (Panethra pardus), all of these species except the Ethiopian wolf have at least 50% of their prey classified as declining. Of the 494 prey species in our analysis, an average of just 6.9% of their ranges overlap protected areas. Together these results show the importance of a holistic approach to conservation that involves protecting both large carnivores directly and the prey upon which they depend.

Keywords: carnivore conservation; large carnivores; predator–prey; prey base; prey depletion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
IUCN Red List conservation status of large carnivores' prey. Status categories are DD (data deficient), LC (least concern), NT (near threatened), VU (vulnerable), EN (endangered) and CR (critically endangered). Carnivores are ordered by decreasing percentage threatened (VU/EN/CR) prey from the top down. The numbers of prey species are shown after the large carnivore names.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Population trends of large carnivores' prey. Carnivores are sorted by percentage of prey with decreasing population trends. The numbers of prey species are shown after the large carnivore names.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Maps showing the percentages of large carnivore prey species with decreasing population trends for the five large carnivores whose prey have the highest percentages of decreasing trends.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Percentages of all 494 prey species that are threatened (a) or have decreasing population trends (b).
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Mean percentages (with standard errors) of prey species ranges occurring inside protected areas. For example, the prey species of the dingo have an average of 13% of their ranges within protected areas.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Hebblewhite M, White CA, Nietvelt CG, McKenzie JA, Hurd TE, Fryxell JM, Bayley SE, Paquet PC. 2005. Human activity mediates a trophic cascade caused by wolves. Ecology 86, 2135–2144. (doi:10.1890/04-1269) - DOI
    1. Letnic M, Ritchie EG, Dickman CR. 2012. Top predators as biodiversity regulators: the dingo Canis lupus dingo as a case study. Biol. Rev. 87, 390–413. (doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.2011.00203.x) - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brashares JS, Prugh LR, Stoner CJ, Epps CW. 2010. Ecological and conservation implications of mesopredator release. In Trophic cascades: predators, prey, and the changing dynamics of nature (eds J Terborgh, JA Estes), pp. 221–240. Washington, DC: Island Press.
    1. Lindsey PA, Alexander R, Mills MGL, Romañach S, Woodroffe R. 2007. Wildlife viewing preferences of visitors to protected areas in South Africa: implications for the role of ecotourism in conservation. J. Ecotourism 6, 19–33. (doi:10.2167/joe133.0) - DOI
    1. Ashley C, Boyd C, Goodwin H.2000. Pro-poor tourism: putting poverty at the heart of the tourism agenda. See http://195.130.87.21:8080/dspace/handle/123456789/444. (accessed 22 March 2016).

LinkOut - more resources