The sensory ecology of fear: African elephants show aversion to olfactory predator signals

Testing the Effectiveness of the "Smelly" Elephant Repellent in Controlled Experiments in Semi-Captive Asian and African Savanna Elephants

Crop-raiding by elephants is one of the most prevalent forms of human-elephant conflict and is increasing with the spread of agriculture into wildlife range areas. As the magnitude of conflicts between people and elephants increases across Africa and Asia, mitigating and reducing the impacts of elephant crop-raiding has become a major focus of conservation intervention. In this study, we tested the responses of semi-captive elephants to the "smelly" elephant repellent, a novel olfactory crop-raiding mitigation method. At two trial sites, in Zambia and Thailand, African elephants (Loxodonta africana) and Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) were exposed to the repellent, in order to test whether or not they entered an area protected by the repellent and whether they ate the food provided. The repellent elicited clear reactions from both study groups of elephants compared to control conditions. Generalised linear models revealed that the elephants were more alert, sniffed more, and vocalised more when they encountered the repellent. Although the repellent triggered a response, it did not prevent elephants from entering plots protected by the repellent or from eating crops, unlike in trials conducted with wild elephants. Personality played a role in responses towards the repellent, as the elephants that entered the experimental plots were bolder and more curious individuals. We conclude that, although captive environments provide controlled settings for experimental testing, the ecological validity of testing human-elephant conflict mitigation methods with captive wildlife should be strongly considered. This study also shows that understanding animal behaviour is essential for improving human-elephant coexistence and for designing deterrence mechanisms. Appreciating personality traits in elephants, especially amongst "problem" elephants who have a greater propensity to crop raid, could lead to the design of new mitigation methods designed to target these individuals.

Disgust in animals and the application of disease avoidance to wildlife management and conservation

Disgust is an adaptive system hypothesized to have evolved to reduce the risk of becoming sick. It is associated with behavioural, cognitive and physiological responses tuned to allow animals to avoid and/or get rid of parasites, pathogens and toxins. Little is known about the mechanisms and outcomes of disease avoidance in wild animals. Furthermore, given the escalation of negative human-wildlife interactions, the translation of such knowledge into the design of evolutionarily relevant conservation and wildlife management strategies is becoming urgent. Contemporary methods in animal ecology and related fields, using direct (sensory cues) or indirect (remote sensing technologies and machine learning) means, provide a flexible toolbox for testing and applying disgust at individual and collective levels. In this review/perspective paper, we provide an empirical framework for testing the adaptive function of disgust and its associated disease avoidance behaviours across species, from the least to the most social, in different habitats. We predict various trade-offs to be at play depending on the social system and ecology of the species. We propose five contexts in which disgust-related avoidance behaviours could be applied, including endangered species rehabilitation, invasive species, crop-raiding, urban pests and animal tourism. We highlight some of the perspectives and current challenges of testing disgust in the wild. In particular, we recommend future studies to consider together disease, predation and competition risks. We discuss the ethics associated with disgust experiments in the above contexts. Finally, we promote the creation of a database gathering disease avoidance evidence in animals and its applications.

A synthesis of human conflict with an African megaherbivore; the common hippopotamus

The common hippopotamus is an extant African megaherbivore that is relatively understudied by scientists and underfunded by conservation organisations. Conflict with people, however, is a major concern given the danger that hippos pose to human life. Moreover, very little is known about human–hippo conflict (HHC), and experimental fieldwork on mitigation methods has hardly been conducted. Here we conduct an exhaustive review of the primary and grey literature outlining how the conflict between people and hippos arises, the impacts of conflict on both human communities and hippo populations, and all known intervention measures. Our review highlights the effectiveness of barriers around crops, riparian buffer zones (that exclude cattle and crop planting), and payments for environmental services as tools to mitigate HHC. This study also highlights the knowledge gaps in HHC research, particularly the spatial scale of HHC, the lack of field experimental research on deterrents, and a paucity of knowledge on outcomes of projected climate change and HHC.

Acknowledging the Relevance of Elephant Sensory Perception to Human–Elephant Conflict Mitigation

Simple Summary

Elephants have a unique sensory perspective of the world, using their complex olfactory and auditory systems to make foraging and social decisions. All three species of elephants are endangered and inhabit environments, which are being affected rapidly by human development. Anthropogenic disturbances can have significant effects on elephants’ abilities to perceive sensory information and communicate with one another, potentially further endangering their survival. Conflicts over high-quality resources also arise from the overlapping habitation of humans and elephants. While many different methods have been employed to reduce this conflict, we propose that elephants’ unique olfactory and acoustic sensory strengths be considered in future mitigation strategies to achieve coexistence.

Abstract

Elephants are well known for their socio-cognitive abilities and capacity for multi-modal sensory perception and communication. Their highly developed olfactory and acoustic senses provide them with a unique non-visual perspective of their physical and social worlds. The use of these complex sensory signals is important not only for communication between conspecifics, but also for decisions about foraging and navigation. These decisions have grown increasingly risky given the exponential increase in unpredictable anthropogenic change in elephants’ natural habitats. Risk taking often develops from the overlap of human and elephant habitat in Asian and African range countries, where elephants forage for food in human habitat and crop fields, leading to conflict over high-quality resources. To mitigate this conflict, a better understanding of the elephants’ sensory world and its impact on their decision-making process should be considered seriously in the development of long-term strategies for promoting coexistence between humans and elephants. In this review, we explore the elephants’ sensory systems for audition and olfaction, their multi-modal capacities for communication, and the anthropogenic changes that are affecting their behavior, as well as the need for greater consideration of elephant behavior in elephant conservation efforts.

Fear effects on bank voles (Rodentia: Arvicolinae): testing for repellent candidates from predator volatiles

BACKGROUND

Arvicolinae rodents are known pests causing damage to both agricultural and forest crops. Today, rodenticides for rodent control are widely discouraged owing to their negative effects on the environment. Rodents are the main prey for several predators, and their complex olfactory system allows them to identify risks of predation. Therefore, the potential use of predators' scents as repellents has gained interest as an ecologically based rodent control method. In a two-choice experiment, we investigated the potential repellent effects of five synthetic predator compounds: 2-phenylethylamine (2-PEA), 2-propylthietane (2-PT), indole, heptanal and 2,5-dihydro-2,4,5-trimethylthiazoline (TMT), at 1% and 5% doses, using the bank vole (Myodes glareolus) as a rodent model.

RESULTS

The compound 2-PEA reduced both the food contacts and the time spent by voles in the treatment arm compared to the control arm. Likewise, 2-PT-treated arms reduced the food contacts, and the voles spent less time there, although this latter difference was not significant. Indole also showed a tendency to reduce the time spent at the treatment arm; however, this result was not significant. Unexpectedly, TMT had the reverse effect in showing attractive properties, possibly due to odor cues from differently sized predators and intraguild predation in nature. We found no dose-related effects for any compounds tested.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that the 2-PEA and 2-PT are both effective odor stimuli for triggering reduced food contacts and area avoidance, and they may be good repellent candidates. We suggest further testing of 2-PEA and 2-PT in field experiments to further determine their dose-efficiency as repellents against rodents in more natural environments. © 2022 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

The Chemical Ecology of Elephants: 21st Century Additions to Our Understanding and Future Outlooks

Chemical signals are the oldest and most ubiquitous means of mediating intra- and interspecific interactions. The three extant species of elephants, the Asian elephant and the two African species, savanna and forest share sociobiological patterns in which chemical signals play a vital role. Elephants emit secretions and excretions and display behaviors that reveal the importance of odors in their interactions. In this review, we begin with a brief introduction of research in elephant chemical ecology leading up to the 21st century, and then we summarize the body of work that has built upon it and occurred in the last c. 20 years. The 21st century has expanded our understanding on elephant chemical ecology, revealing their use of odors to detect potential threats and make dietary choices. Furthermore, complementary in situ and ex situ studies have allowed the careful observations of captive elephants to be extended to fieldwork involving their wild counterparts. While important advances have been made in the 21st century, further work should investigate the roles of chemical signaling in elephants and how these signals interact with other sensory modalities. All three elephant species are threatened with extinction, and we suggest that chemical ecology can be applied for targeted conservation efforts.

African elephants can detect water from natural and artificial sources via olfactory cues

Water is vital for mammals. Yet, as ephemeral sources can be difficult to find, it raises the question, how do mammals locate water? Elephants (Loxodonta africana) are water-dependent herbivores that possess exceptional olfactory capabilities, and it has been suggested that they may locate water via smell. However, there is no evidence to support this claim. To explore this, we performed two olfactory choice experiments with semi-tame elephants. In the first, we tested whether elephants could locate water using olfactory cues alone. For this, we used water from two natural dams and a drinking trough utilised by the elephants. Distilled water acted as a control. In the second, we explored whether elephants could detect three key volatile organic compounds (VOCs) commonly associated with water (geosmin, 2-methylisoborneol, and dimethyl sulphide). We found that the elephants could locate water olfactorily, but not the distilled water. Moreover, they were also able to detect the three VOCs associated with water. However, these VOCs were not in the odour profiles of the water sources in our experiments. This suggests that the elephants were either able to detect the unique odour profiles of the different water sources or used other VOCs that they associate with water. Ultimately, our findings indicate that elephants can locate water olfactorily at small spatial scales, but the extent to which they, and other mammals, can detect water over larger scales (e.g. km) remains unclear.