White-tailed deer responses to predator cues depend upon past land use and contemporary fire regime

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 a..., 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...., , #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: [e-mail]
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:m...