Fitness-maximizing foragers can use information about patch quality to decide how to search for and within patches: optimal Lévy walk searching patterns from optimal foraging theory

Optimal foraging theory shows how fitness-maximizing foragers can use information about patch quality to decide how to search within patches. It is amply supported by empirical studies. Nonetheless, the theory largely ignores the fact that foragers may need to search for patches as well as for the targets within them. Here, using an exact but simple mathematical argument, it is shown how foragers can use information about patch quality to facilitate the execution of Lévy walk movement patterns with μ = 2 at inter-patch scales. These movement patterns are advantageous when searching for patches that are not depleted or rejected once visited but instead remain profitable. The analytical results are verified by the results of numerical simulations. The findings bring forth an innovative theoretical synthesis of searching for and within patches and, suggest that foragers' memories may be adaptive under spatially heterogeneous reward schedules.

[1]  H. Larralde,et al.  Lévy walk patterns in the foraging movements of spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi) , 2003, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[2]  Y. Iwasa,et al.  Prey Distribution as a Factor Determining the Choice of Optimal Foraging Strategy , 1981, The American Naturalist.

[3]  Bernd Heinrich,et al.  Resource heterogeneity and patterns of movement in foraging bumblebees , 2004, Oecologia.

[4]  G. Zaslavsky,et al.  Lévy Flights and Related Topics in Physics , 2013 .

[5]  A M Reynolds,et al.  The Lévy flight paradigm: random search patterns and mechanisms. , 2009, Ecology.

[6]  Ola Olsson,et al.  The foraging benefits of information and the penalty of ignorance , 2006 .

[7]  A M Reynolds,et al.  Animals That Randomly Reorient at Cues Left by Correlated Random Walkers Do the Lévy Walk , 2010, The American Naturalist.

[8]  Andy M. Reynolds,et al.  Balancing the competing demands of harvesting and safety from predation: Lévy walk searches outperform composite Brownian walk searches but only when foraging under the risk of predation , 2010 .

[9]  A. M. Edwards,et al.  Revisiting Lévy flight search patterns of wandering albatrosses, bumblebees and deer , 2007, Nature.

[10]  Nicolas E. Humphries,et al.  Scaling laws of marine predator search behaviour , 2008, Nature.

[11]  Karl J. Niklas,et al.  Invariant scaling relations across tree-dominated communities , 2001, Nature.

[12]  Germinal Cocho,et al.  Scale-free foraging by primates emerges from their interaction with a complex environment , 2006, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[13]  Frederic Bartumeus,et al.  LÉVY PROCESSES IN ANIMAL MOVEMENT: AN EVOLUTIONARY HYPOTHESIS , 2007 .

[14]  M. Shlesinger,et al.  Lévy Walks Versus Lévy Flights , 1986 .

[15]  B. Enquist,et al.  On estimating the exponent of power-law frequency distributions. , 2008, Ecology.

[16]  M. Zimmerman,et al.  Bumblebee Foraging Behavior: Changes in Departure Decisions as a Function of Experimental Nectar Manipulations , 1987 .

[17]  Graham H. Pyke,et al.  Optimal Foraging: A Selective Review of Theory and Tests , 1977, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[18]  K. Chung,et al.  Limit Distributions for Sums of Independent Random Variables. , 1955 .

[19]  Andy M. Reynolds,et al.  Lévy flight patterns are predicted to be an emergent property of a bumblebees’ foraging strategy , 2009, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[20]  Nicolas E. Humphries,et al.  Environmental context explains Lévy and Brownian movement patterns of marine predators , 2010, Nature.

[21]  R. Macarthur,et al.  On Optimal Use of a Patchy Environment , 1966, The American Naturalist.

[22]  S. Levin.  Dispersion and Population Interactions , 1974, The American Naturalist.

[23]  H. Stanley,et al.  Optimizing the success of random searches , 1999, Nature.

[24]  G M Viswanathan,et al.  Origin of power-law distributions in deterministic walks: the influence of landscape geometry. , 2007, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[25]  A M Reynolds,et al.  Deterministic walks with inverse-square power-law scaling are an emergent property of predators that use chemotaxis to locate randomly distributed prey. , 2008, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[26]  F. Bartumeus,et al.  Helical Lévy walks: Adjusting searching statistics to resource availability in microzooplankton , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  J C Stout,et al.  Identity and Function of Scent Marks Deposited by Foraging Bumblebees , 2000, Journal of Chemical Ecology.

[28]  Yuhai Tu,et al.  How white noise generates power-law switching in bacterial flagellar motors. , 2005, Physical review letters.

[29]  John A. Allen,et al.  Repellent scent-marking of flowers by a guild of foraging bumblebees (Bombus spp.) , 1998, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[30]  K. Hunt,et al.  Estimators of Fruit Abundance of Tropical Trees1 , 1992 .

[31]  Richard W. Byrne,et al.  Spider monkey ranging patterns in Mexican subtropical forest: do travel routes reflect planning? , 2007, Animal Cognition.

[32]  Amnon Rapoport,et al.  Analysis of heuristic solutions to the best choice problem , 2003, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[34]  Frederic Bartumeus,et al.  ANIMAL SEARCH STRATEGIES: A QUANTITATIVE RANDOM‐WALK ANALYSIS , 2005 .

[35]  A. Reynolds,et al.  Free-Flight Odor Tracking in Drosophila Is Consistent with an Optimal Intermittent Scale-Free Search , 2007, PloS one.

[36]  K. Hunt,et al.  Estimators of Fruit Abundance of Tropical Trees , 2011 .

[37]  Thomas J. Valone,et al.  Measuring Patch Assessment Abilities of Desert Granivores , 1989 .

[39]  F. Bartumeus,et al.  Optimal search behavior and classic foraging theory , 2009 .

[40]  J. Vilar,et al.  From molecular noise to behavioural variability in a single bacterium , 2004, Nature.

[41]  Richard H. Rand,et al.  Tree size frequency distributions, plant density, age and community disturbance , 2003 .

[42]  F. Bartumeus.  Behavioral intermittence, Lévy patterns, and randomness in animal movement , 2009 .

[43]  Thomas J. Valone,et al.  Bayesian and prescient assessment: foraging with pre-harvest information , 1991, Animal Behaviour.

[44]  Joel s. Brown,et al.  Vigilance, patch use and habitat selection: Foraging under predation risk , 1999 .

[45]  J. Klafter,et al.  Temporal generation of power-law distributions: A universal ‘oligarchy mechanism’ , 2007 .

[46]  E. Charnov.  Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. , 1976, Theoretical population biology.

[47]  Ola Olsson,et al.  The survival-rate-maximizing policy for Bayesian foragers: wait for good news , 1998 .

[48]  A. Oaten,et al.  Optimal foraging in patches: a case for stochasticity. , 1977, Theoretical population biology.

[49]  Richard F. Green,et al.  Bayesian birds: A simple example of Oaten's stochastic model of optimal foraging , 1980 .

[50]  Lars Chittka,et al.  The importance of experience in the interpretation of conspecific chemical signals , 2006, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[51]  H. Stanley,et al.  The Physics of Foraging: An Introduction to Random Searches and Biological Encounters , 2011 .

[52]  J. McNamara.  Optimal patch use in a stochastic environment , 1982 .

[53]  Andy M. Reynolds,et al.  Avoidance of conspecific odour trails results in scale-free movement patterns and the execution of an optimal searching strategy , 2007 .

[54]  Thomas J. Valone,et al.  Are animals capable of Bayesian updating? An empirical review , 2006 .