Experiment shows exploration improves habitat selection and movement efficiency in bison, suggesting refined monitoring for reintroduction efforts.
Understanding how animals learn in novel environments is crucial for predicting behavioral responses to rapid environmental change, yet we lack knowledge about how long different behaviors take to develop and refine, and how exploration facilitates learning. We tested the exploration–refinement hypothesis using movement and diet data from GPS‐collared bison Bison bison (n = 10) monitored for five years following reintroduction to Banff National Park. We examined how exploration influenced movement efficiency, habitat selection behaviors, and home range establishment. Different behaviors showed distinct learning trajectories. Movement efficiency in familiar areas reached an inflection point at 384 days, but when facing unfamiliar terrain, efficiency decreased as animals needed time to learn the new area. Habitat selection behaviors showed rapid initial improvement followed by extended refinement periods lasting up to three years. Exploratory movements occurred primarily in the first year (57%) but continued throughout the study and were positively correlated with improvements in habitat selection behaviors and home range stabilization, but not with movement efficiency. Our results demonstrate that exploration facilitates spatial learning – the process of acquiring and using information about environmental structure, distances, and relative positions to navigate effectively, locate resources, and avoid threats. This suggests that allowing individuals to explore while preventing large dispersal movements may be required for successful reintroductions. The extended timeline required for spatial behaviors to stabilize (3–4 years) indicates that behavioral refinement takes substantially longer than typically assumed, highlighting the need to align monitoring periods with the biological timeframes required for animals to learn novel environments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Verzuh et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: