4
1 University of Maribor, Faculty of Natural 
Sciences and Mathematics, Department of 
Biology, Chair of Ecology
* Corresponding author:  
E-mail address: nina.sajna@um.si
Citation: Bedrač, L., Šajna, N., (2024).  
Domestic cat – the unspoken threat to  
wildlife in the sub-urban location of Maribor.  
Acta Biologica Slovenica 67 (2)
https://doi.org/10.14720/abs.67.2.18552
This article is an open access article distributed 
under the terms and conditions of the Creative 
Commons Attribution (CC BY SA) license
Original Research
Domestic cat –  
the unspoken threat to 
wildlife in the sub-urban 
location of Maribor 
Larisa Bedrač 1, Nina Šajna 1*
Abstract
The monitoring of domestic cats' prey brought home was conducted between 
the 13th of March and the 1st of May 2023 in two residential areas near Maribor, 
Slovenia. This study aimed to provide information about the amount, diversity, 
and frequency of prey that the cats captured to identify the predatory impact 
of domestic cats in peri-urban areas. We present the results of the prey return, 
whether the prey was brought alive or not, and whether it was eaten or not. 
We further provide information about the predation frequency of domestic cats 
concerning circadian activity according to weather conditions and air temperature. 
The frequencies of various taxonomic groups of prey captured were described 
in relation to land use in a location and species' biology. Our results include a 
total of 50 records of 12 species (3 species of birds and 9 of mammals). Domestic 
cats were more active during the mornings and on days without rain, and the 
frequency of bringing home prey increased with higher temperatures. 
Keywords
domestic cats, cat predation, wildlife, indoor-outdoor cat, survey
5
Acta Biologica Slovenica, 2024, 67 (2)
Domača mačka – tiha grožnja prostoživečim vrstam živali v primestni lokaciji 
Maribora
Izvleček
Med 13. marcem in 1. majem 2023 smo v dveh stanovanjskih naseljih v bližini Maribora v Sloveniji izvajali popis plena 
domačih mačk, prinesenega domov. Namen te študije je bil pridobiti informacije o količini, raznolikosti in pogostosti 
plena, ki so ga mačke uplenile, ter s tem ovrednotiti plenilski vpliv domačih mačk v primestnih območjih. Predstavljamo 
rezultate o prinesenem plenu ter ali je bil plen prinesen lastnikom živ ali ne in ali je bil konzumiran ali ne. Nadalje 
podajamo informacije o plenilskih aktivnostih domačih mačk čez dan, glede na vremenske razmere in temperaturo 
zraka. Opisane so bile pogostnosti različnih taksonomskih skupin ulovljenega plena glede na rabo tal na lokaciji 
in biologijo vrste. Naši rezultati kažejo, da je bilo uplenjenih 50 živali, ki so pripadale 12-im vrstam (3 ptice in 9 
sesalcev). Domače mačke so bile bolj aktivne zjutraj, v dneh brez dežja, pogostost prinašanja plena pa se je z višjimi 
temperaturami povečala.
Ključne besede 
domača mačka, plenilska aktivnost mačk, prostoživeče živali, notranje-zunanja mačka
Introduction
Domestic cats (Felis catus Linnaeus, 1758) are the most 
widely embraced pets across the globe. In the United 
States, one-third of households include feline companions, 
and over 600 million cats share their world with humanity 
(Driscoll et al., 2009). As they are beloved and widely cher-
ished animal companions, bringing substantial joy to their 
human caretakers, we tend to overlook their primal nature 
as carnivorous mesopredators and the threat they pose 
to wildlife. Even though owned cats are fed, their hunting 
instinct is not lost, and they often kill wild animals. What is 
more, because cat owners provide care for domestic cats, 
their populations are not regulated by natural selection 
(e.g. diseases, parasites, food, shelter). Even though a 
domestic cat is a species that has been present in Central 
Europe since the expansion of the Roman empire (Krajcarz 
et al., 2022), its population has never in our history been 
higher (Lepczyk et al., 2010). Domestic cats in our society 
assume unique and strange roles. On the one hand, we 
regard them as domesticated pet animals; however, they 
are mostly capable of surviving in the wild on their own. 
This is why many owners allow their cats to fully or par-
tially freely live outside of their home. It is often regarded 
as proper care and an ideal lifestyle for these pets if they 
have the opportunity to roam outdoors freely. However, as 
commented by Lepczyk et al. (2010), these norms do not 
apply to any other domestic animal species, such as dogs, 
ferrets, livestock, or others. 
Owned domestic cats that are granted outdoor access 
represent an anthropogenic threat to smaller wild animals 
from different taxa of vertebrates (Blancher, 2013; Loss et 
al., 2013; Loss & Marra, 2017) and invertebrates (Medina 
& García, 2007; Eisenhauer, 2018; Li et al., 2021). Loss et 
al. (2013) estimated in their study that 1.3–4.0 billion birds 
and 6.3–22.3 billion mammals are annually lost due to pre-
dation by free-roaming domestic cats in the United States 
alone. Li et al. (2021) estimated that the predation by all 
free-roaming cats in China is at least 2.69-5.52 billion birds 
and 3.61-9.80 billion mammals, but also 1.61-3.58 billion 
fishes, 1.13-3.82 billion amphibians, 1.48-4.31 billion reptiles, 
and 1.61-4.95 billion invertebrates annually. In areas where 
free-roaming domestic cats are an introduced species 
and the local native prey is naïve, the predation rates can 
have a more devastating impact, even causing extinctions 
(Medina & García, 2007; Nogales & Medina, 2009). Unre-
strained cats living on islands have played a role in causing 
or contributing to 33 (14%) of the recent extinctions of birds, 
mammals, and reptiles documented on the International 
Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List (Medina 
et al., 2011). Besides predation, free-roaming domestic cats 
impact biodiversity by causing disturbances and indirect 
6
Acta Biologica Slovenica, 2024, 67 (2)
fear effects (Loss & Marra, 2017), representing a competing 
species for wild mesopredators, acting as a vector for 
diseases and parasites (Loss & Marra, 2017), and hybrid-
ization with wildcats Felis silvestris (Todesco et al., 2016).
While meaningful controls are being pursued for feral 
and stray cat populations in various countries, hardly any 
strategies were designed for free-roaming domestic cats 
(Trouwborst et al., 2020). As a response, we can observe 
the rise of animal welfare organizations and conservation 
scientists in recent years, raising appeals to owners and 
governments to implement changes to prevent the biodi-
versity impacts of free-roaming domestic cats. The most 
desired policy seems to be restricting the outdoor access 
of owned cats (Trouwborst et al., 2020). In countries where 
domestic cats are listed as an invasive alien species (IAS), 
many national and international laws on IAS apply to 
owned domestic cats. In the European Union, some inter-
national legal obligations indirectly address the threats of 
free-roaming domestic cats to wildlife (e.g. The EU Birds 
and Habitats Directive). However, in the Slovenian legisla-
ture - Animal protection law (Zakon o zaščiti živali, 1999), 
there are restrictions on having owned animals in public, 
only for dogs – use of leashes in public spaces, and owned 
cats are addressed only within welfare factors (feeding, 
adequate shelter, health care, freedom of movement, 
socialization).
Given the considerable success of domestic cats as 
predators, characterized by significant variations in catch 
rates across different locations and a discernible reliance 
on environmental and landscape factors, there is an 
imperative need for more comprehensive and refined local 
assessments. This necessity is particularly underscored by 
the ongoing initiatives for state-level biodiversity protec-
tion. It is crucial to avoid formulating legislation based on 
broad generalizations and instead prioritize the integration 
of specific, localized data. By conducting meticulous and 
site-specific evaluations, we can ensure that regulatory 
measures are grounded in a nuanced understanding of 
the intricate interactions between domestic cats and local 
ecosystems, thus fostering more effective and targeted 
conservation efforts.
As such evaluation has not been conducted in our 
area, this study sought to offer insights into the quantity, 
variety, and occurrence frequency of prey captured by 
cats to discern the predatory influence of domestic cats in 
peri-urban regions. Because this is a very crowd-splitting 
theme, we wanted to put forth for owners who allow their 
cats to roam outside an alternative to keeping them inside 
for the sake of wildlife conservation. Therefore, our prey 
return survey also included the need for abiotic factors to 
be noted, such as the temperature, the time of the day the 
prey was brought, and what type of weather was on that 
day. With this, we wanted to find the appropriate time of 
the day when owners could let their cats roam free with the 
least negative impact on wildlife. With spatial analysis, we 
also wanted to identify land uses and connect them to the 
preferred habitat of prey species. This would enable us to 
predict what prey is present in each land use, which could 
be a foundation for establishing outdoor cat-free zones if 
vulnerable species are present in that area.
Materials and Methods
The research participants were selected based on location 
and the knowledge that individual households have cats 
that were allowed to go out freely. Cat owners were 
requested to meticulously document the prey items that 
each of their cats brought home.
The monitoring took place in the spring of 2023 for 
seven weeks, starting on the 13th of March. This timeframe 
was chosen because that is when the reproductive period 
begins for most vertebrates and marks the return of migra-
tory species to the observed area.
The household in location 1 is located outside the 
housing community on the border between cultivated 
areas and natural forest – showing more rural habitats 
(Fig.1a). The household in the 2nd location is on the outer 
edge of a compacted community bordering on arable land, 
characterizing this as more urban habitats (Fig.1b). Both 
locations have surface watercourses nearby. In location 
2, where two cats resided in the same household, it was 
not always feasible to attribute the items brought home 
to a particular cat. For that reason, we assumed that the 
frequency of cat predation is similar; therefore, the number 
of prey brought home was divided between both cats.
We compiled a survey form in such a way that the cat 
owners could document the days at which the prey was 
brought home. Prey items were recorded, a photograph 
was taken, and we identified preyed animals to the 
highest taxonomic level possible allowed by the condition 
of the prey remains. We used the Key for determining the 
vertebrates of Slovenia (Janžekovič et al., 1999) for prey 
identification. Cat owners recorded information about the 
7
Acta Biologica Slovenica, 2024, 67 (2)
prey – whether the animals brought by the cats were alive 
or dead, and for the latter, if there was any consumption 
(marked as complete or partial or not consumed). Addi-
tionally, cat owners recorded the weather conditions 
according to four categories proposed: 1 - clear weather, 
2 - partially cloudy, 3 - cloudy, and 4 – rainy; and the 
time of the predation according to three categories: 1 - 
morning, 2 - midday and 3 - evening. For more details on 
the weather, we obtained average daily air temperature 
data available freely at the government online archives 
of the Environmental Agency of the Republic of Slovenia 
(ARSO, 2023). This would enable us to examine if the 
probability of the prey being brought back is dependent 
on the temperature.
We also studied the habitats in which cats move. We 
summarized the results for area size from Pirie et al., 2022 
where their results showed that the outdoor cats have a 
mean home range of 3.42 ha. We utilized the obtained 
result to visually depict the spatial distribution of areas of 
locations 1 and 2 and assessed land use in each location. 
We classified different land use types: urban areas, water-
courses and bodies of water, forest areas, grasslands, 
arable land, and orchards. From the base map, we were 
able to calculate percentages for each category and 
compare them between the locations.
Statistical analysis
We employed various methods to assess biodiversity 
and investigate correlations between environmental 
variables and prey return frequencies. For alpha diversity, 
we calculated Shannon and Simpson diversity indexes 
using an online calculator, Omnicalculator (https://www.
omnicalculator.com/). This analysis provided insights into 
the within-sample diversity of our study area. To explore 
the potential correlation between the average temperature 
over a 5-day period and prey return frequency, we con-
ducted Pearson's correlation analysis using the software 
PAST (Version 4.14, 64-bit Windows) (Hammer et al., 2001). 
Furthermore, we employed chi-square tests to analyze 
variations in prey return frequencies across different parts 
of the day and under different weather conditions. For this 
analysis, we utilized an online calculator, GraphPad (https://
www.graphpad.com/quickcalcs/chisquared1.Chi-square/).
Figure 1. a) land use at location 1 – rural area; b) land use at location 2 – urban area.
Slika 1. a) Raba tal na lokaciji 1 – ruralno okolje; b) raba tal na lokaciji 2 – urbano okolje.
8
Acta Biologica Slovenica, 2024, 67 (2)
Results
Prey diversity 
The results of the survey give us information on the fre-
quency and consumption patterns of prey return in two 
locations, each with different environmental characteris-
tics, with location 1 having more rural habitats and location 
2 having more urban habitats. A total of 50 prey items were 
recorded, with 24 in the household on location 1 and 26 in 
the household on location 2. Notably, location 2 had two 
cats, while location 1 had a single cat. Overall, 12 species 
were identified, 9 in rural and 9 in urban (Table 1). 
The species distribution varied between the locations, 
with notable differences in the preyed-upon species 
returned to the households (Table 1). In rural locations, the 
yellow-necked mouse (Apodemus flavicollis Malchior, 1834) 
and the wood mouse (Apodemus sylvaticus Linnaeus, 
1758) were prominent, representing 67% of prey return in 
location 1. In contrast, urban locations saw higher numbers 
of the wood mouse (Apodemus sylvaticus) and the common 
shrew (Sorex araneus Linnaeus, 1758), representing 65% 
of total prey return to that household. The three most 
preyed-upon species—A. sylvaticus, A. flavicollis, and S. 
araneus—comprised 66% of the overall prey return.
Species were categorized taxonomically, revealing 
that three species belong to the order Passeriformes, one 
belongs to the order Eulipotyphla, and eight belong to the 
order Rodentia (Fig. 2). Thus, we can see that the most 
represented order of prey is Rodentia, as it has not only the 
highest species diversity but also the highest frequencies 
of brought prey, which amounts to 74%.
We compared the α-diversity of prey return for each 
location and calculated β-diversity between our two 
sampling locations (Table 2). Only identified species 
were included in the calculations (Table ). The Shannon 
Diversity Index for location 1 (rural) was calculated to be 
1.49, indicating a moderate level of species diversity. The 
Simpson Diversity Index for the same location was found 
to be 0.26, suggesting a certain degree of dominance by 
a few species.
Location 2 (urban) exhibited a higher Shannon Diversity 
Index at 1.75, reflecting a marginally more even distribution 
of species. The Simpson Diversity Index for location 2 was 
0.20, indicative of a relatively low dominance of specific 
species.
These indices collectively underscore moderate diver-
sity within both locations, with location 2 showcasing a 
somewhat more even distribution of prey species returned.
The Sørensen-Dice Index is 0.375 and signifies a 
moderate degree of similarity in species composition 
between the two samples (Table 2). Approximately 33% of 
species were found to be shared between the samples, 
while 25% were unique for rural and 42 for urban samples.
Prey species Rural (1 cat) Urban (2 cats) Rural + urban
Apodemus sylvaticus 6 9 15
Apodemus flavicollis 10 0 10
Mus musculus 0 2 2
Rattus norvegicus 0 1 1
Arvicola amphibius 1 1 2
Microtus arvalis 1 2 3
Microtus agrestis 2 0 2
Microtus subterraneus 1 0 1
Rodentia sp. 1 0 1
Sorex araneus 0 8 8
Sorex sp. 1 0 1
Parus major 1 1 2
Poecile palustris 0 1 1
Phoenicurus ochruros 0 1 1
Total number of prey 24 26 50
Table 1. Frequency of prey return species by location and total number of prey.
Tabela 1. Število osebkov prinesenih vrst plena glede na lokacijo in skupno število plena
9
Acta Biologica Slovenica, 2024, 67 (2)
Prey consumption 
Owners were asked to note prey consumption, revealing 
that in rural locations, three prey items brought home were 
consumed, two were partially consumed, and 19 were 
not consumed. In urban locations, three were consumed, 
five were partially consumed, and 18 were not consumed. 
Therefore, leading to an overall consumption of 12%, partial 
consumption of 14%, and no consumption of 74%. Notably, 
in rural locations, all 24 prey items were brought home 
dead, while in urban locations, four were brought alive.
Temperature and predation
The results of the correlation analysis between the 
average temperature over five days in 10 intervals and the 
frequency of brought prey (Fig. 3) yielded a statistically 
significant positive correlation (r(8) = 0.79, p = 0.007). The 
p-value associated with the correlation coefficient indicates 
that the observed correlation is unlikely to have occurred 
by random chance. This positive correlation suggests a 
strong positive linear relationship between the average 
temperature and prey return frequency. In other words, 
as the temperature increases, there is a tendency for an 
increased prey return.
Weather and predation
Out of 49 surveyed days, 17 had clear weather, seven were 
partially cloudy, 16 were cloudy, and 9 had rainy conditions. 
The frequency of brought prey was influenced by distinct 
weather conditions (Fig. 4). The highest frequency of prey 
return was observed in clear and cloudy weather, and the 
lowest was in rainy conditions.
On days without precipitation, the total abundance of 
prey return was 44, indicating that the cats brought in 44 
prey items over 40 days without precipitation. Out of 9 
days with precipitation, only six prey items were brought 
home, thus indicating a reduced frequency of brought prey.
Similarly, when we looked at the abundance of the 
three most commonly preyed upon species, contributing 
67% of data (Apodemus sylvaticus, Apodemus flavicollis, 
Location Evenness Shannon's Index Simpson's Index Sørensen-Dice Index
1 0.767 1.49 0.26
0.375
2 0.797 1.75 0.20
Table 1. Frequency of prey return species by location and total number of prey.
Tabela 1. Število osebkov prinesenih vrst plena glede na lokacijo in skupno število plena
Figure 2. Frequencies of prey return 
according to taxonomic orders and 
location (location 1 = rural, location 2 = 
urban).
Slika 2. Število osebkov prinesenega 
plena glede na taksonomski red in lok-
acijo (lokacija 1 = ruralna, lokacija 2 = 
urbana).
10
Acta Biologica Slovenica, 2024, 67 (2)
and Sorex araneus), the result showed a similar pattern as 
the overall abundance (Fig. 5).
The chi-square test for goodness of fit was conducted to 
determine whether the proportion of prey return was equal 
between all four types of weather. Observed frequencies 
for prey abundance were clear weather 18, partially cloudy 
9, cloudy 17, and rainy 6. The chi-square value was calcu-
lated χ2 (3, N = 50) = 8.4, p = 0.038, indicating that the 
weather type may influence prey return.
Predation by time of the day
A distinct pattern in prey frequencies emerged when 
examining in which part of the day the prey was brought, 
showing noteworthy variations in prey return numbers 
(Fig. 6). During the morning hours, a substantial combined 
total of 29 brought prey items (location 1 and location 2) 
was observed, reflecting heightened predator activity 
and successful hunts during this period. However, as the 
day progressed into midday, the overall total abundance 
Figure 3. Correlation between 5-day 
average temperature [°C] and prey 
return frequency (r(8) = 0.79, p = 0.007).
Slika 3. Korelacija med 5-dnevnim 
povprečjem temperature [°C] in pogos-
tost prinesenega plena (r(8) = 0.79, p = 
0.007).
Figure 4. The frequency of prey return 
depends on the type of weather.
Slika 4. Število prinesenega plena glede 
na tip vremena.
11
Acta Biologica Slovenica, 2024, 67 (2)
sharply decreased to 9 prey return items, suggesting 
potential changes in predator behaviour or prey availability 
during these hours.
The chi-square test for goodness of fit was applied 
to examine if the distribution of brought prey frequency 
across three groups of times of the day is equal. Observed 
frequencies were as follows: 29 in the morning, nine at 
midday, and 12 in the evening. The chi-square value was 
computed as χ2 (2, N = 50) = 16.7, p < 0.001, indicating 
uneven prey return throughout the day.
As we looked at the frequency of brought prey in 
different parts of the day and included the weather factor, 
a similar pattern appeared (Fig. 7). Prey brought in the 
morning was the most abundant throughout all weather 
types, while prey brought in the midday was the least 
abundant, recorded only in 3 out of 4 weather types.
Figure 5. Abundance of 3 most fre-
quently brought prey species: Apode-
mus sylvaticus, Apodemus flavicollis, and 
Sorex araneus combined depending on 
weather type in rural location (location 1) 
and urban location (location 2).
Slika 5. Abundanca 3 najpogosteje 
prinesenih vrst: Apodemus sylvaticus, 
Apodemus flavicollis in Sorex araneus 
sešteto glede na vrsto vremena na 
ruralni (lokacija 1) in urbani lokaciji (lok-
acija 2).
Figure 6. The frequency of prey brought 
depends on the part of the day the prey 
was caught in a rural location (location1) 
and urban location (location2).
Slika 6. Pogostost prinešenega plena 
glede na del dneva, ko je bil plen ulovl-
jen na ruralni (lokacija 1) in urbani lokaciji 
(lokacija 2).
12
Acta Biologica Slovenica, 2024, 67 (2)
Discussion
Although our study included a small sample of studied cats 
and considering that only a small portion of captured prey 
is brought to households (Loyd et al., 2013), our results 
offer a brief insight into domestic cats' predation effect on 
wildlife in Slovenia. Our investigation into the predatory 
habits of domestic cats in peri-urban areas has unveiled 
nuanced patterns that have significant implications for 
wildlife conservation and pet ownership practices. The 
detailed examination of prey diversity, climatic influences, 
and temporal dynamics contributes to a more compre-
hensive understanding of the complex interplay between 
domestic cats and local ecosystems. 
One of the earliest research projects that surveyed 
a large sample of prey return by outdoor cats that were 
owned was done by Churcher and Lawton (1987). In their 
study, 70 cats were included. Though a one-year period, 
1090 items of prey were noted, with an average of about 
14 items per cat. They especially noted the impact of cat 
predation on house sparrow (Passer domesticus Linnaeus, 
1758) since their results, based on initial counts of house 
sparrows in the village at the beginning of the breeding 
season and the documented number of sparrows caught 
by cats, showed that it was evident that a minimum of 
30% of sparrow fatalities in the village could be attributed 
to cat predation. They find that domestic cats emerge as 
significant predators in their study area. In later years, 
further researches were conducted including more factors 
that could affect cat predation such as if the cats were 
equipped with collar bells and if they were kept indoors 
at night (Woods et al., 2003), estimating cats' hunting area 
and comparing different rates of predation by where the 
cat's home is located – in inner suburbs or the edge of 
suburban area (Pirie et al., 2022) and even if the owners 
characterization of their cats' personalities could correlate 
to number of returned prey (Cecchetti et al., 2022). 
Observing the variations in prey return species compo-
sition between rural and urban settings provides a glimpse 
into the intricate dynamics between domestic cats and their 
local habitats. In our case, specific species' prevalence in 
each location reflects the influence of habitat characteristics 
on feline prey return. For instance, rural areas exhibit a 
preference for species indigenous to natural or semi-natural 
landscapes, such as the yellow-necked mouse and wood 
mouse, while urban environments see the influence of human 
settlements, evident in the presence of the wood mouse and 
common shrew. However, we must acknowledge that these 
species are common and found in various habitats. While yel-
low-necked mouse prefers forests and closed habitats, wood 
mouse often uses habitats within their ranges at random, 
including cropped areas (Tattersall et al., 2001). The common 
shrew can be found in habitats like grasslands, woodlands, 
arable land, and hedges (Wang and Grimm, 2007). 
Figure 7. The frequency of prey brought 
depends on the combination of the part 
of the day and the weather.
Slika 7. Število osebkov prinesenega 
plena glede na kombinacijo dela dneva 
in vremena.
13
Acta Biologica Slovenica, 2024, 67 (2)
The alpha diversity indices, encompassing the 
Shannon and Simpson Diversity Index, offer a quantitative 
lens through which to view the distribution of prey return 
species within each location. The moderately diverse 
nature of both settings indicates that, despite differences in 
habitat, both areas support a varied array of prey species. 
This information is pivotal for devising conservation strat-
egies that are not only effective but also tailored to the 
inherent biodiversity of each specific locality.
The observed correlation between average tempera-
ture and prey abundance introduces a compelling dimen-
sion to our understanding of cat predation. The statistically 
significant positive correlation suggests that temperature 
acts as a key determinant of predatory activities, providing 
potential insights into seasonal variations. The interpreta-
tion of the results implies that temperature may play a sig-
nificant role in influencing prey return frequency; however, 
our study was limited to early spring and under the influence 
of prey activities. The positive correlation may suggest 
that higher temperatures are associated with higher prey 
abundance, possibly due to increased activity, breeding, or 
availability of food sources for the prey species. 
The examination of the frequency of prey return under 
different weather conditions provides additional depth 
to our understanding. The higher number of prey that is 
brought in during clear weather and reduced numbers 
during precipitation align with established behavioural 
patterns of domestic cats (Geary et al., 2022). The aversion 
to hunting in adverse weather conditions, as evidenced by 
the lower frequency of prey return during rainy periods, 
reflects the adaptive nature of cat behaviour. In our study, 
we employed the chi-square test for goodness of fit to 
investigate potential disparities in prey return frequencies 
across distinct weather types. With the null hypothesis 
assuming a random distribution of prey return across 
weather types, the p-value (0,038) suggests that there is 
statistical evidence to reject the null hypothesis. Therefore, 
we conclude that the distribution of prey return is not 
uniform across the different weather types. The observed 
frequencies of prey return in each weather category are 
significantly different from what would be expected if the 
prey return were randomly distributed. The results indicate 
that weather types have a significant impact on the dis-
tribution of prey return, supporting the notion that cats 
may exhibit different (hunting) behaviours under varying 
weather conditions. This information is particularly relevant 
for owners and policymakers alike, as it suggests that 
weather conditions can influence the ecological impact of 
outdoor cats.
The distinct temporal patterns in predation, with 
heightened activity during the night until morning hours 
when the prey was found, present valuable insights into 
the diurnal dynamics of cat behaviour. The statistical sig-
nificance of these temporal variations, confirmed by the 
chi-square test, underscores the importance of consider-
ing daily activity patterns when evaluating the impact of 
domestic cats on local prey populations. Interpreting the 
results, we rejected the null hypothesis, indicating that the 
observed distribution of prey abundance across different 
times of the day is significantly different from what would 
be expected if prey return were evenly distributed. These 
findings highlight the influence of temporal factors on prey 
capture, with mornings being particularly prolific in terms 
of abundance.
While our study has provided valuable insights into the 
predatory behaviours of domestic cats in peri-urban areas, 
it is crucial to acknowledge certain limitations that warrant 
consideration for future research. The current investigation 
was conducted with a specific focus on two locations and 
a relatively short sampling period of 7 weeks. To enhance 
the robustness and generalizability of our findings, it is 
recommended that future research endeavours encompass 
a larger and more diverse sample of owned cats across 
various geographical locations. Additionally, extending the 
sampling period over a more prolonged duration could 
yield a more comprehensive understanding of seasonal 
variations and potential changes in predation patterns over 
time. For a better understanding of the entire ecological 
picture, future studies should also aim to gather information 
on the total population of cats in the studied areas and 
the proportion of those cats that are owned and allowed 
outside. Although some studies suggest that around 
50%–80% of owned cats are allowed outdoors (Loss et al., 
2018; Loss et al., 2013; Loyd et al., 2013), further research 
should be conducted for specific areas. Studies confirm that 
typically, only a fraction of hunted prey is brought back to 
the house or the farm, for instance, 23% (Loyd et al., 2013) 
or 10% (Krauze-Gryz et al., 2019). A more extensive and 
prolonged study is currently ongoing and was launched 
as an MSc work of the first author, coupled with a broader 
demographic perspective, which will not only contribute to 
the refinement of our current insights but also facilitate a 
more nuanced comprehension of the intricate dynamics 
between domestic cats and their surrounding ecosystems.
14
Acta Biologica Slovenica, 2024, 67 (2)
Author Contributions
The authors confirm their contribution to the paper as 
follows: study conception and design: LB, NŠ; data collec-
tion: LB; analysis and interpretation of results: LB, NŠ; draft 
manuscript preparation: LB, NŠ. Both authors reviewed the 
results and approved the final version of the manuscript.
Acknowledgement
The authors thank the anonymous reviewer for helpful 
comments that improved the quality of the manuscript.
Funding
NŠ acknowledges funding within the research program 
P1-0403 (Slovenian Research Agency).
Data Availability
All raw or analyzed data are available from the correspond-
ing author upon reasonable request.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
Animal Protection Act – ZZZiv (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia [Uradni list RS], No. 98/99 of the 3rd of December 1999).
Blancher, P., 2013. Estimated Number of Birds Killed by House Cats (Felis catus) in Canada. Avian Conservation and Ecology, 8(2), 3. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/
ACE-00557-080203
Cecchetti, M., Crowley, S. L., McDonald, J., McDonald, R. A., 2022. Owner-ascribed personality profiles distinguish domestic cats that capture and bring home 
wild animal prey. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 256, 105774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2022.105774 
Churcher, P. B., Lawton, J. H., 1987. Predation by domestic cats in an English village. Journal of Zoology, 212(3), 439-455. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1987.
tb02915.x 
Driscoll, C. A., Clutton-Brock, J., Kitchener, A. C., & O'Brien, S. J., 2009. The Taming of the cat. Genetic and archaeological findings hint that wildcats became 
housecats earlier--and in a different place--than previously thought. Scientific American, 300(6), 68–75.
Eisenhauer, N., 2018. Impacts of free-ranging cats on invertebrates. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 16(5), 262-263. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1805 
Geary, W. L., Wayne, A. F., Tulloch, A. I., Ritchie, E. G., Maxwell, M. A., & Doherty, T. S. (2022). Fox and cat responses to fox baiting intensity, rainfall and prey 
abundance in the Upper Warren, Western Australia. Wildlife Research, 50(3), 201-211.
Hammer, Ø., Harper, D. A., 2001. Past: paleontological statistics software package for educaton and data analysis. Palaeontologia electronica, 4(1), 1.
Krajcarz, M., Krajcarz, M. T., Baca, M., Golubiński, M., Bielichová, Z., Bulatović, J., ... Popović, D., 2022. The history of the domestic cat in Central Europe. Antiquity, 
96(390), 1628-1633. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2022.128 
Krajcarz, M., Krajcarz, M. T., Baca, M., Golubiński, M., Bielichová, Z., Bulatović, J., ... Popović, D., 2022. The history of the domestic cat in Central Europe. Antiquity, 
96(390), 1628-1633. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2022.128 
Krauze-Gryz, D., Gryz, J., Żmihorski, M., 2019. Cats kill millions of vertebrates in Polish farmland annually. Global Ecology and Conservation, 17, e00516. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2018.e00516 
Lepczyk, C. A., Dauphiné, N., Bird, D. M., Conant, S., Cooper, R. J., Duffy, D. C., ... Temple, S. A., 2010. What conservation biologists can do to counter trap-neuter-
return: response to Longcore et al. Conservation Biology, 24(2), 627-629. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01426.x 
Li, Y., Wan, Y., Shen, H., Loss, S. R., Marra, P. P., Li, Z., 2021. Estimates of wildlife killed by free-ranging cats in China. Biological Conservation, 253, 108929. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108929 
Loss, S. R., Marra, P. P., 2017. Population impacts of free-ranging domestic cats on mainland vertebrates. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 15(9), 502-
509. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1633 
Loss, S. R., Will, T., Marra, P. P., 2013. The impact of free-ranging domestic cats on wildlife of the United States. Nature Communications, 4(1), 1-8. https://doi.
org/10.1038/ncomms2380 
Loss, S. R., Will, T., Longcore, T., Marra, P. P., 2018. Responding to misinformation and criticisms regarding United States cat predation estimates. Biological 
Invasions, 20(12), 3385-3396.
Loyd, K. A. T., Hernandez, S. M., Carroll, J. P., Abernathy, K. J., Marshall, G. J., 2013. Quantifying free-roaming domestic cat predation using animal-borne video 
cameras. Biological Conservation, 160, 183-189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.01.008 
Medina, F. M., García, R., 2007. Predation of insects by feral cats (Felis silvestris catus L., 1758) on an oceanic island (La Palma, Canary Island). Journal of Insect 
Conservation, 11, 203-207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10841-006-9036-7 
Medina, F. M., Bonnaud, E., Vidal, E., Tershy, B. R., Zavaleta, E. S., Josh Donlan, C., ... Nogales, M., 2011. A global review of the impacts of invasive cats on island 
endangered vertebrates. Global Change Biology, 17(11), 3503-3510. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02464.x 
15
Acta Biologica Slovenica, 2024, 67 (2)
Nogales, M., Medina, F. M., 2009. Trophic ecology of feral cats (Felis silvestris f. catus) in the main environments of an oceanic archipelago (Canary Islands): An 
updated approach. Mammalian Biology, 74, 169-181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2008.10.002 
Pirie, T. J., Thomas, R. L., Fellowes, M. D., 2022. Pet cats (Felis catus) from urban boundaries use different habitats, have larger home ranges and kill more prey 
than cats from the suburbs. Landscape and Urban Planning, 220, 104338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104338 
Tattersall, F. H., Macdonald, D. W., Hart, B. J., Manley, W. J., & Feber, R. E. (2001). Habitat use by wood mice (Apodemus sylvaticus) in a changeable arable 
landscape. Journal of Zoology, 255(4), 487-494.
Todesco, M., Pascual, M. A., Owens, G. L., Ostevik, K. L., Moyers, B. T., Hübner, S., ... Rieseberg, L. H., 2016. Hybridization and extinction. Evolutionary applications, 
9(7), 892-908. https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.12367 
Trouwborst, A., McCormack, P. C., Martínez Camacho, E., 2020. Domestic cats and their impacts on biodiversity: A blind spot in the application of nature 
conservation law. People and Nature, 2(1), 235-250. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10073 
Wang, M., & Grimm, V. (2007). Home range dynamics and population regulation: an individual-based model of the common shrew Sorex araneus. Ecological 
Modelling, 205(3-4), 397-409.
Woods, M., McDonald, R. A., Harris, S., 2003. Predation of wildlife by domestic cats Felis catus in Great Britain. Mammal review, 33(2), 174-188. https://doi.
org/10.1046/j.1365-2907.2003.00017.x