Study
The Serengeti Lion: A Study of Predator-Prey Relations
Schaller, George B.
University of Chicago Press, 1972
The founding field study of lion ecology: three years of continuous observation of Serengeti prides covering social organisation, hunting, prey selection, cub survival and the relationship with other large carnivores.
- Studied in
- Panthera leo, Crocuta crocuta
- Sample size
- three years of continuous field observation in the Serengeti
Established the basic account of pride structure, territoriality, hunting behaviour and predator-prey dynamics that later work refined. Documented substantial scavenging by lions, including from hyenas, and recorded activity budgets showing lions inactive for around twenty hours a day.
What it means
The authors' reading, and ours. Where they differ, that difference is the point.
How the authors put it
Lion ecology is shaped by the energetics of large prey and by competition with other carnivores as much as by hunting ability.
How NatureHQ reads it
Cited because so much of what circulates about lions traces to this book, including one thing it got right that everyone assumes it got wrong. Schaller recorded that lions steal a great deal of food from hyenas — reversing the popular image — and that the two species take carcasses from one another in both directions depending on numbers. He also recorded the twenty-hour inactivity figure that is now quoted everywhere, usually as "lions sleep twenty hours a day", which is not what inactive means.
- One ecosystem over three years, subsequently extended by decades of continuous work.
- Predates the long-term individual records that established coalition and takeover dynamics.
- Activity budgets were scored by observation and record inactivity rather than sleep.
What this study is used for on NatureHQ
One study can inform several subjects. Here is everywhere this one is cited.
Published by: Academic book publishersPublished as an academic monograph.
Search for this paper by title and author
Reference details for this record were entered editorially and have not been confirmed against a bibliographic register. The title, authors, journal and year are enough to locate the paper; we would rather say this than publish an identifier we have not verified.
A note on this reference: Unresolved: title 97%, author NOT matched, year near; single register (crossref); recorded year 1972 vs register 1973; a register was unreachable on this run — witnessed today by crossref
NatureHQ summarises research in its own words and does not reproduce published text. Reviewed 2026-08-11.