![]() Holling CS (1959) The components of predation as revealed by a study of small- mammal predation of the European pine sawfly. Hijmans RJ, van Etter J, Cheng J et al (2017) Geographic data analysis and modeling. Hebblewhite M, Merrill EH, McDonald TL (2005) Spatial decomposition of predation risk using resource selection functions: an example in a wolf–elk predator–prey system. Hebblewhite M, Pletscher DH (2002) Effects of elk group size on predation by wolves. Hammond JI, Luttbeg B, Sih A (2007) Predator and prey space use: dragonflies and tadpoles in an interactive game. Garrott RA, Bruggeman JE, Becker MS et al (2007) Evaluating prey switching in wolf-ungulate systems. įieberg J, Signer J, Smith B, Avgar T (2021) A ‘How to’ guide for interpreting parameters in habitat-selection analyses. įagan WF, Lewis MA, Auger-Méthé M et al (2013) Spatial memory and animal movement. ĭickie M, Serrouya R, Avgar T et al (2022) Resource exploitation efficiency collapses the home range of an apex predator. J Anim Ecol 63:644–652ĭavidson Z, Valeix M, Loveridge AJ et al (2012) Environmental determinants of habitat and kill site selection in a large carnivore: scale matters. ĭale BW, Adams LG, Bowyer RT (1994) Functional response of wolves preying on barren-ground caribou in a multiple-prey ecosystem. J Mammal 93:716–721Ĭreel S, Winnie J Jr, Maxwell B et al (2005) Elk alter habitat selection as an antipredator response to wolves. Ĭastillo DF, Vidal EML, Casanave EB et al (2012) Habitat selection of Molina’s hog-nosed skunks in relation to prey abundance in the Pampas grassland of Argentina. Canadian Wildlife ServiceĬarbyn LN (1983) Wolf predation on Elk in riding mountain national park Manitoba. Ĭarbyn LN (1980) Ecology and management of wolves in Riding Mountain National Park, Manitoba. ījørneraas K, Solberg EJ, Herfindal I et al (2011) Moose Alces alces habitat use at multiple temporal scales in a human-altered landscape. īergman EJ, Garrott RA, Creel S et al (2006) Assessment of prey vulnerability through analysis of wolf movements and kill sites. Van Beest FM, McLoughlin PD, Vander Wal E, Brook RK (2014) Density-dependent habitat selection and partitioning between two sympatric ungulates. īates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. īalme G, Hunter L, Slotow R (2007) Feeding habitat selection by hunting leopards Panthera pardus in a woodland savanna: prey catchability versus abundance. J Mammal 40:420–424Īndruskiw M, Fryxell JM, Thompson ID, Baker JA (2008) Habitat-mediated variation in predation risk by the American marten. Īltmann M (1959) Group dynamics in wyoming moose during the rutting season. We illustrate that of the three hypotheses the primary driver was prey catchability, where the interplay of both prey habitat with catchability culminate in predator spatial behaviour in a multiprey system.Īarts G, Fieberg J, Matthiopoulos J (2012) Comparative interpretation of count, presence–absence and point methods for species distribution models. Counter to our predictions, wolves avoided areas of moose and elk density, likely highlighting the ongoing space race between predator and prey. Wolves selected for the catchability of elk, their secondary prey, but not elk habitat. Wolves used spaces described by the intersection of moose habitat and moose catchability. For moose, their primary prey, wolves employed a mixed habitat and catchability tactic. We reveal support for both the prey habitat and prey catchability hypotheses. We evaluated wolf selection for prey density, habitat selection and catchability on the landscape through within-territory habitat selection analysis. We conducted a study on 17 GPS collared wolves in 6 packs in Riding Mountain National Park, Manitoba, Canada where wolves prey on moose ( Alces alces) and elk ( Cervus canadensis). The gray wolf ( Canis lupus) is a generalist predator that likely employs more than one spatial hunting tactic to match their diverse prey with distinct distributions and behavior that are available. ![]() ![]() Three hypotheses describe spatial tactics: prey abundance for prey that are aggregated in space prey habitat for uniformly distributed prey and prey catchability for prey that are difficult to catch and kill. Predators use different spatial tactics to track the prey on the landscape.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |