| 1. |
- Chapron, Guillaume, et al.
(författare)
-
Habitat segregation between brown bears and gray wolves in a human-dominated landscape
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Ecology and Evolution. - : Wiley. - 2045-7758. ; 8, s. 11450-11466
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Identifying how sympatric species belonging to the same guild coexist is a major question of community ecology and conservation. Habitat segregation between two species might help reduce the effects of interspecific competition and apex predators are of special interest in this context, because their interactions can have consequences for lower trophic levels. However, habitat segregation between sympatric large carnivores has seldom been studied. Based on monitoring of 53 brown bears (Ursus arctos) and seven sympatric adult gray wolves (Canis lupus) equipped with GPS collars in Sweden, we analyzed the degree of interspecific segregation in habitat selection within their home ranges in both late winter and spring, when their diets overlap the most. We used the K-select method, a multivariate approach that relies on the concept of ecological niche, and randomization methods to quantify habitat segregation between bears and wolves. Habitat segregation between bears and wolves was greater than expected by chance. Wolves tended to select for moose occurrence, young forests, and rugged terrain more than bears, which likely reflects the different requirements of an omnivore (bear) and an obligate carnivore (wolf). However, both species generally avoided human-related habitats during daytime. Disentangling the mechanisms that can drive interspecific interactions at different spatial scales is essential for understanding how sympatric large carnivores occur and coexist in human-dominated landscapes, and how coexistence may affect lower trophic levels. The individual variation in habitat selection detected in our study may be a relevant mechanism to overcome intraguild competition and facilitate coexistence.
|
|
| 2. |
- Jonzén, Niclas, et al.
(författare)
-
Sharing the bounty-Adjusting harvest to predator return in the Scandinavian human-wolf-bear-moose system
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Ecological Modelling. - : Elsevier BV. - 0304-3800 .- 1872-7026. ; 265, s. 140-148
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The increase and range extension of wolves (Canis lupus L) and brown bears ( Ursus arctos L) in Scandinavia inevitably impacts moose (Alces alces L.) populations and, as a consequence, the size and composition of the hunter harvest must be adjusted. We used a sex- and age-structured moose population model to delineate optimal harvest strategies under predation and to compare the resulting harvest composition with the strategy commonly implemented in practice. We examined how much moose density or adult sex ratio needs to change to fully compensate for losses to predation. We found a harvest allocation pattern in commonly used practical management across calves, bulls and cows that indicated a trade-off strategy between maximising the number of shot moose, the yield biomass and the number of shot prime bulls. This strategy performed quite well with respect to all yield measures and yielded an age structure most similar to the strategies maximising harvest biomass and prime bulls. Unless predation pressure was very high, the harvest loss could be completely compensated for by allowing a higher moose density. In other situations the current hunting strategy was not possible to implement and the moose density needed to sustain predation even without hunting increases dramatically. An alternative option to balance the predation loss was to accept a more female-biased sex ratio in the winter population. Hence, it may be possible to keep 50% calves in the harvest and still obtain the same total harvest if the proportion of bulls in the harvest is increased to compensate for predation. The increase of large carnivores competing with moose hunting creates conflicts and will inevitably reduce harvest yield unless hunting strategies change. We show how increased moose density and redistribution of the harvest towards bulls can mitigate this conflict and we provide a web-based tool, where stakeholders can compare the long-term effects of alternative management decisions and eventually adjust their hunting strategy accordingly. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
