OmicsDI
0 Reanalyses
Omics score: 0
Camera Traps on Wildlife Crossing Structures as a Tool in Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) Management - Five-Years Monitoring of Wolf Abundance Trends in Croatia.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: The conservation of gray wolf (Canis lupus) and its coexistence with humans presents a challenge and requires continuous monitoring and management efforts. One of the non-invasive methods that produces high-quality wolf monitoring datasets is camera trapping. We present a novel monitoring approach where camera traps are positioned on wildlife crossing structures that channel the animals, thereby increasing trapping success and increasing the cost-efficiency of the method. In this way we have followed abundance trends of five wolf packs whose home ranges are intersected by a motorway which spans throughout the wolf distribution range in Croatia. During the five-year monitoring of six green bridges we have recorded 28 250 camera-events, 132 with wolves. Four viaducts were monitored for two years, recording 4914 camera-events, 185 with wolves. We have detected a negative abundance trend of the monitored Croatian wolf packs since 2011, especially severe in the northern part of the study area. Further, we have pinpointed the legal cull as probable major negative influence on the wolf pack abundance trends (linear regression, r2 > 0.75, P < 0.05). Using the same approach we did not find evidence for a negative impact of wolves on the prey populations, both wild ungulates and livestock. We encourage strict protection of wolf in Croatia until there is more data proving population stability. In conclusion, quantitative methods, such as the one presented here, should be used as much as possible when assessing wolf abundance trends.
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4915698 | BioStudies |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies
Json Xml
Estimation of pack density in grey wolf (<i>Canis lupus</i>) by applying spatially explicit capture-recapture models to camera trap data supported by genetic monitoring.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Density estimation is a key issue in wildlife management but is particularly challenging and labour-intensive for elusive species. Recently developed approaches based on remotely collected data and capture-recapture models, though representing a valid alternative to more traditional methods, have found little application to species with limited morphological variation. We implemented a camera trap capture-recapture study to survey wolf packs in a 560-km<sup>2</sup> area of Central Italy. Individual recognition of focal animals (alpha) in the packs was possible by relying on morphological and behavioural traits and was validated by non-invasive genotyping and inter-observer agreement tests. Two types (Bayesian and likelihood-based) of spatially explicit capture-recapture (SCR) models were fitted on wolf pack capture histories, thus obtaining an estimation of pack density in the area.<h4>Results</h4>In two sessions of camera trapping surveys (2014 and 2015), we detected a maximum of 12 wolf packs. A Bayesian model implementing a half-normal detection function without a trap-specific response provided the most robust result, corresponding to a density of 1.21?±?0.27 packs/100 km<sup>2</sup> in 2015. Average pack size varied from 3.40 (summer 2014, excluding pups and lone-transient wolves) to 4.17 (late winter-spring 2015, excluding lone-transient wolves).<h4>Conclusions</h4>We applied for the first time a camera-based SCR approach in wolves, providing the first robust estimate of wolf pack density for an area of Italy. We showed that this method is applicable to wolves under the following conditions: <i>i</i>) the existence of sufficient phenotypic/behavioural variation and the recognition of focal individuals (i.e. alpha, verified by non-invasive genotyping); <i>ii</i>) the investigated area is sufficiently large to include a minimum number of packs (ideally 10); <i>iii</i>) a pilot study is carried out to pursue an adequate sampling design and to train operators on individual wolf recognition. We believe that replicating this approach in other areas can allow for an assessment of density variation across the wolf range and would provide a reliable reference parameter for ecological studies.
| S-EPMC6171198 | BioStudies
Can occupancy-abundance models be used to monitor wolf abundance?
Project description:Estimating the abundance of wild carnivores is of foremost importance for conservation and management. However, given their elusive habits, direct observations of these animals are difficult to obtain, so abundance is more commonly estimated from sign surveys or radio-marked individuals. These methods can be costly and difficult, particularly in large areas with heavy forest cover. As an alternative, recent research has suggested that wolf abundance can be estimated from occupancy-abundance curves derived from "virtual" surveys of simulated wolf track networks. Although potentially more cost-effective, the utility of this approach hinges on its robustness to violations of its assumptions. We assessed the sensitivity of the occupancy-abundance approach to four assumptions: variation in wolf movement rates, changes in pack cohesion, presence of lone wolves, and size of survey units. Our simulations showed that occupancy rates and wolf pack abundances were biased high if track surveys were conducted when wolves made long compared to short movements, wolf packs were moving as multiple hunting units as opposed to a cohesive pack, and lone wolves were moving throughout the surveyed landscape. We also found that larger survey units (400 and 576 km2) were more robust to changes in these factors than smaller survey units (36 and 144 km2). However, occupancy rates derived from large survey units rapidly reached an asymptote at 100% occupancy, suggesting that these large units are inappropriate for areas with moderate to high wolf densities (>15 wolves/1,000 km2). Virtually-derived occupancy-abundance relationships can be a useful method for monitoring wolves and other elusive wildlife if applied within certain constraints, in particular biological knowledge of the surveyed species needs to be incorporated into the design of the occupancy surveys. Further, we suggest that the applicability of this method could be extended by directly incorporating some of its assumptions into the modelling framework.
How the west was won: genetic reconstruction of rapid wolf recolonization into Germany's anthropogenic landscapes.
Project description:Following massive persecution and eradication, strict legal protection facilitated a successful reestablishment of wolf packs in Germany, which has been ongoing since 2000. Here, we describe this recolonization process by mitochondrial DNA control-region sequencing, microsatellite genotyping and sex identification based on 1341 mostly non-invasively collected samples. We reconstructed the genealogy of German wolf packs between 2005 and 2015 to provide information on trends in genetic diversity, dispersal patterns and pack dynamics during the early expansion process. Our results indicate signs of a founder effect at the start of the recolonization. Genetic diversity in German wolves is moderate compared to other European wolf populations. Although dispersal among packs is male-biased in the sense that females are more philopatric, dispersal distances are similar between males and females once only dispersers are accounted for. Breeding with close relatives is regular and none of the six male wolves originating from the Italian/Alpine population reproduced. However, moderate genetic diversity and inbreeding levels of the recolonizing population are preserved by high sociality, dispersal among packs and several immigration events. Our results demonstrate an ongoing, rapid and natural wolf population expansion in an intensively used cultural landscape in Central Europe.
Finding wolf homesites: improving the efficacy of howl surveys to study wolves.
Project description:Locating wolf (Canis lupus) homesites is valuable for understanding the foraging behavior, population dynamics, and reproductive ecology of wolves during summer. During this period wolf pack members (adults and pups) readily respond to simulated wolf howls (i.e., howl surveys), which allows researchers to estimate the location of the homesite via triangulation. Confirming the actual locations of homesites via ground truthing is labor intensive because of the error surrounding estimated locations. Our objectives were (1) to quantify observer error during howl surveys and compare amongst experience levels, (2) provide a simple method for locating homesites in the field by incorporating observer error, and (3) further document the value of this method for monitoring wolf packs throughout the summer. We located 17 homesites by howl surveys during 2015-2017 in the Greater Voyageurs Ecosystem, Minnesota, USA. Of 62 bearings taken by observers during howl surveys, bearings erred by an average of 7.6° ± 6.3° (SD). There was no difference in observer error between novice and experienced observers. A simple way to increase efficiency when searching for homesites is to search concentric areas (bands) based on estimated observer error, specifically by: (1) adding ±10° error bands around howl survey bearings when ?3 bearings can be obtained, (2) ±10° and ±20° error bands when 2 bearings are obtained, and (3) ±10° and ±26° error bands when 1 bearing is obtained. By incorporating observer error and understanding how frequently and how far wolves move homesites, it is possible to monitor wolf packs and confirm most, if not all, homesites used by a pack from at least June until August without having a collared individual in a pack.
How climate impacts the composition of wolf-killed elk in northern Yellowstone National Park.
Project description:While the functional response of predators is commonly measured, recent work has revealed that the age and sex composition of prey killed is often a better predictor of prey population dynamics because the reproductive value of adult females is usually higher than that of males or juveniles. Climate is often an important mediating factor in determining the composition of predator kills, but we currently lack a mechanistic understanding of how the multiple facets of climate interact with prey abundance and demography to influence the composition of predator kills. Over 20 winters, we monitored 17 wolf packs in Yellowstone National Park and recorded the sex, age and nutritional condition of kills of their dominant prey-elk-in both early and late winter periods when elk are in relatively good and relatively poor condition, respectively. Nutritional condition (as indicated by per cent marrow fat) of wolf-killed elk varied markedly with summer plant productivity, snow water equivalent (SWE) and winter period. Moreover, marrow was poorer for wolf-killed bulls and especially for calves than it was for cows. Wolf prey composition was influenced by a complex set of climatic and endogenous variables. In early winter, poor plant growth in either year t or t - 1, or relatively low elk abundance, increased the odds of wolves killing bulls relative to cows. Calves were most likely to get killed when elk abundance was high and when the forage productivity they experienced in utero was poor. In late winter, low SWE and a relatively large elk population increased the odds of wolves killing calves relative to cows, whereas low SWE and poor vegetation productivity 1 year prior together increased the likelihood of wolves killing a bull instead of a cow. Since climate has a strong influence on whether wolves prey on cows (who, depending on their age, are the key reproductive components of the population) or lower reproductive value of calves and bulls, our results suggest that climate can drive wolf predation to be more or less additive from year to year.
Competition between apex predators? Brown bears decrease wolf kill rate on two continents.
Project description:Trophic interactions are a fundamental topic in ecology, but we know little about how competition between apex predators affects predation, the mechanism driving top-down forcing in ecosystems. We used long-term datasets from Scandinavia (Europe) and Yellowstone National Park (North America) to evaluate how grey wolf (Canis lupus) kill rate was affected by a sympatric apex predator, the brown bear (Ursus arctos). We used kill interval (i.e. the number of days between consecutive ungulate kills) as a proxy of kill rate. Although brown bears can monopolize wolf kills, we found no support in either study system for the common assumption that they cause wolves to kill more often. On the contrary, our results showed the opposite effect. In Scandinavia, wolf packs sympatric with brown bears killed less often than allopatric packs during both spring (after bear den emergence) and summer. Similarly, the presence of bears at wolf-killed ungulates was associated with wolves killing less often during summer in Yellowstone. The consistency in results between the two systems suggests that brown bear presence actually reduces wolf kill rate. Our results suggest that the influence of predation on lower trophic levels may depend on the composition of predator communities.
Fear or food - abundance of red fox in relation to occurrence of lynx and wolf.
Project description:Apex predators may affect mesopredators through intraguild predation and/or supply of carrion from their prey, causing a trade-off between avoidance and attractiveness. We used wildlife triangle snow-tracking data to investigate the abundance of red fox (Vulpes vulpes) in relation to lynx (Lynx lynx) and wolf (Canis lupus) occurrence as well as land composition and vole (Microtus spp.) density. Data from the Swedish wolf-monitoring system and VHF/GPS-collared wolves were used to study the effect of wolf pack size and time since wolf territory establishment on fox abundance. Bottom-up processes were more influential than top-down effects as the proportion of arable land was the key indicator of fox abundance at the landscape level. At this spatial scale, there was no effect of wolf abundance on fox abundance, whereas lynx abundance had a positive effect. In contrast, at the wolf territory level there was a negative effect of wolves on fox abundance when including detailed information of pack size and time since territory establishment, whereas there was no effect of lynx abundance. This study shows that different apex predator species may affect mesopredator abundance in different ways and that the results may be dependent on the spatiotemporal scale and resolution of the data.
Behavioral response of naive and non-naive deer to wolf urine.
Project description:Large carnivores are recolonizing many regions in Europe, where their ungulate prey have lived without them for >150 years. Whether the returning large carnivores will modify ungulate behavior and indirectly affect lower trophic levels, depends on the ability of ungulates to recognize risk based on past encounters and cues indicating carnivore presence. In two case studies, we tested, by means of camera trapping, the behavioral response of deer to wolf urine. The first case study was in the Netherlands where deer (still) live in absence of wolves, and the second in Poland with long-term wolf presence. As controls we used water (no scent) and all-purpose soap (unfamiliar scent). Deer vigilance level on control plots was 20% in both case studies indicating that wolf occupancy per se does not lead to a consistent difference in behavior. Placing wolf urine did not significantly affect deer behavior in either the wolf-absent or the wolf-present area. More intense cues, or a combination of cues, are likely needed to affect deer behavior. Moreover, we found an unexpected reaction of deer towards all-purpose soap of reduced foraging (and tendency for increased vigilance) in the wolf-present area, whereas it did not affect deer behavior in the wolf-absent area. We hypothesize that deer associate all-purpose soap with human presence, causing no response in human-dominated landscapes (the Netherlands), but triggering a behavioral reaction in more remote areas (Poland). This illustrates attention should be paid to controls used in scent experiments as they may be associated differently than intended.
Effect of sociality and season on gray wolf (Canis lupus) foraging behavior: implications for estimating summer kill rate.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Understanding how kill rates vary among seasons is required to understand predation by vertebrate species living in temperate climates. Unfortunately, kill rates are only rarely estimated during summer.<h4>Methodology/principal findings</h4>For several wolf packs in Yellowstone National Park, we used pairs of collared wolves living in the same pack and the double-count method to estimate the probability of attendance (PA) for an individual wolf at a carcass. PA quantifies an important aspect of social foraging behavior (i.e., the cohesiveness of foraging). We used PA to estimate summer kill rates for packs containing GPS-collared wolves between 2004 and 2009. Estimated rates of daily prey acquisition (edible biomass per wolf) decreased from 8.4±0.9 kg (mean ± SE) in May to 4.1±0.4 kg in July. Failure to account for PA would have resulted in underestimating kill rate by 32%. PA was 0.72±0.05 for large ungulate prey and 0.46±0.04 for small ungulate prey. To assess seasonal differences in social foraging behavior, we also evaluated PA during winter for VHF-collared wolves between 1997 and 2009. During winter, PA was 0.95±0.01. PA was not influenced by prey size but was influenced by wolf age and pack size.<h4>Conclusions/significance</h4>Our results demonstrate that seasonal patterns in the foraging behavior of social carnivores have important implications for understanding their social behavior and estimating kill rates. Synthesizing our findings with previous insights suggests that there is important seasonal variation in how and why social carnivores live in groups. Our findings are also important for applications of GPS collars to estimate kill rates. Specifically, because the factors affecting the PA of social carnivores likely differ between seasons, kill rates estimated through GPS collars should account for seasonal differences in social foraging behavior.
Whole-genome analyses provide no evidence for dog introgression in Fennoscandian wolf populations.
Project description:Hybridization and admixture can threaten the genetic integrity of populations and be of particular concern to endangered species. Hybridization between grey wolves and dogs has been documented in many wolf populations worldwide and is a prominent example of human-mediated hybridization between a domesticated species and its wild relative. We analysed whole-genome sequences from >200 wolves and >100 dogs to study admixture in Fennoscandian wolf populations. A principal component analysis of genetic variation and admixture showed that wolves and dogs were well-separated, without evidence for introgression. Analyses of local ancestry revealed that wolves had <1% mixed ancestry, levels comparable to the degree of mixed ancestry in many dogs, and likely not resulting from recent wolf-dog hybridization. We also show that the founders of the Scandinavian wolf population were genetically inseparable from Finnish and Russian Karelian wolves, pointing at the geographical origin of contemporary Scandinavian wolves. Moreover, we found Scandinavian-born animals among wolves sampled in Finland, demonstrating bidirectional gene flow between the Scandinavian Peninsula and eastern countries. The low incidence of admixture between wolves and dogs in Fennoscandia may be explained by the fact that feral dogs are rare in this part of Europe and that careful monitoring and management act to remove hybrids before they backcross into wolf populations.
OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure
OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›
OmicsDI Databases
PeptideAtlas
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective
MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub
ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas