2003
DOI: 10.2981/wlb.2003.054
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison of age estimation methods for the saiga antelope Saiga tatarica

Abstract: Age estimation is particularly crucial for the conservation of the saiga antelope Saiga tatarica, but modern laboratory methods for aging have not previously been applied to this species. There is an urgent need for evaluation of the techniques that could be used for age estimation in order that long‐term ecological data sets can be correctly interpreted and conservation advice given. We evaluated the repeatability, practical feasibility and comparability of three techniques for age estimation of saiga antelop… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The only exceptions to this were calves in particularly dense areas of the aggregation for which litter size could not be unambiguously determined (2004, nZ16; 2005, nZ209); these were subsequently excluded from analyses involving litter size. Calves were aged using a combination of behavioural and physiological indicators designed and tested during past saiga fieldwork (Lundervold 2001;Lundervold et al 2003). Owing to the non-invasive sampling methods, employed because of the conservation status of the species, no data on individual adult females were obtained.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The only exceptions to this were calves in particularly dense areas of the aggregation for which litter size could not be unambiguously determined (2004, nZ16; 2005, nZ209); these were subsequently excluded from analyses involving litter size. Calves were aged using a combination of behavioural and physiological indicators designed and tested during past saiga fieldwork (Lundervold 2001;Lundervold et al 2003). Owing to the non-invasive sampling methods, employed because of the conservation status of the species, no data on individual adult females were obtained.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Adult/juvenile status was determined by sight using head proportions and tooth eruption. This two-level age estimation in the field was shown to be accurate when compared with reliable age estimation using tooth eruption and wear (Lundervold, Langvatn & Milner-Gulland, 2003). On average 69.5 AE 5.5 (SE) females with known age and litter size were recorded from the spring cull per year and population for 42 years in total (except that 460 females were culled in the north-west Pre-Caspian in 1958).…”
Section: Saiga Embryo Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, data at the individual level were available from the Betpak-dala population (n =651 females; Fadeev & Sludskii, 1982;K¨uhl et al, 2007). For a subset, jaws were collected for detailed age estimation using tooth eruption and tooth wear analysis (n =651; Lundervold et al, 2003) and gutted body mass was measured using a hanging balance in Betpak-dala, Kazakhstan during 1966Kazakhstan during -1978.…”
Section: Saiga Embryo Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, sport hunting can also play a role in driving species declines in some areas, as has been observed for elephants (Selier, Page, Vanak, & Slotow, 2014), leopards (Pitman, Swanepoel, Hunter, Slotow, & Balme, 2015) and lions (Bauer et al, 2015). An animal's age is a common metric used to guide the sustainable harvest and management of a number of species throughout the world (Berkeley, Hixon, Larson, & Love, 2004;Garel, Cugnasse, Hewison, & Maillard, 2006;Gipson, Ballard, Nowak, & Mech, 2000;Hiller, 2014;Lundervold & Langvatn, 2003). Simulation modelling studies recently identified the implementation of age restrictions on trophy harvests as a promising method for regulating sustainable sport hunting of large carnivores, including African lions (Creel et al, 2016;Packer et al, 2009;Whitman, Starfield, Quadling, & Packer, 2004).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%