Calving and post-calving habitat use of female moose in two contrasting landscapes

Melin, Markus; Matala, Juho; Pusenius, Jyrki; Packalen, Tuula

doi:10.2981/wlb.00569

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 43 publications

(86 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Alternatively, these stands could also provide shelter from high temperature and intense solar radiation during the warm season (Dussault et al., 2004 ). In areas where moose cohabit with wolves, female moose and their calves also favor conifer forests that lower predation risk or predator efficiency (Alaska: Bowyer et al., 2001 ; Quebec: Dussault, Ouellet, et al., 2005 ; Finland: Melin et al., 2019 ). Although there have been no wolves in our study area for ~170 years, black bears and coyotes, known to predate moose neonates (Ballard & Van Ballenberghe, 2007 ; Patterson & Messier, 2003 ), are relatively abundant and certainly shape habitat selection patterns of moose.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal variations in female moose responses to roads and logging in the absence of wolves

Gagnon,

Lesmerises,

St‐Laurent

2024

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animal movements, needed to acquire food resources, avoid predation risk, and find breeding partners, are influenced by annual and circadian cycles. Decisions related to movement reflect a quest to maximize benefits while limiting costs, especially in heterogeneous landscapes. Predation by wolves (Canis lupus) has been identified as the major driver of moose (Alces alces) habitat selection patterns, and linear features have been shown to increase wolf efficiency to travel, hunt, and kill prey. However, few studies have described moose behavioral response to roads and logging in Canada in the absence of wolves. We thus characterized temporal changes (i.e., day phases and biological periods) in eastern moose (Alces alces americana) habitat selection and space use patterns near a road network in a wolf‐free area located south of the St. Lawrence River (eastern Canada). We used telemetry data collected on 18 females between 2017 and 2019 to build resource selection functions and mixed linear regressions to explain variations in habitat selection patterns, home‐range size, and movement rates. Female moose selected forest stands providing forage when movement was not impeded by snow cover (i.e., spring/green‐up, summer/rearing, fall/rut) and stands offering protection against incidental predation during calving. In winter, home‐range size decreased with an increasing proportion of stands providing food and shelter against harsh weather, limiting the energetic costs associated with movement. Our results reaffirmed the year‐round aversive effect of roads, even in the absence of wolves, but the magnitude of this avoidance differed between day phases, being lower during the “dusk‐night‐dawn” phase, perhaps due to a lower level of human activity on and near roads. Female moose behavior in our study area was similar to what was observed in landscapes where moose and wolves cohabit, suggesting that the risk associated with humans, perceived as another type of predator, and with incidental predators (coyote Canis latrans, black bear Ursus americanus), equates that of wolf predation in heavily managed landscapes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal variations in female moose responses to roads and logging in the absence of wolves

Gagnon,

Lesmerises,

St‐Laurent

2024

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lastly, our movement-based approach is unable to identify parturition promptly enough to aid in neonate capture, and thus it is not a direct alternative to using VITs when the study objective is collaring neonates. Several researchers have examined GPS relocation data to infer parturition and capture neonates on the ground [43,75] as well as identify calving habitat [47,48], but all used a relatively fine fix rate (one fix every ≤ 4 h). Also, as we did not consistently observe long distance preparturition movements in our study animals, identifying parturition based upon visual observation alone would have been difficult during the first few days of life for the neonate.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the use of VITs has the potential to improve estimates of neonatal and fetal survival, their invasive nature and the cost of deploying them [40][41][42][43] have prompted researchers to use advances in Global Positioning System (GPS) telemetry to develop methods that identify changes in movement and space use metrics to determine parturition and birth sites [41,44,45]. Changes in movement patterns prior to and after parturition are well-documented in cervids, including moose (Alces alces) [46][47][48], mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) [43,49], caribou (Rangifer tarandus) [41,44,50], and elk (Cervus canadensis) [51,52].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using low-fix rate GPS telemetry to expand estimates of ungulate reproductive success

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Population parameters such as reproductive success are critical for sustainably managing ungulate populations, however obtaining these data is often difficult, expensive, and invasive. Movement-based methods that leverage Global Positioning System (GPS) relocation data to identify parturition offer an alternative to more invasive techniques such as vaginal implant transmitters, but thus far have only been applied to relocation data with a relatively fine (one fix every < 8 h) temporal resolution. We employed a machine learning method to classify parturition/calf survival in cow elk in southeastern Kentucky, USA, using 13-h GPS relocation data and three simple movement metrics, training a random forest on cows that successfully reared their calf to a week old. Results We developed a decision rule based upon a predicted probability threshold across individual cow time series, accurately classifying 89.5% (51/57) of cows with a known reproductive status. When used to infer status of cows whose reproductive outcome was unknown, we classified 48.6% (21/38) as successful, compared to 85.1% (40/47) of known-status cows. Conclusions While our approach was limited primarily by fix acquisition success, we demonstrated that coarse collar fix rates did not limit inference if appropriate movement metrics are chosen. Movement-based methods for determining parturition in ungulates may allow wildlife managers to extract more vital rate information from GPS collars even if technology and related data quality are constrained by cost.

show abstract

“…Female moose select for coniferous and peatland forest stands that provide both food and cover and avoid open terrain during the calving season [45,56,57]. Both high and low predatory bears also selected habitats closer to wetlands, deciduous forests, coniferous forests, and old clear cuts during the moose calving period and avoided habitats closer to open areas, therefore mirroring to a large extent the habitat types selected by moose.…”

Section: Differences In Habitat Selection Between Low and High Predat...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Habitat Selection by Brown Bears with Varying Levels of Predation Rates on Ungulate Neonates

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In northern Eurasia, large carnivores overlap with semi-domestic reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) and moose (Alces alces). In Scandinavia, previous studies have quantified brown bear (Ursus arctos) spring predation on neonates of reindeer (mostly in May) and moose (mostly in June). We explored if habitat selection by brown bears changed following resource pulses and whether these changes are more pronounced on those individuals characterised by higher predatory behaviour. Fifteen brown bears in northern Sweden (2010–2012) were fitted with GPS proximity collars, and 2585 female reindeers were collared with UHF transmitters. Clusters of bear positions were visited to investigate moose and reindeer predation. Bear kill rates and home ranges were calculated to examine bear movements and predatory behaviour. Bear habitat selection was modelled using resource selection functions over four periods (pre-calving, reindeer calving, moose calving, and post-calving). Coefficients of selection for areas closer to different land cover classes across periods were compared, examining the interactions between different degrees of predatory behaviour (i.e., high and low). Bear habitat selection differed throughout the periods and between low and high predatory bears. Differences among individuals’ predatory behaviour are reflected in the selection of habitat types, providing empirical evidence that different levels of specialization in foraging behaviour helps to explain individual variation in bear habitat selection.

show abstract

Calving and post-calving habitat use of female moose in two contrasting landscapes

Abstract: BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses.

Cited by 6 publications

References 43 publications

Temporal variations in female moose responses to roads and logging in the absence of wolves

Temporal variations in female moose responses to roads and logging in the absence of wolves

Using low-fix rate GPS telemetry to expand estimates of ungulate reproductive success

Habitat Selection by Brown Bears with Varying Levels of Predation Rates on Ungulate Neonates

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About