1995
DOI: 10.2307/3809108
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differential Effects of Coyotes and Red Foxes on Duck Nest Success

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
68
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 146 publications
(69 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
68
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, Sovada et al (1995) found that nest success of ground-nesting duck species in the prairie pothole region of North America was greater in areas of coyote abundance and than in areas of red fox (Vulpes vulpes) abundance; coyotes apparently actively reduced red fox abundance (an important mesopredator on duck nests). Soule et al (1988) working in the chaparral ecosystem in California found higher bird species diversity (possibly re¯ecting lower predation on adults and nests of bird species) in areas with coyotes present than in areas without coyotes.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, Sovada et al (1995) found that nest success of ground-nesting duck species in the prairie pothole region of North America was greater in areas of coyote abundance and than in areas of red fox (Vulpes vulpes) abundance; coyotes apparently actively reduced red fox abundance (an important mesopredator on duck nests). Soule et al (1988) working in the chaparral ecosystem in California found higher bird species diversity (possibly re¯ecting lower predation on adults and nests of bird species) in areas with coyotes present than in areas without coyotes.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Thus it seems likely that using coyotes as landbird protectors will require strong support from state game management agencies, an improbable outcome at present. Hopefully, the positive eects of top carnivores on public "resources" such as songbirds (this study) and ducks (Sovada et al 1995) will help to reverse public opinion about top carnivores.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…These in turn affected the abundance of birds so that in the absence of coyotes, the number of bird species was depressed. Sovada et al (1995) studied duck nesting success in upland areas of North America where coyotes or red foxes occurred and found that nesting success was higher in areas dominated by coyotes. In southwestern Spain, high densities of the Spanish lynx may benefit European rabbits Oryctolagus cuniculus by controlling Egyptian mongooses that also feed on rabbits (Palomares et al 1995).…”
Section: Changes In Prey Populationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By conserving the Spanish lynx, the negative impact of red foxes and Egyptian mongooses on small game populations can be ameliorated (Palomares et al 1995). Similarly, protecting coyotes may reduce the effect of red foxes on ducks in North America (Sargeant et al 1984;Sovada et al 1995) because foxes can be killed by coyotes. Managing certain carnivores may therefore be a low-cost and effective method for increasing abundance of some prey species.…”
Section: Implications For Conservationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…primarily, competition can reduce the population size of an endangered carnivore (Caro and Stoner 2003) (Hayward and Kerley 2008); secondarily, competition between carnivores can affect the population of other species at lower tropic levels (Jedrzejewska and Jedrzejewski 2005). For example, the absence of carnivore species may increase either herbivore population (Sinclair et al 1990) or other medium-sized carnivores (Sovada et al 1995) or both (Sinclair et al 1990). Carnivores often regulate or limit the numbers of their prey, thereby altering the structure and function of entire ecosystems (Schaller 1972;Estes et al 1998;Berger et al 2001;Terborgh et al 2002), and large carnivores themselves are limited by the abundance of their prey (Hayward et al 2007).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%