Is winter diet quality related to body condition of white-tailed deer (<i>Odocoileus virginianus</i>)? An experiment using urine profiles

Sauvé, Daniel G.; Côté, Steeve D.

doi:10.1139/z06-086

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…and Picea spp. ), and mosses provide few readily accessible nutrients because of plant defensive compounds and low digestibility (Bergerud and Russell 1964;Bryant et al 1991;Sauvé and Côté 2006) and such low-quality plants are often avoided (Klein 1970;Bryant et al 1983;White 1983;Sauvé and Côté 2006). Consumption of low-quality forages reduces the ability of ruminant species to satisfy longer term intake rates (reviewed by Allen 1996), which may explain the highly selective behaviour of caribou.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Straight from the caribou’s (Rangifer tarandus) mouth: detailed observations of tame caribou reveal new insights into summer–autumn diets

Denryter

Cook

et al. 2017

Can. J. Zool.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High-quality habitats for caribou (Rangifer tarandus (L., 1758)) are associated primarily with lichens, but lichens alone fail to satisfy summer nutritional requirements. To evaluate the summer forage value of plant communities across northeastern British Columbia (BC), where populations of northern and boreal ecotypes of caribou are declining, we observed foraging by tame, female caribou. We compared diet composition with forage abundance to determine forage selection and to quantify forage availability. Deciduous shrubs, not lichens, largely dominated summer diets. Caribou were highly selective foragers, with 28 species comprising 78% of diets. Caribou avoided ≥50% of understory vegetation in all communities, especially conifers, evergreen shrubs, mosses, and two genera of terrestrial lichens. Availability of accepted forage (species not avoided) was strongly heterogeneous across landscapes. Alpine shrub areas and mid-elevation spruce-fir stands in the mountains, as well as treed rich fens and white spruce communities in the boreal forests, provided the greatest quantities of accepted forage for caribou. Dry alpine sites and unproductive black spruce communities provided the least accepted forage. Our work has direct implications to caribou conservation by contributing to a greater understanding of the forage value of summer habitats, with implications to habitat selection, seasonal movements, and distribution ecology.Key words: Rangifer tarandus caribou, woodland caribou, diet composition, alpine, boreal forest, food selection, foraging.Résumé : Si les habitats de grande qualité pour le caribou (Rangifer tarandus (L., 1758)) sont principalement associés aux lichens, ces derniers seuls ne peuvent satisfaire aux besoins alimentaires estivaux des caribous. Afin d'évaluer la valeur comme fourrage des communautés de plantes dans le nord-est de la Colombie-Britannique (C.-B.), où les populations des écotypes nordique et boréal de caribous sont en baisse, nous avons observé l'approvisionnement de caribous femelles apprivoisés. Nous avons comparé la composition du régime alimentaire à l'abondance de fourrage afin de déterminer quels types de fourrage sont sélectionnés et de quantifier la disponibilité de fourrage. Les arbustes feuillus, et non les lichens, constituaient une portion prépondérante des régimes alimentaires estivaux. Les caribous s'approvisionnaient de manière très sélective, 28 espèces constituant 78 % de leurs régimes alimentaires. Les caribous évitaient ≥50 % de la végétation du sous-bois dans toutes les communautés, particulièrement les arbres et arbustes conifères, les mousses et deux genres de lichens terrestres. La disponibilité de fourrages acceptés (espèces non évitées) était très hétérogène dans les différents paysages. Les zones arbustives alpines et les peuplements d'épinettes et de sapins d'élévation moyenne dans les montagnes, ainsi que les tourbières boisées riches et les communautés d'épinettes blanches dans les forêts boréales offraient les plus grandes quantités de fourrage ac...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Straight from the caribou’s (Rangifer tarandus) mouth: detailed observations of tame caribou reveal new insights into summer–autumn diets

Denryter

Cook

et al. 2017

Can. J. Zool.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We considered clear-cuts and peatlands as food-rich habitat categories during summer, because they contained more forbs than forested habitat categories (Massé and Côté 2009). For the winter season, we considered balsam fir stands as the food-rich habitat category, because deer prefer balsam fir over white spruce (Sauvé and Côté 2006), they forage mainly on balsam fir during that season, and are more likely to use balsam fir stands as snow accumulates on the ground (Lefort et al 2007). We identified edges between foodrich and cover-rich habitat categories for each season, because proximity between these patches could influence habitat selection (Dussault et al 2005b).…”

Section: Forage Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, ruminants are generally constrained by the time necessary to process forage rather than by the time required to find it (Moen 1978), and they generally respond to low forage quality by increasing digestion time during winter (Cederlund 1989;Green and Bear 1990). Deer on Anticosti Island forage mainly on balsam fir browse during winter (Sauvé and Côté 2006;Lefort et al 2007), and must balance time spent searching with time spent digesting this scarce and low-quality forage. We found that activity level and movements of deer during winter were half those measured during summer, as also reported for other cervids (roe deer, Capreolus capreolus (L., 1758): Cederlund 1989; moose, Alces alces (L., 1758): Cederlund 1989, Dussault et al 2004elk, Cervus elaphus L., 1758: Green andBear 1990;reindeer, Rangifer tarandus (L., 1758): Loe et al 2007).…”

Section: Forage Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatiotemporal variations in resources affect activity and movement patterns of white-tailed deer (Odocoileusvirginianus) at high density

Massé

Côté

2013

Can. J. Zool.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although activity budget, movements, and habitat use of herbivores have been extensively studied, few studies have simultaneously examined these behaviors at several temporal scales. We investigated the influence of spatiotemporal variations in forage and climate on the activity and movement patterns of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus (Zimmermann, 1780)) at high density, in a predator-free ecosystem impacted by long-term browsing. We used GPS telemetry and activity sensors to monitor seasonal activity budgets, movements, and patterns of habitat use within the home ranges of 24 female deer at three temporal scales: (1) season, (2) within season, and (3) daily. At large temporal scale, deer were less active and moved less during winter than during summer. Within each season, deer reduced their activity and movements in areas where forage resources were abundant and when climatic conditions were more difficult. On a daily scale, summer and winter movements peaked at dusk, but habitat selection neither changed with period of the day nor activity (foraging vs. resting). These results provide empirical evidence on how environmental constraints can modulate the trade-offs between forage acquisition and exposure to limiting factors.

show abstract

“…The amount of energy and nutrients available and consumed by ungulates can affect both survival and reproduction (Mduma et al 1999, Cook et al 2004a. Because winter starvation is the most visible effect of nutrition on wild ungulates, research and management has typically focused on winter nutrition and forage quality (Gray and Servello 1995, Fauchald et al 2004, Parker et al 2005, Page and Underwood 2006, and Sauve and Cote 2006. However, research with elk (Cervus elaphus; Cook et al 2001Cook et al , 2004a, red deer (C. elaphus; Loudon et al 1983), caribou (Rangifer tarandus; Cameron and Smith 1993, Adams and Dale 1998, Russell et al 1998), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus; Verme 1969, White 1992, muskoxen (Ovibos moschatus; Adamczewski et al 1998), cattle (Randel 1990), and sheep (Sosa et al 2004) suggests that forage quality and nutrient intake during summer and autumn may have even greater effects on ungulate populations than in winter.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Summer and Autumn Nutrition on Body Condition and Reproduction in Lactating Mule Deer

Tollefson

Shipley²,

Myers

et al. 2010

J Wildl Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent work suggests that availability and quality of forage in late summer and early autumn, a time when female ungulates face multiple energetic demands, is critical to reproduction in wild ungulates. Therefore, we examined direct links between nutritional quality of diets, body condition, and reproduction of lactating mule deer. Using captive mule deer, we tested the hypothesis that females consuming diets with lower digestible energy (DE; kJ/g) would have lower DE intake rates (DEI; MJ/day), have less body fat and muscle, have later estrus cycles, and have lower pregnancy and twinning rates. Deer fed lower DE diets had lower DEI during summer and autumn. In turn, deer with lower DEI, regardless of diet DE, had lower body mass, body fat, and muscle thickness. When nutritional quality of diets began to decline earlier in the summer, relationships between food quality, DEI, and body condition were stronger. Although DEI did not influence estrus date for deer that became pregnant before 21 December, deer with lower DEI had a lower probability of becoming pregnant and had a lower probability of producing twins. Measures of body condition in October (i.e., body mass, body fat, and muscle depth) predicted pregnancy and twinning rates in mule deer. Serum concentration of hormones leptin and Insulin Growth Factor 1 were not good predictors of body condition or reproduction. These findings suggest that managers concerned with productivity of mule deer populations should consider focusing on assessing and improving quality of forage available in summer and autumn.

show abstract

Is winter diet quality related to body condition of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus)? An experiment using urine profiles

Cited by 9 publications

References 36 publications

Straight from the caribou’s (Rangifer tarandus) mouth: detailed observations of tame caribou reveal new insights into summer–autumn diets

Straight from the caribou’s (Rangifer tarandus) mouth: detailed observations of tame caribou reveal new insights into summer–autumn diets

Spatiotemporal variations in resources affect activity and movement patterns of white-tailed deer (Odocoileusvirginianus) at high density

Influence of Summer and Autumn Nutrition on Body Condition and Reproduction in Lactating Mule Deer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About