Roe and fallow deer: are they compatible neighbours?

Abstract

The analysis of the relationships between population density and habitat features is important to evaluate the ecological needs of a species, its potential impact on ecosystems and its interspecific interactions. We analysed the spatial variation of roe deer Capreolus capreolus and fallow deer Dama dama densities in a Mediterranean area in summer 2007 and winter 2007/2008. Previous research has shown that fallow deer can actively displace and exclude roe deer from natural feeding sites. Here we show that both species have the greatest densities in ecotone habitats between wood and open fields (abandoned olive groves and pastures), but with contrasting geographic patterns. The fallow deer showed the greatest densities in the central northern part of the study area near to local historical release sites. The densities of roe deer were great where fallow deer were rare and low where fallow deer were abundant. Spatial overlap was great at the habitat scale, indicating a high potential for competition, but was low at the plot scale, suggesting that partitioning of space occurred at a fine scale. Supporting great numbers of deer, the ecotone areas are crucial for the management of ecosystems. We suggest that roe deer avoid areas with great densities of fallow deer and that interspecific interference from the latter affects the density and distribution of the former both at a fine and at a large scale.

To scan or not to scan? Occurrence of the group‐size effect in a seasonally nongregarious forager

“…Behavioural observations were conducted from vantage points, through 10 × 42 binoculars and 20 × 60 Leica spotting scopes, by one observer (Ferretti, Bertoldi et al, ; Ferretti, Sforzi, & Lovari, ; Ferretti, Sforzi et al, ). Data were collected over sessions of 2 hr each, at dawn and dusk, 3–4 days/week, throughout the year.…”

“…In each bout, we recorded the following activities: feeding (grazing or browsing, standing or in movement), vigilance (the individual lifts its head above the body axis, intently looking at/around and orienting the ears towards the source of disturbance, if any) and other activities (San José et al, ). Fallow deer and, to a lesser extent, wild boar can elicit avoidance reactions in roe deer, e.g., increase in vigilance, decrease in foraging and displacement (Ferretti, Bertoldi et al, ; Ferretti et al, ; Ferretti, Sforzi et al, ). Hence, we only considered bouts collected when potential competitors (e.g., fallow deer, wild boar) were at a distance >50 m from focal individuals (Ferretti, Bertoldi et al, ; Ferretti, Sforzi et al, ).…”

“…Fallow deer and, to a lesser extent, wild boar can elicit avoidance reactions in roe deer, e.g., increase in vigilance, decrease in foraging and displacement (Ferretti, Bertoldi et al, ; Ferretti et al, ; Ferretti, Sforzi et al, ). Hence, we only considered bouts collected when potential competitors (e.g., fallow deer, wild boar) were at a distance >50 m from focal individuals (Ferretti, Bertoldi et al, ; Ferretti, Sforzi et al, ). Before starting each observation bout, we recorded group size (median ± interquartile range = 2 ± 2; mean ± SE = 2.11 ± 0.05; min = 1; max = 6; n = 642).…”

Spatiotemporal mechanisms of coexistence in an European mammal community in a protected area of southern Italy

“…fear of predators), whereas resource exploitation involves the consumption of a limiting resource by the superior competitor, which reduces its availability to the inferior one (Tilman, 1982;Merson et al, 2019;Nagy-Reis et al, 2019;Pudyatmoko, 2019). Amongst mammals, interference through interspecific aggression is quite common amongst carnivores, with larger predators being usually dominant over smaller ones and often affecting their behaviour, ecology and/or numbers (Palomares & Caro, 1999;Donadio & Buskirk, 2006), but it is rare in ungulates (Valeix et al, 2007;Ferretti et al, 2011a), for which indirect interactions seem relatively more frequent. Mechanisms of niche partitioning may limit competitive interactions and promote coexistence amongst species, including spatial (e.g.…”

Damherten in de Manteling van Walcheren en de kop van Schouwen : beheer van damhertpopulaties in relatie tot beheerdoelstellingen en welzijnsaspecten

“…Concurrentie om voedsel lijkt de meest waarschijnlijke oorzaak (Kuiters et al, 1996;Ferretti et al, 2011), al is bekend dat reeën andere grazers mijden als deze in hoge dichtheden voorkomen. In het aangrenzende Nationaal Park Zuid-Kennemerland (NPZK) was de reeënpopulatie tot 2010 min of meer stabiel, maar recentelijk nemen ook daar de reeën aantallen af door een sterke toename in aantal damherten na het (Kuiters et al, 1996;Ferretti et al, 2011). De ontwikkelingen in de AWD-duinen over de afgelopen jaren laten dit duidelijk zien (Figuur 6).…”