The annual habitat selection of released Père David’s Deer in Dafeng Milu National Nature Reserve

Wu, Baolei; Ji, Yifan; Wang, Jinli; Qin, Pei

doi:10.1016/j.chnaes.2011.04.007

Cited by 10 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The reserve is divided into three core areas. The mudflat wetland is the third core area, which is covered by Gramineae, Cyperaceae, and Compositae plants that serve as the primary food sources for the wild deer in this area (Wu et al, 2011; Yuan et al, 2019). The captive populations are divided into two parts in the first and second core areas, respectively; the captive deer in this study were sampled from the second core area.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of the Gut Microbiome of Wild and Captive Père David’s Deer

Sun

Liu

et al. 2019

Front. Microbiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Père David’s deer (Elaphurus davidianus or milu) is a highly endangered species originating from China, and many deer are currently being raised in captivity for gradual re-introduction to the wild. Wild and captive deer currently live in the same region but have vastly different diets. In this study, we used 16S rRNA high-throughput sequencing to identify the healthy core microbiome in the gut of wild and captive Père David’s deer and investigate how dietary factors influence the gut microbiome by comparing their differences. A core shared gut microbiome was identified in healthy Père David’s deer, which was similar to that of other ruminants, mainly comprising the phyla Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes. There were no differences in the richness or diversity of the gut microbiome between the wild and captive deer. However, PCA and ANOSIM demonstrated clear differences in the microbial community structure between the captive and wild deer, which mainly manifested as changes in the relative abundance of 39 bacterial genera. As the majority of these genera were not dominant in the deer gut, no significant difference was detected in functional modules related to the microbiome between the two groups. Therefore, the difference in dietary factors does not appear to affect the healthy core gut microbiome between captive and wild Père David’s deer, suggesting strong co-evolution and the possibility of re-establishment in the wild. These data could guide future applications of population management in Père David’s deer conservation.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of the Gut Microbiome of Wild and Captive Père David’s Deer

Sun

Liu

et al. 2019

Front. Microbiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Water and food are freely available. Their diet mainly consists of plants, including Spartina alterniflora, Suaeda spp., Spartina anglica, Imperata cylindrical, Phragmites australis, and Scirpus triqueter (Scirpus triqueter L.) ( Wu et al, 2011 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal and spatial dynamics of gastrointestinal parasite infection in Père David’s deer

Zhang

et al. 2021

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The Père David’s deer (Elaphurus davidianus) population was established from only a small number of individuals. Their genetic diversity is therefore relatively low and transmissible (parasitic) diseases affecting them merit further attention. Parasitic infections can affect the health, survival, and population development of the host. However, few reports have been published on the gastrointestinal parasites of Père David’s deer. The aims of this study were: (1) to identify the intestinal parasites groups in Père David’s deer; (2) to determine their prevalence and burden and clarify the effects of different seasons and regions on various indicators of Père David’s deer intestinal parasites; (3) to evaluate the effects of the Père David’s deer reproductive period on these parasites; (4) to reveal the regularity of the parasites in space and time. Methods In total, 1,345 Père David’s deer faecal samples from four regions during four seasons were tested using the flotation (saturated sodium nitrate solution) to identify parasites of different genus or group, and the McMaster technique to count the number of eggs or oocysts. Results Four groups of gastrointestinal parasites were found, of which strongyles were dominant; their prevalence and burden were significantly higher than other groups. Significant temporal and spatial effects on gastrointestinal parasitic infection were found. Parasite diversity, prevalence, parasite burden, and aggregation were the highest in summer. Among the four regions, parasite diversity, prevalence, and burden were the highest in the Dongting Lake area. In addition, parasite diversity and burden during the reproductive period of Père David’s deer was significantly higher than during the post-reproductive period. Conclusions The summer season and the reproductive period of Père David’s deer had great potential for parasite transmission, and there is a high risk of parasite outbreaks in the Dongting Lake area.

show abstract

“…In many areas of the world, fish feed, biomineral liquid, and biofuel (Chung, 2006) has been investigated; however, reports on its feeding value in ruminants are limited. Recently, Wu et al (2011) found that Elaphurus davidinus (Père David's deer) released in Dafeng Milu National Nature Reserve of China prefers S. alterniflora communities and consumes the aboveground parts of S. alterniflora as its main source of food. Wang et al (2008) reported that S. alterniflora in the diet of dairy cattle has no drastic effects on milk production and composition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%