When wildcats feed on rabbits: an experimental study to understand the taphonomic signature of European wildcats (Felis silvestris silvestris)

Lloveras, Lluís; Thomas, Richard M.; Cosso, Alessandra; Pinyol, César; Nadal, J.

doi:10.1007/s12520-016-0364-6

Cited by 31 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For leporids from Sample 4 (cf. jackal/wolf), the observations seem similar to those reported for leporids ingested by the fox, coyote, European wildcat, caracal, and honey badger (Cohen, ; Lloveras et al, , ; Schmitt & Juell, ), but maybe with a lower degree of digestion than in Lloveras et al (, ) for the fox and European wildcat referentials, or in Cohen () for prey teeth found in caracal scats. For the grey wolves from Bieszczady, “Identification as ingested parts is in many cases only based on the fact of having been found in scats” (Fosse et al, ); thus, in our samples, the light degree of digestion may not have been identified in a nonscatological context.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Digestion Attack and Tooth Markssupporting

confidence: 80%

“…leopard), complete bones are rare, and small‐sized fragments are numerous (<3 cm, mainly <10 mm), with an average size of remains of ~7–8 mm and a maximum of ~25–26 mm. In previous studies, few complete bones were found in canid, mustelid, felid, and hyaena scats, and remains are mainly less than 30 mm long, with a majority of remains measuring less than 10 mm long (Schmitt & Juell, ; Mondini, ; Montalvo et al, ; Lloveras et al, , , ; Esteban‐Nadal et al, ; Mallye et al, ; Stiner et al, ; Tables S10–S12). In Sample 4 (cf.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…For large felids, such as the leopard ( Panthera pardus ) or the lion ( Panthera leo ), studies have focused on faunal accumulations and meat consumption behaviours (e.g., Brain, ; de Ruiter & Berger, 2000; Domı́nguez‐Rodrigo, ; Gidna, Domı́nguez‐Rodrigo, & Pickering, ). Data on ingested bones concern other small‐medium felids, such as the European wildcat ( Felis silvestris silvestris ), South American wildcats ( Leopardus geoffroyi or Leopardus colocolo ), the lynx ( Lynx pardina ) or the mountain lion ( Puma concolor ; e.g., Lloveras, Moreno‐García, & Nadal, ; Lloveras, Thomas, Cosso, Pinvol, & Nadal, ; Lopez, Rosi, Tabeni, Bender, & Chiavazza, ; Montalvo, Bisceglia, Kin, & Sosa, ; Montalvo, Pessino, & Gonzalez, ; Stiner, Munro, & Sanz, ), and several African small felids, such as the caracal ( Felis caracal ; Matthews, , ; Cohen, ) and the serval ( Felis serval ; Matthews, , ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

African carnivores as taphonomic agents: Contribution of modern coprogenic sample analysis to their identification

Campmas

Stoetzel

Denys

2018

Intl J of Osteoarchaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In archaeological sites, large, medium, and small vertebrate remains may have been accumulated by humans, by nonhuman predators, or both. It is now assumed that neotaphonomic referentials are essential to contribute to characterising the accumulators of fossil assemblages. However, such reference data are lacking for many areas (such as North Africa) and for several predators. In addition, most of the existing studies focus on skeleton representation, bone fragmentation, and tooth marks on noningested remains. Faeces‐containing ingested remains are still rarely considered, especially for viverrids, small or medium canids, or large felids. This paper provides new taphonomic data concerning the ingested remains of diversified prey (herbivores, lagomorphs, rodents, amphibians, fish, squamates, birds, and insects) from coprogenic samples accumulated by these predators. As expected, small or medium‐small carnivores consumed more small vertebrates than did medium‐large and large carnivores. Among the small vertebrate remains from small and medium‐small carnivore scats, limb extremities are less represented than other parts of the skeleton, whereas in meso‐macromammal remains from medium‐large and large carnivore scats, small bones (from limb extremities) are abundant. Digestion attack seems to be more developed on small vertebrate remains from small and medium‐small carnivore scats than in mesofaunal prey remains from medium‐large and large carnivore scats. Among small and medium‐small carnivores, prey from cf. fox scats (mainly microvertebrates) are more diversified, more fragmented, and more digested than in small carnivore (cf. genet) samples. Among medium‐large and large carnivores, fragmentation and digestion attack on mesofaunal remains are more intense in large carnivore (cf. leopard) scats than in medium‐large (cf. jackal/wolf) scats. Finally, in order to improve characterisation of the predator responsible for fossil faunal accumulations, we highlight here the importance of considering all the small bone fragments from sieve residues in archaeological contexts (and not only whole bones and identified bone fragments).

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Digestion Attack and Tooth Markssupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

African carnivores as taphonomic agents: Contribution of modern coprogenic sample analysis to their identification

Campmas

Stoetzel

Denys

2018

Intl J of Osteoarchaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Compared to all other terrestrial carnivores apart from the wildcat, the only exception is the percentage of teeth, which is markedly higher in the wolf assemblage. The wildcat creates rabbit assemblages practically opposite to those of the wolf, with very large quantities of non-ingested remains 49 . Profiles of relative abundance for the wolf, wildcat, lynx and fox show that wildcats consume little of the rabbit skeleton, whereas the Iberian lynx is situated in an intermediate position followed by the red fox.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distinguishing the taphonomic signature of wolves from humans and other predators on small prey assemblages

Lloveras

Nadal

Fullola

2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

However, despite being one of the most ubiquitous carnivores in prehistoric archaeological sites, the role of the wolf (Canis lupus) as an agent responsible for accumulations of small-prey remains has never been examined. Wolves are a widespread Holarctic species distributed across a broad variety of habitats, including deserts, dry plains, boreal forests, and the High Arctic 28. They are generalist carnivores, feeding on a wide variety of species throughout their range. Wild ungulates (e.g. red deer, roe deer, fallow deer, moose, wild boar) tend to be their preferred prey, but normally they also prey on smaller animals such as small carnivores, hares, beavers, squirrels, rabbits or birds 29-31. Rabbits are a recurrent prey, reaching values of up to 45% of the wolf diet in some areas where these animals are abundant 31-34. Besides, wolves can use caves and rock shelters, particularly during the breeding season, where they deposit their food debris 35. Studies about wolves' behaviour demonstrate that, despite not accumulating bones in the same large quantities as other carnivores do 36 , parts of their prey carcass (including bones, antlers, and hair) are often brought by the animals to the den from a kill site 37. These studies also show that abundant scats containing prey digested teeth and bone fragments can be found around and inside the caves used as dens 38,39. This indicates that wolves might well have been agents responsible for rabbit bone assemblages at archaeological sites. The aims of this study are as follows: firstly, to study the taphonomic patterns left by the wolf on rabbit remains; and secondly, to put forward a series of criteria that can help distinguish assemblages produced by wolves from those accumulated by people or by other predators in archaeological samples. To this end, an experimental study was conducted with an adult male Iberian wolf (Canis lupus signatus) kept at the wildlife recovery centre, the Centro de Naturaleza Cañada Real (Peralejo, Spain). During March and April 2013, the wolf was fed with 15 complete domestic rabbit carcasses. The rabbit remains used in this study were from a farm specialized in breeding rabbits. All the animals used in the study were sub-adults. The protocol integrated the recovery of the rabbit leftovers not ingested during the feeding as well as the scats deposited inside the enclosure for subsequent analysis. Before each feeding episode the predator enclosure was cleaned of previous meals and scats.

show abstract

Identifying the accidental‐natural mortality of leporids in the archaeological record: insights from a taphonomical analysis of a pitfall without evidence of human presence

Pelletier

Desclaux

Mallye

et al. 2020

J Quaternary Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Leporids (Lagomorpha, Mammalia), especially the mountain hare (Lepus timidus) and the European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus), have been among the most abundant small game in western Europe since the Pleistocene. These animals are preferred prey for more than 40 predators, which increases the chances of finding their skeletal remains at archaeological or natural sites, and in particular karstic formations alternately occupied by Palaeolithic human societies and other predators. Moreover, specific eco‐ethological characteristics for both species also offer the possibility to produce a substantial quantity of their bones accumulated by natural mortality without predation, making it more difficult to identify their origin in the fossil record. Despite this fact, the taphonomic signature of accidental‐natural accumulations of leporids in karsts, such as pitfalls, has never been properly characterised. In order to address these issues, we carried out a detailed taphonomic study of leporid remains in a pitfall without any evidence of human activity, namely at Coulet des Roches (Monieux, Vaucluse, south‐eastern France). At this site, leporids are the most abundant species throughout the Last Glacial Maximum sedimentary sequence. The bone accumulation was analysed in order to determine the most relevant criteria to identify a natural accumulation that results from the accidental fall of individuals in the pitfall. The relative proportions of each species are consistent with their current ethology, and their mortality profiles are compatible with the structure of a living natural population. The completeness rate of the different skeletal portions for both species is relatively high, bones are less fragmented and, unlike what might be expected, very few anatomical connections were preserved. The observed anatomical representation, breakage, and bone surface modification patterns are discussed and compared with available data concerning accumulations with predation. Taken together, the identified criteria contribute valuable help in the recognition of accidental mortality in the fossil record, as well as to evaluate the proportion of leporid bones accumulated naturally and those accumulated by predation, human or not, in a deposit.

show abstract

When wildcats feed on rabbits: an experimental study to understand the taphonomic signature of European wildcats (Felis silvestris silvestris)

Abstract: When wildcats feed on rabbits: an experimental study to understand the taphonomic signature of European wildcats (Felis silvestris silvestris

Cited by 31 publications

References 33 publications

African carnivores as taphonomic agents: Contribution of modern coprogenic sample analysis to their identification

African carnivores as taphonomic agents: Contribution of modern coprogenic sample analysis to their identification

Distinguishing the taphonomic signature of wolves from humans and other predators on small prey assemblages

Identifying the accidental‐natural mortality of leporids in the archaeological record: insights from a taphonomical analysis of a pitfall without evidence of human presence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About