[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
4.9
2.7
Journals
Animals
Special Issues
Evolution, Ecology and Management of Wild Boar and Deer
share announcement

Evolution, Ecology and Management of Wild Boar and Deer

A special issue of Animals (ISSN 2076-2615). This special issue belongs to the section "Wildlife".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 March 2024) | Viewed by 15642

Special Issue Editor

Dr. Javier Pérez-González

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Biology and Ethology Unit, Department of Anatomy, Cellular Biology and Zoology, University de Extremadura, Cáceres, Spain
Interests: population genetics; behavioral ecology; game management; red deer; wild boar
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The population sizes of wild boar and some deer species across Europe and Asia have increased significantly in recent decades. This trend has also been detected on other continents such as America and Oceania, where wild boar are an invasive species. Underharvest has been proposed as a major determinant that favors big game species. On the other hand, the number of hunters in regions such as Europe and North America has been declining for several decades, and this downward trend is expected to continue in the future. The densities of wild boar and deer deeply impact forest preservation and the spread of infectious diseases. Therefore, to deal with these threats to natural communities and human activities, it is necessary to improve current knowledge of the evolution and ecology of these species and to develop management strategies.

This Special Issue welcomes contributions on the evolution, ecology and management of wild boar and deer. The knowledge provided by these contributions could increase our chances of overcoming certain threats to biodiversity conservation and human activities.

Dr. Javier Pérez-González
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Animals is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • evolution
  • ecology
  • game management
  • wild boar
  • deer
  • forest
  • infectious disease

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (8 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Editorial

Jump to: Research, Review

4 pages, 197 KiB  
Editorial
Evolution, Ecology and Management of Wild Boar and Deer
by Javier Pérez-González
Animals 2024, 14(18), 2741; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14182741 - 22 Sep 2024
Viewed by 1253
Abstract
Wild boar (Sus scrofa) is the most widespread member of the order Artiodactyla, a group of even-toed ungulates that are prone to overabundance, with adverse consequences for conservation, agriculture, transportation and public health [...] Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Evolution, Ecology and Management of Wild Boar and Deer)

Research

Jump to: Editorial, Review

20 pages, 113230 KiB  
Article
Automated Detection and Counting of Wild Boar in Camera Trap Images
by Anne K. Schütz, Helen Louton, Mareike Fischer, Carolina Probst, Jörn M. Gethmann, Franz J. Conraths and Timo Homeier-Bachmann
Animals 2024, 14(10), 1408; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14101408 - 8 May 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1970
Abstract
Camera traps are becoming widely used for wildlife monitoring and management. However, manual analysis of the resulting image sets is labor-intensive, time-consuming and costly. This study shows that automated computer vision techniques can be extremely helpful in this regard, as they can rapidly [...] Read more.
Camera traps are becoming widely used for wildlife monitoring and management. However, manual analysis of the resulting image sets is labor-intensive, time-consuming and costly. This study shows that automated computer vision techniques can be extremely helpful in this regard, as they can rapidly and automatically extract valuable information from the images. Specific training with a set of 1600 images obtained from a study where wild animals approaching wild boar carcasses were monitored enabled the model to detect five different classes of animals automatically in their natural environment with a mean average precision of 98.11%, namely ‘wild boar’, ‘fox’, ‘raccoon dog’, ‘deer’ and ‘bird’. In addition, sequences of images were automatically analyzed and the number of wild boar visits and respective group sizes were determined. This study may help to improve and speed up the monitoring of the potential spread of African swine fever virus in areas where wild boar are affected. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Evolution, Ecology and Management of Wild Boar and Deer)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Examples of camera trap images, diverse camera types, different seasons, day scenes (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>,<b>e</b>) and night scenes (<b>c</b>,<b>f</b>). The camera types used were Maginon WK3 HD (<b>a</b>), Dörr Snapshot UV555 (<b>b</b>), Seissinger Special-Cam 3 Classic (<b>c</b>,<b>e</b>), Moultry I40 (<b>d</b>) and Moultry A5 (<b>f</b>). For details, please refer to [<a href="#B24-animals-14-01408" class="html-bibr">24</a>].</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Workflow image data evaluation. Determination of the number of visits of wild boar and the number of wild boar per visit. One image after the other is analyzed with the detector until all images are evaluated. If wild boar detection is positive, it is tested if the last wild boar detection was less than 8 min ago, in which case it is the same visit. Otherwise, it is a new visit. For a visit that has already started, the maximum number of wild boar in the visit is compared with the number in the current image and updated if necessary. For a new visit, the number of detected wild boar is saved as the maximum number of wild boar. In both cases, the last detection time is updated.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Detection examples for each class, two day scene images and two night scene images each. The BBs are depicted as colored boxes. ‘Wild boar’: (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>), ‘deer’: (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>), ‘raccoon dog’: (<b>i</b>–<b>l</b>), ‘fox’: (<b>m</b>–<b>p</b>) and ‘bird’: (<b>q</b>–<b>t</b>). (All images are shown in higher resolution in <a href="#app1-animals-14-01408" class="html-app">Appendix A</a>, attached in <a href="#animals-14-01408-f0A1" class="html-fig">Figure A1</a>, <a href="#animals-14-01408-f0A2" class="html-fig">Figure A2</a>, <a href="#animals-14-01408-f0A3" class="html-fig">Figure A3</a>, <a href="#animals-14-01408-f0A4" class="html-fig">Figure A4</a> and <a href="#animals-14-01408-f0A5" class="html-fig">Figure A5</a>).</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Example of automated wild boar detection and group size estimation in complex settings. The BB depicted as a purple box. (<b>a</b>) the detection of six piglets, (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>) detection of wild boar in night scene images; in each image, two wild boar are detected, (<b>c</b>) three detected wild boar, one with a special fur color.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>A visit of wild boar with a group of 6 animals. (<b>a</b>) First image of the visit. Two wild boar were automatically detected. (<b>b</b>) Image with the largest number of wild boar during the visit; 6 wild boar were detected automatically. The BB depicted as a purple box.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) Missed detection—overlapping wild boar; (<b>b</b>) additional detection. The BB depicted as a purple box.</p> Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Detection examples for the class ‘wild boar’: (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) day scene, (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) night scene. The BB depicted as a purple box.</p> Full article ">Figure A2
<p>Detection examples for the class ‘deer’: (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) day scene, (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) night scene. The BB depicted as a blue box.</p> Full article ">Figure A3
<p>Detection examples for the class ‘fox’: (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) day scene, (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) night scene. The BB depicted as a red box.</p> Full article ">Figure A4
<p>Detection examples for the class ‘bird’: (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) day scene, (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) night scene. The BB depicted as a yellow box.</p> Full article ">Figure A5
<p>Detection examples for the class ‘other species’: (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) day scene, (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) night scene. The BB depicted as a green box.</p> Full article ">Figure A6
<p>A visit of wild boar with a group size of 6 wild boar. On the left side is the images and on the right side is each image with a BB (depicted as purple box) around the detection of the automatic evaluation.</p> Full article ">Figure A6 Cont.
<p>A visit of wild boar with a group size of 6 wild boar. On the left side is the images and on the right side is each image with a BB (depicted as purple box) around the detection of the automatic evaluation.</p> Full article ">Figure A6 Cont.
<p>A visit of wild boar with a group size of 6 wild boar. On the left side is the images and on the right side is each image with a BB (depicted as purple box) around the detection of the automatic evaluation.</p> Full article ">Figure A7
<p>One example image of visit 21 with fog. Both the manual and the automatic evaluation had problems recognizing the two wild boar.</p> Full article ">
11 pages, 538 KiB  
Article
Female Deer Movements Relative to Firearms Hunting in Northern Georgia, USA
by Jacalyn P. Rosenberger, Adam C. Edge, Charlie H. Killmaster, Kristina L. Johannsen, David A. Osborn, Nathan P. Nibbelink, Karl V. Miller and Gino J. D’Angelo
Animals 2024, 14(8), 1212; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14081212 - 18 Apr 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1141
Abstract
Perceived risk associated with hunters can cause white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) to shift their activity away from key foraging areas or alter normal movements, which are important considerations in managing hunting and its effects on a population. We studied the effects [...] Read more.
Perceived risk associated with hunters can cause white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) to shift their activity away from key foraging areas or alter normal movements, which are important considerations in managing hunting and its effects on a population. We studied the effects of seven firearms hunts on the movements of 20 female deer in two Wildlife Management Areas within the Chattahoochee National Forest of northern Georgia, USA, during the 2018–2019 and 2019–2020 hunting seasons. Deer populations and the number of hunters in our study area have declined significantly since the 1980s. In response, hunting regulations for the 2019–2020 hunting season eliminated opportunities for harvesting female deer. To evaluate the indirect effects of antlered deer hunting on non-target female deer, we calculated 90% utilization distributions (UDs), 50% UDs, and step lengths for pre-hunt, hunt, and post-hunt periods using the dynamic Brownian bridge movement model. Data included 30 min GPS locations for 44 deer-hunt combinations. Pre-hunt 50% UDs (x− = 7.0 ha, SE = 0.4 ha) were slightly greater than both hunt (x− = 6.0 ha, SE = 0.3 ha) and post-hunt (x− = 6.0 ha, SE = 0.2 ha) 50% UDs (F = 3.84, p = 0.03). We did not detect differences in step length, nor did we detect differences in size or composition of 90% UDs, among the periods. Overall, our results suggest that the low level of hunting pressure in our study area and lack of exposure to hunters led to no biologically significant changes in female deer movements. To the extent of the findings presented in this paper, adjustments to the management of hunting in our study area do not appear to be necessary to minimize hunting-related disturbances for female deer. However, managers should continue to consider female deer behavior when evaluating future changes to hunting regulations. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Evolution, Ecology and Management of Wild Boar and Deer)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The 135 km<sup>2</sup> study area (dark boundary in (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>)) for tracking movements of 20 GPS-collared female white-tailed deer relative to firearms hunts during the 2018–2019 and 2019–2020 hunting seasons included parts of Blue Ridge and Coopers Creek Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs, (<b>a</b>)) and private land (white areas in (<b>a</b>), [<a href="#B20-animals-14-01212" class="html-bibr">20</a>]). WMAs are located in the northern region of Georgia, USA (<b>b</b>), within the Chattahoochee National Forest ((<b>c</b>); [<a href="#B21-animals-14-01212" class="html-bibr">21</a>,<a href="#B22-animals-14-01212" class="html-bibr">22</a>]).</p> Full article ">
11 pages, 475 KiB  
Article
Combination with Annual Deworming Treatments Does Not Enhance the Effects of PCV2 Vaccination on the Development of TB in Wild Boar Populations
by Javier Galapero, Alfonso Ramos, José Manuel Benítez-Medina, Remigio Martínez, Alfredo García, Javier Hermoso de Mendoza, Rocío Holgado-Martín, David Risco and Luis Gómez
Animals 2023, 13(24), 3833; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13243833 - 13 Dec 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1260
Abstract
Vaccination against PCV2 has been proven to be an effective measure to reduce the severity of TB in wild boar. The combination of this measure with strategies focused on treating other key concomitant pathogens, such as nematodes, could be a useful strategy. This [...] Read more.
Vaccination against PCV2 has been proven to be an effective measure to reduce the severity of TB in wild boar. The combination of this measure with strategies focused on treating other key concomitant pathogens, such as nematodes, could be a useful strategy. This study assesses whether a combination of deworming treatments and PCV2 vaccination may reduce the prevalence and severity of TB in wild boar. The study was conducted on five game estates in mid-western Spain where four groups of wild boar were produced: control, vaccinated, dewormed and vaccinated-dewormed. Wild boars from all groups were hunted between 2017 and 2020, and all of them received a TB diagnosis based on pathological and microbiological tests. Generalised linear models were used to explore the effect of deworming and PCV2 vaccination on TB prevalence and severity. PCV2-vaccinated animals showed lower probabilities of suffering severe TB lesions. However, no differences regarding TB severity were found between dewormed and non-dewormed wild boar. PCV2 vaccination reduces TB severity in wild boar. However, annual deworming does not produce a long-term parasitological reduction that can influence the development of TB in wild boar, nor does it improve the effect of PCV2 vaccination on TB. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Evolution, Ecology and Management of Wild Boar and Deer)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Percentage of animals infected by MTBC and suffering generalised TB pattern in different groups of animals: C (Control), D (Dewormed), V (PCV2 Vaccinated), VD (PCV2 Vaccinated and dewormed). No animals displaying generalised TB lesions were recorded in vaccinated groups (V and VD).</p> Full article ">
16 pages, 1064 KiB  
Article
Population Dynamics of a Declining White-Tailed Deer Population in the Southern Appalachian Region of the United States
by Adam C. Edge, Jacalyn P. Rosenberger, Charlie H. Killmaster, Kristina L. Johannsen, David A. Osborn, Karl V. Miller and Gino J. D’Angelo
Animals 2023, 13(23), 3675; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13233675 - 28 Nov 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2319
Abstract
Although generally abundant, white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) populations in the southeastern United States have recently experienced several localized declines attributed to reduced fawn recruitment following the establishment of coyotes (Canis latrans). The Southern Appalachians is a mountainous region suggested [...] Read more.
Although generally abundant, white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) populations in the southeastern United States have recently experienced several localized declines attributed to reduced fawn recruitment following the establishment of coyotes (Canis latrans). The Southern Appalachians is a mountainous region suggested to be experiencing white-tailed deer declines, as harvest numbers and hunter success rates have substantially decreased in northern Georgia since 1979. Low fawn survival (16%) was also recently documented in the Chattahoochee National Forest (CNF) in northern Georgia, necessitating further examination. We radio-collared 14 yearling and 45 adult female white-tailed deer along with 71 fawns during 2018–2020 in the CNF to estimate field-based vital rates (i.e., survival and fecundity) and parameterize stage-structured population models. We projected population growth rates (λ) over 10 years to evaluate the current rate of decline and various other management scenarios. Our results indicated that the observed population would decline by an average of 4.0% annually (λ = 0.960) under current conditions. Only scenarios including antlerless harvest restrictions in addition to improved fawn survival resulted in positive growth (λ = 1.019, 1.085), suggesting these measures are likely necessary for population recovery in the region. This approach can be applied by wildlife managers to inform site-specific management strategies. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Evolution, Ecology and Management of Wild Boar and Deer)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Abundance (<span class="html-italic">n</span>) progression of one age class to the next in a stage-structured population model used for female white-tailed deer (<span class="html-italic">Odocoileus virginianus</span>) with three stages—fawn (<span class="html-italic">f</span>), yearling (<span class="html-italic">y</span>), and adult (<span class="html-italic">a</span>)—in northern Georgia, USA, 2018–2020. Survival between stages is represented by <span class="html-italic">S</span>, and fecundity values are represented by <span class="html-italic">F</span>.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Frequency distribution of Scenario 1 growth rates (λ) for 1000 iterations of a female-only, stage-structured population model. The model was parameterized by observed white-tailed deer (<span class="html-italic">Odocoileus virginianus</span>) vital rates recorded in northern Georgia, USA, in 2018–2020, with an average annual population growth rate of λ = 0.960 (interquartile range (IQR) = 0.949–0.971).</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Population projections, including growth rates (λ), for different antlerless harvest and fawn survival scenarios over 10 years for female white-tailed deer (<span class="html-italic">Odocoileus virginianus</span>) in northern Georgia, USA, 2018–2020. Included scenarios: (1) observed fawn, yearling, adult survival; (2) no antlerless harvest and observed fawn survival; (3) 5% antlerless harvest and observed fawn survival; (4) observed yearling and adult survival and moderate fawn survival; (5) observed yearling and adult survival and high fawn survival.</p> Full article ">
13 pages, 3013 KiB  
Article
Comparative Analysis of Microsatellite and SNP Markers for Genetic Management of Red Deer
by Javier Pérez-González, Juan Carranza, Gabriel Anaya, Camilla Broggini, Giovanni Vedel, Eva de la Peña and Alberto Membrillo
Animals 2023, 13(21), 3374; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13213374 - 31 Oct 2023
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2305
Abstract
The analysis of population genetic structure and individual multilocus heterozygosity are crucial for wildlife management and conservation. Microsatellite markers have traditionally been used to assess these genetic parameters. However, single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are becoming increasingly popular. Our goal here was to determine to [...] Read more.
The analysis of population genetic structure and individual multilocus heterozygosity are crucial for wildlife management and conservation. Microsatellite markers have traditionally been used to assess these genetic parameters. However, single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are becoming increasingly popular. Our goal here was to determine to what extent SNPs can provide better insights than microsatellites into the overall genetic status and population genetic processes in the species. To this end, we genotyped 210 red deer (Cervus elaphus) in the Spanish wild population with both 11 microsatellites and 31,712 SNPs. We compared parameters related to population genetic structure and individual multilocus heterozygosity obtained with both types of markers. Our results showed correlations between parameters measured using both microsatellites and SNPs, particularly those related to the level of genetic diversity and genetic differentiation. However, we found notably lower precision of microsatellites in measuring the distribution of genetic diversity among individuals. We conclude that microsatellites can be used to monitor the overall genetic status and detect broad patterns in red deer populations. Nevertheless, the greater precision of SNPs in inferring genetic structure and multilocus heterozygosity leads us to encourage scientists and wildlife managers to prioritize their use whenever possible. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Evolution, Ecology and Management of Wild Boar and Deer)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Relationship of different genetic diversity measures obtained with microsatellite and SNP markers in red deer populations. (<b>A</b>) Observed heterozygosity (H<sub>O</sub>). (<b>B</b>) Expected heterozygosity (H<sub>E</sub>). (<b>C</b>) Inbreeding coefficient at population level (F<sub>IS</sub>).</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Relationship between pairwise F<sub>ST</sub> values obtained with microsatellite and SNP markers in red deer populations.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>PCA plots for the two PCs with the highest eigenvalues obtained in red deer populations. (<b>A</b>) PCA obtained with microsatellite markers. (<b>B</b>) PCA obtained with SNPs. The figure shows the percentage of the total variance explained by each PC (in brackets). SP2: Sierra de San Pedro 2. SP1: Sierra de San Pedro 1. MO: Monfragüe National Park. SM1: Sierra Morena 1. SM2: Sierra Morena 2. PYS: southern Pyrenees. Order of populations: west to east (see <a href="#app1-animals-13-03374" class="html-app">Figure S1</a>).</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Membership/ancestry coefficients obtained with microsatellite (<b>A</b>) and SNP markers (<b>B</b>) for K = 5 in red deer populations. Each individual is represented by a thin vertical line, which is portioned into 5 segments with different colors representing the individual’s estimated membership fraction in K clusters. SP2: Sierra de San Pedro 2. SP1: Sierra de San Pedro 1. MO: Monfragüe National Park. SM1: Sierra Morena 1. SM2: Sierra Morena 2. PYS: southern Pyrenees. Order of populations: west to east (see <a href="#app1-animals-13-03374" class="html-app">Figure S1</a>).</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Expected r<sup>2</sup> between inbreeding and multilocus heterozygosity obtained with microsatellites (<b>A</b>) and SNPs (<b>B</b>) in red deer populations. Figure shows the histogram of r<sup>2</sup> values in permutations. Observed r<sup>2</sup> is represented by a vertical dotted line. Horizontal continuous lines represent the confidence intervals.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Relationship of multilocus heterozygosity (<b>A</b>); (MLH) and standardized multilocus heterozygosity (<b>B</b>); (sMLH) of red deer individuals obtained with microsatellite and SNP markers.</p> Full article ">
11 pages, 471 KiB  
Article
Is the Intrasexual Competition in Male Red Deer Reflected in the Ratio of Stable Isotopes of Carbon and Nitrogen in Faeces?
by Giovanni Vedel, Eva de la Peña, Jose Manuel Moreno-Rojas and Juan Carranza
Animals 2023, 13(14), 2397; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13142397 - 24 Jul 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1656
Abstract
Isotopic analysis of carbon and nitrogen in faeces is a reliable methodology for studying ecology in wildlife. Here, we tested this technique to detect variations in carbon and nitrogen isotopic ratios (δ13C and δ15N) in two different intrasexual competition [...] Read more.
Isotopic analysis of carbon and nitrogen in faeces is a reliable methodology for studying ecology in wildlife. Here, we tested this technique to detect variations in carbon and nitrogen isotopic ratios (δ13C and δ15N) in two different intrasexual competition scenarios of male Iberian red deer (Cervus elaphus hispanicus) using faeces of individuals collected during hunting actions in South-eastern Spain. The carbon isotopic ratio (δ13C) was not found to be significant, likely due to similar diet composition in all individuals. However, the nitrogen isotopic ratio (δ15N) was found to be lower in populations where sexual competition between males during the rut was higher compared to low-competition populations. Therefore, this study suggests a different use of proteins by an individual male red deer depending on the sexually competitive context in which he lives. Although further research is needed, these results show the potential of isotopic analysis as a tool for studying individual and populational variations in the level of intrasexual competition, with implications in evolutionary ecology and population management. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Evolution, Ecology and Management of Wild Boar and Deer)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Predictions derived from LMM with logit as the link function of δ<sup>15</sup>N against the level of intrasexual competition in the population of Iberian red deer (HC vs. LC) for parasitised (orange) and non-parasitised (green) individuals. The error bar represents the mean, and 95% C.I. Graphic was generated using the generic function plot in R.</p> Full article ">

Review

Jump to: Editorial, Research

19 pages, 360 KiB  
Review
A Review of Cervidae Visual Ecology
by Blaise A. Newman and Gino J. D’Angelo
Animals 2024, 14(3), 420; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14030420 - 27 Jan 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2637
Abstract
This review examines the visual systems of cervids in relation to their ability to meet their ecological needs and how their visual systems are specialized for particular tasks. Cervidae encompasses a diverse group of mammals that serve as important ecological drivers within their [...] Read more.
This review examines the visual systems of cervids in relation to their ability to meet their ecological needs and how their visual systems are specialized for particular tasks. Cervidae encompasses a diverse group of mammals that serve as important ecological drivers within their ecosystems. Despite evidence of highly specialized visual systems, a large portion of cervid research ignores or fails to consider the realities of cervid vision as it relates to their ecology. Failure to account for an animal’s visual ecology during research can lead to unintentional biases and uninformed conclusions regarding the decision making and behaviors for a species or population. Our review addresses core behaviors and their interrelationship with cervid visual characteristics. Historically, the study of cervid visual characteristics has been restricted to specific areas of inquiry such as color vision and contains limited integration into broader ecological and behavioral research. The purpose of our review is to bridge these gaps by offering a comprehensive review of cervid visual ecology that emphasizes the interplay between the visual adaptations of cervids and their interactions with habitats and other species. Ultimately, a better understanding of cervid visual ecology allows researchers to gain deeper insights into their behavior and ecology, providing critical information for conservation and management efforts. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Evolution, Ecology and Management of Wild Boar and Deer)
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-8
Back to TopTop