Functional response of wolves to human development across boreal North America.
boreal forest
ecosystem conservation
forestry
functional response
habitat selection
roads
trade‐offs
wolves
Journal
Ecology and evolution
ISSN: 2045-7758
Titre abrégé: Ecol Evol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101566408
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2019
Sep 2019
Historique:
received:
11
12
2018
revised:
29
07
2019
accepted:
30
07
2019
entrez:
19
10
2019
pubmed:
19
10
2019
medline:
19
10
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The influence of humans on large carnivores, including wolves, is a worldwide conservation concern. In addition, human-caused changes in carnivore density and distribution might have impacts on prey and, indirectly, on vegetation. We therefore tested wolf responses to infrastructure related to natural resource development (i.e., human footprint). Our study provides one of the most extensive assessments of how predators like wolves select habitat in response to various degrees of footprint across boreal ecosystems encompassing over a million square kilometers of Canada. We deployed GPS-collars on 172 wolves, monitored movements and used a generalized functional response (GFR) model of resource selection. A functional response in habitat selection occurs when selection varies as a function of the availability of that habitat. GFRs can clarify how human-induced habitat changes are influencing wildlife across large, diverse landscapes. Wolves displayed a functional response to footprint. Wolves were more likely to select forest harvest cutblocks in regions with higher cutblock density (i.e., a positive functional response to high-quality habitats for ungulate prey) and to select for higher road density in regions where road density was high (i.e., a positive functional response to human-created travel routes). Wolves were more likely to use cutblocks in habitats with low road densities, and more likely to use roads in habitats with low cutblock densities, except in winter when wolves were more likely to use roads regardless of cutblock density. These interactions suggest that wolves trade-off among human-impacted habitats, and adaptively switch from using roads to facilitate movement (while also risking encounters with humans), to using cutblocks that may have higher ungulate densities. We recommend that conservation managers consider the contextual and interacting effects of footprints when assessing impacts on carnivores. These effects likely have indirect impacts on ecosystems too, including on prey species.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31624583
doi: 10.1002/ece3.5600
pii: ECE35600
pmc: PMC6787805
doi:
Banques de données
Dryad
['10.5061/dryad.q9j281m']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
10801-10815Informations de copyright
© 2019 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
None declared.
Références
PeerJ. 2017 Aug 29;5:e3736
pubmed: 28875080
PLoS One. 2017 Nov 8;12(11):e0186525
pubmed: 29117234
J Anim Ecol. 2015 Jan;84(1):102-12
pubmed: 25109601
Theor Popul Biol. 1977 Oct;12(2):197-29
pubmed: 929457
Sci Rep. 2017 Jul 25;7(1):6370
pubmed: 28744023
Trends Ecol Evol. 1999 Jul;14(7):268-272
pubmed: 10370262
Science. 2014 Jan 10;343(6167):1241484
pubmed: 24408439
J Anim Ecol. 2018 Jan;87(1):274-284
pubmed: 28940254
Oecologia. 2005 Jun;144(2):257-67
pubmed: 15891849
J Anim Ecol. 2013 Jul;82(4):770-80
pubmed: 23414218
Ecology. 2011 Mar;92(3):583-9
pubmed: 21608467
Ecol Evol. 2019 Aug 30;9(18):10801-10815
pubmed: 31624583
J Environ Manage. 2001 Dec;63(4):387-405
pubmed: 11826722
J Anim Ecol. 2006 Jul;75(4):887-98
pubmed: 17009752