Density-dependent habitat selection and partitioning between two sympatric ungulates

被引:0
|
作者
Floris M. van Beest
Philip D. McLoughlin
Eric Vander Wal
Ryan K. Brook
机构
[1] University of Saskatchewan,Department of Animal and Poultry Science, College of Agriculture and Bioresources
[2] Aarhus University,Department of Bioscience
[3] University of Saskatchewan,Department of Biology
[4] Université de Sherbrooke,Department of Biology
来源
Oecologia | 2014年 / 175卷
关键词
Competition; State space; Population density; Harvest; Resource-selection functions; Coexistence; Deer; Predation risk;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Theory on density-dependent habitat selection predicts that as population density of a species increases, use of higher quality (primary) habitat by individuals declines while use of lower quality (secondary) habitat rises. Habitat partitioning is often considered the primary mechanism for coexistence between similar species, but how this process evolves with changes in population density remains to be empirically tested for free-ranging ungulates. We used resource-selection functions to quantify density effects on landscape-scale habitat selection of two sympatric species of ungulates [moose (Alces alces) and elk (Cervus canadensis manitobensis)] in Riding Mountain National Park, Manitoba, Canada (2000–2011). The density of elk was actively reduced from 1.2 to 0.4 elk km−2 through increased hunting effort during the period of study, while moose density decreased without additional human influence from 1.6–0.7 moose km−2. Patterns of habitat selection during winter by both species changed in accordance to expectations from density-dependent habitat-selection theory. At low intraspecific density, moose and elk did not partition habitat, as both species selected strongly for mixed forest (primary habitat providing both food and cover), but did so in different areas segregated across an elevational gradient. As intraspecific density increased, selection for primary habitat by both species decreased, while selection for secondary, lower quality habitat such as agricultural fields (for elk) and built-up areas (for moose) increased. We show that habitat-selection strategies during winter for moose and elk, and subsequent effects on habitat partitioning, depend heavily on the position in state space (density) of both species.
引用
收藏
页码:1155 / 1165
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Density-dependent habitat selection and partitioning between two sympatric ungulates
    van Beest, Floris M.
    McLoughlin, Philip D.
    Vander Wal, Eric
    Brook, Ryan K.
    [J]. OECOLOGIA, 2014, 175 (04) : 1155 - 1165
  • [2] DETECTING DENSITY-DEPENDENT HABITAT SELECTION
    ROSENZWEIG, ML
    ABRAMSKY, Z
    [J]. AMERICAN NATURALIST, 1985, 126 (03): : 405 - 417
  • [3] Density-dependent habitat selection in plants
    Gersani, M
    Abramsky, Z
    Falik, O
    [J]. EVOLUTIONARY ECOLOGY, 1998, 12 (02) : 223 - 234
  • [4] Density-dependent habitat selection in plants
    M. Gersani
    Z. Abramsky
    O. Falik
    [J]. Evolutionary Ecology, 1998, 12 : 223 - 234
  • [5] Density-independent habitat distribution caused by density-dependent habitat selection
    Shenbrot, Georgy
    Krasnov, Boris
    Burdelov, Sergei
    [J]. EVOLUTIONARY ECOLOGY RESEARCH, 2006, 8 (07) : 1277 - 1290
  • [6] OF MICE AND HABITATS - TESTS FOR DENSITY-DEPENDENT HABITAT SELECTION
    HALAMA, KJ
    DUESER, RD
    [J]. OIKOS, 1994, 69 (01) : 107 - 114
  • [7] TESTS OF DENSITY-DEPENDENT HABITAT SELECTION IN A PATCHY ENVIRONMENT
    MORRIS, DW
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS, 1987, 57 (04) : 269 - 281
  • [8] Density-dependent habitat selection varies between male and female African elephants
    Fortin, Daniel
    Berube, Audrey-Jade
    Boudreau, Stephane
    Shrader, Adrian
    Ward, David
    [J]. BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2022, 276
  • [9] DENSITY-DEPENDENT HABITAT SELECTION - EVALUATION OF THE ISODAR METHOD
    OVADIA, O
    ABRAMSKY, Z
    [J]. OIKOS, 1995, 73 (01) : 86 - 94
  • [10] Spatial scale and the cost of density-dependent habitat selection
    Morris, Douglas W.
    [J]. EVOLUTIONARY ECOLOGY, 1987, 1 (04) : 379 - 388