Literature DB >> 17891419

Comment arising from a paper by Wittmer et al.: hypothesis testing for top-down and bottom-up effects in woodland caribou population dynamics.

Glen S Brown1, Lynn Landriault, Darren J H Sleep, Frank F Mallory.   

Abstract

Conservation strategies for populations of woodland caribou Rangifer tarandus caribou frequently emphasize the importance of predator-prey relationships and the availability of lichen-rich late seral forests, yet the importance of summer diet and forage availability to woodland caribou survival is poorly understood. In a recent article, Wittmer et al. (Can J Zool 83:407-418, 2005b) concluded that woodland caribou in British Columbia were declining as a consequence of increased predation that was facilitated by habitat alteration. Their conclusion is consistent with the findings of other authors who have suggested that predation is the most important proximal factor limiting woodland caribou populations (Bergerud and Elliot in Can J Zool 64:1515-1529, 1986; Edmonds in Can J Zool 66:817-826, 1988; Rettie and Messier in Can J Zool 76:251-259, 1998; Hayes et al. in Wildl Monogr 152:1-35, 2003). Wittmer et al. (Oecologia 144:257-267, [corrected] 2005b) presented three alternative, contrasting hypotheses for caribou decline that differed in terms of predicted differences in instantaneous rates of increase, pregnancy rates, causes of mortality, and seasonal vulnerability to mortality (Table 1, p 258). These authors rejected the hypotheses that food or an interaction between food and predation was responsible for observed declines in caribou populations; however, the use of pregnancy rate, mortality season and cause of mortality to contrast the alternative hypotheses is problematic. We argue here that the data employed in their study were insufficient to properly evaluate a predation-sensitive foraging hypothesis for caribou decline. Empirical data on seasonal forage availability and quality and plane of nutrition of caribou would be required to test the competing hypotheses. We suggest that methodological limitations in studies of woodland caribou population dynamics prohibit proper evaluation of the mechanism of caribou population declines and fail to elucidate potential interactions between top-down and bottom-up effects on populations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17891419     DOI: 10.1007/s00442-007-0855-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oecologia        ISSN: 0029-8549            Impact factor:   3.225


  5 in total

1.  Predator diet breadth influences the relative importance of bottom-up and top-down control of prey biomass and diversity.

Authors:  Lin Jiang; Peter J Morin
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2005-02-09       Impact factor: 3.926

2.  The role of predation in the decline and extirpation of woodland caribou.

Authors:  Heiko U Wittmer; Anthony R E Sinclair; Bruce N McLellan
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2005-05-11       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Predation risk and habitat selection in the persistence of a remnant caribou population.

Authors:  S H Ferguson; A T Bergerud; R Ferguson
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  The effects of density dependent resource limitation on size of wild reindeer.

Authors:  Terje Skogland
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1983-11       Impact factor: 3.225

5.  Seasonal shift from bottom-up to top-down impact in phytophagous insect populations.

Authors:  Claudio Gratton; Robert F Denno
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2003-01-31       Impact factor: 3.225

  5 in total
  1 in total

1.  Implications of body condition on the unsustainable predation rates of endangered mountain caribou.

Authors:  Michelle L McLellan; Robert Serrouya; Bruce N McLellan; Kelsey Furk; Doug C Heard; Heiko U Wittmer
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2011-12-20       Impact factor: 3.225

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.