| Literature DB >> 23300951 |
Masashi Soga1, Shinsuke Koike.
Abstract
Despite a marked increase in the focus toward biodiversity conservation in fragmented landscapes, studies that confirm species breeding success are scarce and limited. In this paper, we asked whether local (area of forest patches) and landscape (amount of suitable habitat surrounding of focal patches) factors affect the breeding success of raccoon dogs (Nyctereutes procyonoides) in Tokyo, Central Japan. The breeding success of raccoon dogs is easy to judge as adults travel with pups during the breeding season. We selected 21 forest patches (3.3-797.8 ha) as study sites. In each forest patch, we used infra-red-triggered cameras for a total of 60 camera days per site. We inspected each photo to determine whether it was of an adult or a pup. Although we found adult raccoon dogs in all 21 forest patches, pups were found only in 13 patches. To estimate probability of occurrence and detection for raccoon in 21 forest fragments, we used single season site occupancy models in PRESENCE program. Model selection based on AIC and model averaging showed that the occupancy probability of pups was positively affected by patch area. This result suggests that large forests improve breeding success of raccoon dogs. A major reason for the low habitat value of small, isolated patches may be the low availability of food sources and the high risk of being killed on the roads in such areas. Understanding the effects of local and landscape parameters on species breeding success may help us to devise and implement effective long-term conservation and management plans.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23300951 PMCID: PMC3534719 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051802
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Twenty-one study forest patches
(black shaded area).
Figure 2Photograph of an adult raccoon dog with pup
(left) and a lone adult (right).
AIC values and Akaike weights (w) of nine candidate models in adults and pups.
| Rank | Variable (s) | AIC | ΔAIC | w |
|
| ||||
| Model 1 |
| 170.51 | 0.00 | 0.288 |
| Model 2 |
| 171.46 | 0.95 | 0.179 |
| Model 3 |
| 172.45 | 1.94 | 0.109 |
| Model 4 |
| 172.51 | 2.00 | 0.106 |
| Model 5 |
| 172.51 | 2.00 | 0.106 |
| Model 6 |
| 173.46 | 2.95 | 0.066 |
| Model 7 |
| 173.46 | 2.95 | 0.066 |
| Model 8 |
| 174.45 | 3.94 | 0.040 |
| Model 9 |
| 172.45 | 3.94 | 0.040 |
|
| ||||
| Model 1 |
| 115.96 | 0.00 | 0.437 |
| Model 2 |
| 116.50 | 0.54 | 0.333 |
| Model 3 |
| 117.81 | 1.85 | 0.173 |
| Model 4 |
| 121.48 | 5.52 | 0.028 |
| Model 5 |
| 123.47 | 7.51 | 0.010 |
| Model 6 |
| 124.42 | 8.46 | 0.006 |
| Model 7 |
| 124.50 | 8.54 | 0.006 |
| Model 8 |
| 125.31 | 9.35 | 0.004 |
| Model 9 |
| 126.08 | 10.12 | 0.003 |
Akaike weights.
Model-averaged estimates for parameters of the site occupancy models of pups.
| Parameters | Coefficients | SE | Lower 95% CI | Upper 95% CI |
| intercept | 0.55 | 0.04 | 0.47 | 0.52 |
| local variable | 0.20 | 0.03 | 0.15 | 0.39 |
| landscape variable | −0.01 | 0.03 | −0.06 | 0.04 |