Literature DB >> 28547395

Food competition between a large ruminant and a small hindgut fermentor: the case of the roe deer and mountain hare.

Ian A Hulbert1, Reidar Andersen1.   

Abstract

In this study, we demonstrate that the mountain hare and roe deer compete with each other. This was determined using "natural experiments" of populations found in sympatry and allopatry on the islands along the west coast of Norway. We demonstrate that both species occupy the same habitats, share the same food resources and that food availability is limited. Two browsing species as different in size as roe deer and mountain hare might be expected to partition the available vegetation (e.g. woody scrub) in terms of height above ground level. However, from the evidence collected, the feeding-height-separation hypothesis must be rejected as an explanation for ecological separation between roe deer and mountain hares because there was extensive height overlap in resource utilisation by both species and neither species changed its feeding height in response to the presence of the other. Total browse utilisation did not increase when both species were together; rather, species-specific browse utilisation declined when the other species was present. However, the foraging behaviour of each herbivore varied significantly between the allopatric and sympatric sites. When both herbivores were present, the clip diameter of shoots browsed by mountain hares declined to match those selected by roe deer, while roe deer switched from a browse-dominated diet to a diet dominated by winter-green gramineae. The change to smaller-diameter shoots likely resulted in the hare increasing its intake of digestion-inhibiting or toxic secondary metabolites, while the alternative choice of digging through the snow like roe deer to reach the winter-green gramineae is a practice considered energetically too costly for hares. On this basis, we conclude that the enforced switch to a nutritionally inferior diet by mountain hares at the sympatric sites may result in changes to growth rate and body size which consequently impact on mortality and may explain the competitive superiority of the roe deer.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Competition; Feeding-height-separation hypothesis; Lagomorph; Resource quality; Scandinavia; Ungulate

Year:  2001        PMID: 28547395     DOI: 10.1007/s004420100683

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


  4 in total

1.  Sheep grazing and rodent populations: evidence of negative interactions from a landscape scale experiment.

Authors:  Harald Steen; Atle Mysterud; Gunnar Austrheim
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2005-02-23       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Why should a grazer browse? Livestock impact on winter resource use by bharal Pseudois nayaur.

Authors:  Kulbhushansingh Ramesh Suryawanshi; Yash Veer Bhatnagar; Charudutt Mishra
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2009-09-27       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Why aren't rabbits and hares larger?

Authors:  Susumu Tomiya; Lauren K Miller
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 3.694

4.  Shift in black rhinoceros diet in the presence of elephant: evidence for competition?

Authors:  Marietjie Landman; David S Schoeman; Graham I H Kerley
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-17       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.