| Literature DB >> 33182794 |
Federico Ossi1,2, Nathan Ranc2,3, Paul Moorcroft3, Priscilla Bonanni2,4, Francesca Cagnacci2,3.
Abstract
Winter supplemental feeding of ungulates potentially alters their use of resources and ecological interactions, yet relatively little is known about the patterns of feeding sites use by target populations. We used camera traps to continuously monitor winter and spring feeding site use in a roe deer population living in a peri-urban area in Northern Italy. We combined circular statistics with generalized additive and linear mixed models to analyze the diel and seasonal pattern of roe deer visits to feeding sites, and the behavioral drivers influencing visit duration. Roe deer visits peaked at dawn and dusk, and decreased from winter to spring when vegetation regrows and temperature increases. Roe deer mostly visited feeding sites solitarily; when this was not the case, they stayed longer at the site, especially when conspecifics were eating, but maintained a bimodal diel pattern of visits. These results support an opportunistic use of feeding sites, following seasonal cycles and the roe deer circadian clock. Yet, the attractiveness of these artificial resources has the potential to alter intra-specific relationships, as competition for their use induces gatherings and may extend the contact time between individuals, with potential behavioral and epidemiological consequences.Entities:
Keywords: camera trapping; competition; diel cycle; generalized additive mixed models; ungulates; urban ecology; wildlife management
Year: 2020 PMID: 33182794 PMCID: PMC7698021 DOI: 10.3390/ani10112088
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 3.231
Summary of the visits to feeding sites by individuals. Days of monitoring (DM), number of visits (NV), mean duration (MD), average (ANOD), and maximum number (MNOD) of other roe deer detected during the visits, are shown for each of the seven marked roe deer. Legend: Sex = F (female), M (male). * = animal equipped with GPS collar.
| Individual | Sex | DM | NV | MD (Sec) | ANOD | MNOD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 * | F | 132 | 672 | 94 | 1.23 | 3 |
| 2 | F | 132 | 219 | 382 | 1.59 | 3 |
| 3 * | F | 132 | 628 | 238 | 1.36 | 4 |
| 4 * | M | 132 | 485 | 130 | 1.41 | 3 |
| 5 | F | 128 | 1 | 210 | 1 | 0 |
| 6 * | F | 126 | 173 | 97 | 1.49 | 2 |
| 7 * | F | 114 | 180 | 49 | 1.51 | 2 |
Figure 1Rose diagrams displaying the circular distribution of the daily modes of the timestamps of the pictures detecting roe deer at FS, divided by sex. Hours shown in UTC.
Summary table of the best model for the daily number of visits to feeding sites. For the fixed effects, we reported beta coefficients, and relative standard errors (β ± SE), while for the splines we reported the estimated degrees of freedom (EDF). Legend: Activation (O) = active feeding site, reference category = closed feeding site; S (Day of year) = spline of the day of the year; S (Individual) = spline of the random effect of the individual; ** = 0.001 < p < 0.01; *** = p < 0.001
|
|
| |
| Activation (O) | 0.82 ± 0.26 | 0.001 ** |
|
|
| |
| S (Day of year) | 6.09 | <0.001 *** |
| S (Individual) | 4.59 | <0.001 *** |
Figure 2Predictive plot of the daily number of visits to feeding site (log scale) by roe deer as a function of the day of the year (panel A) contrasted with the observed increment of NDVI (panel B), and minimum daily temperature (panel C).
Figure 3Predictive boxplots reporting the probability to detect a long visit to a feeding site in function of the presence of other roe deer at the feeding site (panel A) and of the eating activity of the other roe deer at the feeding site (panel B). Red points denote the predicted mean values; the black dot denotes an outlier.
Figure 4Rose diagrams displaying the circular distribution of the modes of the timestamps of the visits to feeding sites by marked roe deer, grouped by day and feeding site, separated into long and short visits. Hours are shown in UTC.