Literature DB >> 33577613

Resource selection of a nomadic ungulate in a dynamic landscape.

Theresa S M Stratmann1,2, Nandintsetseg Dejid2, Justin M Calabrese3, William F Fagan4, Christen H Fleming4,5, Kirk A Olson6, Thomas Mueller1,2.   

Abstract

Nomadic movements are often a consequence of unpredictable resource dynamics. However, how nomadic ungulates select dynamic resources is still understudied. Here we examined resource selection of nomadic Mongolian gazelles (Procapra gutturosa) in the Eastern Steppe of Mongolia. We used daily GPS locations of 33 gazelles tracked up to 3.5 years. We examined selection for forage during the growing season using the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI). In winter we examined selection for snow cover which mediates access to forage and drinking water. We studied selection at the population level using resource selection functions (RSFs) as well as on the individual level using step-selection functions (SSFs) at varying spatio-temporal scales from 1 to 10 days. Results from the population and the individual level analyses differed. At the population level we found selection for higher than average NDVI during the growing season. This may indicate selection for areas with more forage cover within the arid steppe landscape. In winter, gazelles selected for intermediate snow cover, which may indicate preference for areas which offer some snow for hydration but not so much as to hinder movement. At the individual level, in both seasons and across scales, we were not able to detect selection in the majority of individuals, but selection was similar to that seen in the RSFs for those individuals showing selection. Difficulty in finding selection with SSFs may indicate that Mongolian gazelles are using a random search strategy to find forage in a landscape with large, homogeneous areas of vegetation. The combination of random searches and landscape characteristics could therefore obscure results at the fine scale of SSFs. The significant results on the broader scale used for the population level RSF highlight that, although individuals show uncoordinated movement trajectories, they ultimately select for similar vegetation and snow cover.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33577613      PMCID: PMC7880454          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246809

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  29 in total

1.  Using the satellite-derived NDVI to assess ecological responses to environmental change.

Authors:  Nathalie Pettorelli; Jon Olav Vik; Atle Mysterud; Jean-Michel Gaillard; Compton J Tucker; Nils Chr Stenseth
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2005-06-09       Impact factor: 17.712

2.  Influences of human and livestock density on winter habitat selection of Mongolian gazelle (Procapra gutturosa).

Authors:  Zhenhua Luo; Bingwan Liu; Songtao Liu; Zhigang Jiang; Richard S Halbrook
Journal:  Zoolog Sci       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 0.931

3.  Not accounting for interindividual variability can mask habitat selection patterns: a case study on black bears.

Authors:  Rémi Lesmerises; Martin-Hugues St-Laurent
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2017-09-09       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Stopover ecology of a migratory ungulate.

Authors:  Hall Sawyer; Matthew J Kauffman
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2011-05-06       Impact factor: 5.091

5.  Finite-Sample Equivalence in Statistical Models for Presence-Only Data.

Authors:  William Fithian; Trevor Hastie
Journal:  Ann Appl Stat       Date:  2013-12-01       Impact factor: 2.083

6.  Quantifying consistent individual differences in habitat selection.

Authors:  Martin Leclerc; Eric Vander Wal; Andreas Zedrosser; Jon E Swenson; Jonas Kindberg; Fanie Pelletier
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  The danger of having all your eggs in one basket--winter crash of the re-introduced Przewalski's horses in the Mongolian Gobi.

Authors:  Petra Kaczensky; Oyunsaikhan Ganbataar; Nanjid Altansukh; Namtar Enkhsaikhan; Christian Stauffer; Chris Walzer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-12-28       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Understanding predation risk and individual variation in risk avoidance for threatened boreal caribou.

Authors:  Matthew A Mumma; Michael P Gillingham; Chris J Johnson; Katherine L Parker
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2017-10-25       Impact factor: 2.912

9.  Relative Selection Strength: Quantifying effect size in habitat- and step-selection inference.

Authors:  Tal Avgar; Subhash R Lele; Jonah L Keim; Mark S Boyce
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 2.912

10.  Black bears alter movements in response to anthropogenic features with time of day and season.

Authors:  Katherine A Zeller; David W Wattles; Laura Conlee; Stephen DeStefano
Journal:  Mov Ecol       Date:  2019-07-11       Impact factor: 3.600

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.