No abstract

No abstract

Records of bountied brown bear s Ursus arctos in Norway and Sweden were analy sed to estimate population size in the mid-1800' s, and changes in popul ation size and distribution in relation to the bear management policies of both countries. In the mid-1800' s about 65% of the bears in Scand inav ia wer e in Norway (perhaps 3,100 in Norw ay and 1,650 in Sweden). Both countries tried to eliminate the bear in the 1800 ' s; Sweden was more effective. By the turn of the century, the numbers of bears were low in both countries. The lowest population level in the population remnants that have subsequently survived occurred around 1930 and was estimated at 130 bears. Sweden' s policy was changed at the turn of the century to save the bear from extin ction. This policy was success ful, and the population is now large and expanding. Norway did not change its policy and bear s were virtually eliminated by 1920-30. Since 1975, bear observations increa sed in Norway. Thi s coincided temporally with an abrupt increase in the Swedish bear population, and bears reappeared sooner in areas closer to the remnant Swedish population s. Both cond itions support our conclusion that the bear was virtually exterminated in Norway and suggest that bears observed now are primarily immigrants from Sweden , except for far northern Norw ay, whi ch was recolonised from Russia and Finland. Today , we estimate that the Scandinavian bear popul ation numbers about 700 , with about 2% in Norw ay (on aver age about 14 in Norway, 650 -700 in Sweden). Thi s is a dra stic reduction in the estimate of bear s in Norway, compared with earlier stud ies. The trend s in bear numbers responded to the policies in effect. The most effective measure s used in Scandinavia to con serve bears were those that reduced or eliminated the economic incentive for people to kill them . Our analy sis also sugges ts that population estim ates based on reports from observation s made by the general public can be greatly inflated.

We analyzed harvest data to describe hunting patterns and harvest demography of brown bears (Ursus arctos) killed in 3 geographic regions in Sweden during 1981–2004. In addition, we investigated the effects of a ban on baiting, instituted in 2001, and 2 major changes in the quota system: a switch to sex‐specific quotas in 1992 and a return to total quotas in 1999. Brown bears (n=887) were harvested specifically by bear hunters and incidentally by moose (Alces alces) hunters. Both hunter categories harvested bears 1) using dogs (37%), 2) by still hunting (30%), 3) with the use of bait (18%), and 4) by stalking (16%). The proportion of bears killed with different harvest methods varied among regions and between bear‐ and moose‐oriented hunters. We found differences between male (52%) and female bears (48%) with respect to the variables that explained age. Moose‐oriented hunters using still hunting harvested the youngest male bears. Bears harvested during the first management period (1981–1991) were older and had greater odds of being male than during the subsequent period. It appears that hunters harvesting bears in Sweden are less selective than their North American counterparts, possibly due to differences in the hunting system. When comparing the 4 years immediately prior to the ban on baiting with the 4 years following the ban, we found no differences in average age of harvested bears, sex ratio, or proportion of bears killed with stalking, still hunting, and hunting with dogs, suggesting that the ban on baiting in Sweden had no immediate effect on patterns of brown bear harvest demography and remaining hunting methods. As the demographic and evolutionary side effects of selective harvesting receive growing attention, wildlife managers should be aware that differences in harvest systems between jurisdictions may cause qualitative and quantitative differences in harvest biases. (JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT 72(1):79–88; 2008)

No abstract

: In North America, brown bears (Ursus arctos) can be a significant predator on moose (Alces alces) calves. Our study in Sweden is the first in which brown bears are the only predator on moose calves. Bears and moose occurred at densities of about 30/1,000 km2 and 920/1,000 km2, respectively, and bears killed about 26% of the calves. Ninety‐two percent of the predation took place when calves were <1 month old. Bear predation was probably additive to other natural mortality, which was about 10% in areas both with and without bears. Females that lost their calves in spring produced more calves the following year (1.54 calves/F) than females that kept their calves (1.11 calves/F), which reduced the net loss of calves due to predation to about 22%.

The white spotting locus (S) in dogs is colocalized with the MITF (microphtalmia-associated transcription factor) gene. The phenotypic effects of the four S alleles range from solid colour (S) to extreme white spotting (sw). We have investigated four candidate mutations associated with the sw allele, a SINE insertion, a SNP at a conserved site and a simple repeat polymorphism all associated with the MITF-M promoter as well as a 12 base pair deletion in exon 1B. The variants associated with white spotting at all four loci were also found among wolves and we conclude that none of these could be a sole causal mutation, at least not for extreme white spotting. We propose that the three canine white spotting alleles are not caused by three independent mutations but represent haplotype effects due to different combinations of causal polymorphisms. The simple repeat polymorphism showed extensive diversity both in dogs and wolves, and allele-sharing was common between wolves and white spotted dogs but was non-existent between solid and spotted dogs as well as between wolves and solid dogs. This finding was unexpected as Solid is assumed to be the wild-type allele. The data indicate that the simple repeat polymorphism has been a target for selection during dog domestication and breed formation. We also evaluated the significance of the three MITF-M associated polymorphisms with a Luciferase assay, and found conclusive evidence that the simple repeat polymorphism affects promoter activity. Three alleles associated with white spotting gave consistently lower promoter activity compared with the allele associated with solid colour. We propose that the simple repeat polymorphism affects cooperativity between transcription factors binding on either flanking sides of the repeat. Thus, both genetic and functional evidence show that the simple repeat polymorphism is a key regulator of white spotting in dogs.

BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses.