2010
DOI: 10.1590/s0001-37652010000300015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Feeding habits of coypu (Myocastor coypus Molina 1978) in the wetlands of the Southern region of Brazil

Abstract: The aim of this study was to determine the diet of coypu (Myocastor coypus) in two areas (Santa Isabel do Sul wetlands -Area 1, and Santa Marta Farm -Area 2) in the Southern region of Brazil, using microhistological analyses of feces. Twenty-four plant species were identified from collected feces samples. Among the identified species, nine are common in the animals' diet in both areas; the presence of Oriza sativa was not detected in any of the samples. Among the identified species, 84% and 54% of the coypu's … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
15
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
2
15
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In some cases, the morphology of the coprolite can indicate the producer, as, for example, spiral coprolites are often attributed to non-teleost fishes (Williams, 1972;Jain, 1983;McAllister, 1985;Souto, 2008;Dentzien-Dias et al, 2012;Niedźwiedzki et al, 2016). However, feces from different groups of animals can be similar in appearance, and variations can occur within the morphology of feces among a single producer, mainly due to different food and water availability and diseases (McAllister, 1985;Thulborn, 1991;Chin, 2002Chin, , 2007Chin, , 2008Chame, 2003;Bisceglia et al, 2007;Colares et al, 2010;Milàn, 2012;Lucas et al, 2012). Although, in some cases, the morphology is not enough to determine the animal source (Francischini et al, 2017), coprolite shape, together with inclusions, makes it possible to determine the producer.…”
Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In some cases, the morphology of the coprolite can indicate the producer, as, for example, spiral coprolites are often attributed to non-teleost fishes (Williams, 1972;Jain, 1983;McAllister, 1985;Souto, 2008;Dentzien-Dias et al, 2012;Niedźwiedzki et al, 2016). However, feces from different groups of animals can be similar in appearance, and variations can occur within the morphology of feces among a single producer, mainly due to different food and water availability and diseases (McAllister, 1985;Thulborn, 1991;Chin, 2002Chin, , 2007Chin, , 2008Chame, 2003;Bisceglia et al, 2007;Colares et al, 2010;Milàn, 2012;Lucas et al, 2012). Although, in some cases, the morphology is not enough to determine the animal source (Francischini et al, 2017), coprolite shape, together with inclusions, makes it possible to determine the producer.…”
Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Considering the number of browsed marks, damage by coypus was moderate in the first season but significant over the two next seasons (Figure 7). Several authors have noted that the coypu diet varies with the year and season (Guichón et al, 2003;Prigioni et al, 2005;Colares et al, 2010). Abbas (Abbas, 1991) observed that coypus only consumed terrestrial plants when aquatic vegetation was scarce.…”
Section: Coypu Impactmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The coypu a large herbivore of semi-aquatic, nocturnal and gregarious habits (Kinler et al, 1987;Palomares et al, 1994;Guichón et al, 2003a;2003b) usually found along the shore of freshwater marshes, ponds, and slow-flowing rivers and streams where it builds nests and burrows used as shelter for resting and reproduction (Courtalon et al, 1993;Merler et al, 1994;D'Adamo et al, 2000). Its distribution ranges from middle Bolivia and southern Brazil to southern Argentina (Woods et al, 1992;Bó et al, 2006;Colares et al, 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%