Does dispersal make the heart grow bolder? Avoidance of anthropogenic habitat elements across wolf life history

3D Insights into the Effects of Captivity on Wolf Mastication and Their Tooth Marks; Implications in Ecological Studies of Both the Past and Present

“…Both parks are dedicated to the conservation and investigation of different species, some of which are endangered, and keeping animals in open-air enclosures while also being open to the public for educational purposes. Nevertheless, in the interest of transparency it is important to point out that, while previous publications have referred to these samples as a product of semi-captive wolves, after careful evaluation and consideration of how wolves in the wild typically inhabit a large and variable territory with high mobility (≈10 km per day, with great variability among some reports [ 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 ], inter alia ), we considered that the enclosures presented in each of these parks were too small to consider these animals as anything other than captive. Personal communications by ground keepers have reported the wolf enclosure in Cabárceno to have an extension of 2700m 2 , approximately 0.04% of the total area (740 ha) of the Cabárceno natural park, while the Hosquillo individuals have a slightly larger enclosure measuring 10,000 m 2 , approximately 0.1% of the 910 ha of the Hosquillo natural park.…”

Estimating encounter location distributions from animal tracking data

“…Beyond the utility of the CDE in our empirical case studies, this framework can be used to investigate a wide range of intra‐ and interspecific relationships such as predator–prey and/or community dynamics, understanding how encounter rates vary in corridors, along key migration routes, in larger versus smaller reserves, etc. At the intraspecific level, the relationship between individual‐level heterogeneity, personality and movement is currently active area of research (Barry et al., 2020; Harris et al., 2020; Harrison et al., 2019; Hertel et al., 2020; Spiegel et al., 2017). Assuming differences in phenotypic traits (e.g.…”

“…At the intraspecific level, the relationship between individual-level heterogeneity, personality and movement is currently active area of research (Barry et al, 2020;Harris et al, 2020;Harrison et al, 2019;Hertel et al, 2020;Spiegel et al, 2017). Assuming differences in phenotypic traits (e.g.…”

Learning and Animal Movement

“…Learning can also help improve fitness even when spatial movement processes are not directly tied to foraging (e.g., territorial defense, migration, reproduction) (Box 2). For example, learning can provide advantages in dominance interactions (Kokko et al, 2006), efficiency of movement (Stamps, 1995), effective escape from predators (Brown, 2001), and large-scale dispersal decisions (Barry et al, 2020), all of which can translate into fitness benefits (Brown et al, 2008;Patrick and Weimerskirch, 2017). For territorial species, learning can influence how conflicts drive pattern formation (Stamps andKrishnan, 1999, 2001;Sih and Mateo, 2001) and alter strategies for territorial defense Schlägel and Lewis, 2014;Schlägel et al, 2017).…”

“…elements, in particular relatively little-used forest roads, in new territories after a greater level of exposure and use during a dispersal phase, suggesting that they might have learned that the benefits of using those human elements outweigh the risks (Barry et al, 2020). Translocation, which can be considered an artificial and more abrupt dispersal, also requires decision making in novel environments.…”