Effects of agro-forestry activities, cattle-raising practices and food-related factors in badger sett location and use in Portugal

Mechanisms underlying increased nest predation in natural gas fields: a test of the mesopredator release hypothesis

“…Rodents provide important food resources for many apex predators (Brillhart and Kaufman 1995, Laudet and Selva 2005, Sidorovich et al 2011), particularly in arid environments where other food resources may be scarce. Because badgers and coyotes avoid some types of human activity (Crooks 2002, Gehrt and Clark 2003, Hip olito et al 2016, their presence near energy development suggests that anthropogenic disturbance can modify behaviors in surprising ways-potentially via increased availability of desirable prey (live rodents and roadkill). Our results corroborate other work, moreover, suggesting that common raven densities increase in the sagebrush steppe near human disturbance, with ravens accounting for nearly half of predatory birds in some areas (Coates et al 2014).…”

“…, Hipólito et al. ). If apex predators present on natural gas fields, including coyotes, badgers, raptors, and corvids, are less prevalent near energy development, reduced risk of predation may facilitate increased mesopredator (i.e., rodent) densities.…”

“…In some contexts, predators such as corvids and coyotes can be drawn to the food and nesting resources associated with human disturbance (Ordeñana et al 2010, Coates et al 2014. In other contexts, however, coyotes, badgers, and raptors shift their distributions and behaviors away from disturbed areas, presumably to minimize contact with humans (Gehrt et al 2009, Garvin et al 2011, Brodie et al 2015, Hip olito et al 2016. If apex predators present on natural gas fields, including coyotes, badgers, raptors, and corvids, are less prevalent near energy development, reduced risk of predation may facilitate increased mesopredator (i.e., rodent) densities.…”

Climate and anthropogenic factors determine site occupancy in Scotland's Northern‐range badger population: implications of context‐dependent responses under environmental change

“…We selected predictor variables categories, a priori, based on factors known to be important to badger's ecology and distribution (e.g., Climate : Nouvellet et al., ; Land cover : Remonti, Balestrieri, & Prigioni, ; Disturbance : Hipólito et al., ; Competition : Soto & Palomares, ; Elevation : Prigioni & Deflorian, ). We used qgis 1.8.0.…”

“…Within this framework, we used Autumn-Winter occupancy data, that is, covering a critical phase of the badger life cycle, when food availability and environmental conditions are likely to be limiting (Noonan et al, 2014;Nouvellet et al, 2013), to test how badger occupancy is influenced by: (1) climatic conditions (and associated elevation effects), which define the species' climatic niche and thus directly affect its survival and recruitment patterns (Byrne et al, 2015;Macdonald et al, 2010;Noonan et al, 2015;Nouvellet et al, 2013;Thornton, 1988); (2) development of human infrastructures, as measures of anthropogenic disturbance (Elliott, O'Brien, & Hayden, 2015;Grilo, Bissonette, & Santos-Reis, 2009;Hipólito, Santos-Reis, & Rosalino, 2016); (3) forested versus un-forested habitats, because these relate to food availability and suitable sett sites (Virgós, 2001(Virgós, , 2002; and (4) structural complexity of the landscape matrix, as a surrogate for resource richness and diversity (Santos, Rosalino, Santos-Reis, & Ustin, 2016;Virgós, 2001). We then investigated how distinct topo-climatic contexts (i.e., temperature and elevation) interact with habitat type, human infrastructural development and modification of the landscape for agriculture.…”