Large felids as predators of wild boars in the Atlantic Forest: reconciling Verdade <i>et al</i>. and Rosa <i>et al</i>.

Hegel, Carla Grasiele Zanin; Marini, Miguel Ângelo

doi:10.1111/acv.12402

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bobcats are known to cache unconsumed prey items (McCord and Cardoza 1982, Svoboda et al 2013, Nelson et al 2015 and their smaller body size may limit consumption of prey relative to coyotes and wolves (Chakrabarti et al 2016), increasing detection by technician teams. Others have also reported high detection rates by humans of cougar (Puma concolor; Knopff et al 2009) and jaguar (Panthera onca; Gese et al 2016) predations sites, despite similar behavior of caching unconsumed prey (Hegel and Marini 2018). We suspect that greater predation site fidelity of bobcats, as compared to the other carnivore species we studied, increased the ability of technician teams to identify prey remains, similar to effects observed for cougars (Knopff et al 2009).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Conservation Detection Dogs Increase Efficacy for Prey Detection at Carnivore GPS Cluster Sites During Summer

Petroelje

Fowler

Kautz

et al. 2021

Wildlife Society Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Combining carnivore movements with site visits to investigate predation events can inform investigators of carnivore diets, kill rates, and risk factors for prey. However, detecting remains of prey can be challenging when prey is small or when vegetation conceals prey. Conservation detection dogs (CDDs) have assisted with wildlife surveys to locate objects of conservation interest, often improving detection over human counterparts. We hypothesized that CDDs would improve efficacy for detection of prey remains at kill locations compared to human searchers. We compared the efficacy of CDD teams (1 dog, 1 human handler) and technician teams (2 humans) for locating prey remains at 729 carnivore cluster (potential predation) sites in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, USA, during May to August of 2015. Carnivore species included gray wolves (Canis lupus), coyotes (C. latrans), bobcats (Lynx rufus), and American black bears (Ursus americanus). Overall, CDD teams identified prey remains at 2.3 times more clusters, required 42% less search time, and handlers traveled 83% less distance per detected prey remain compared to technician teams. Within carnivore species, CDD teams detected small prey remains at a greater rate than technician teams (4.0-4.3 times greater) for all carnivores except for bobcat which had similar detection rate. Detection of large prey remains (e.g., adult ungulates) was similar between CDD teams and technician teams. Our study supports CDDs ability to outperform humans when searching for objects of conservation interest which are visually cryptic but traceable by scent. Where logistics allow, we recommend use of CDDs over human searchers when it is a priority to locate remains of small prey and when vegetation is dense and may obscure even larger prey items.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Conservation Detection Dogs Increase Efficacy for Prey Detection at Carnivore GPS Cluster Sites During Summer

Petroelje

Fowler

Kautz

et al. 2021

Wildlife Society Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…So, it is possible to suggest that pumas are not actively foraging for wild boars. Pumas probably prey on young wild boars opportunistically, but there are no published data of this behaviour in tropical environments of South America, except by anecdotical information cited by Hegel & Marini (2018) [ 56 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who’s afraid of the big bad boar? Assessing the effect of wild boar presence on the occurrence and activity patterns of other mammals

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wild boar are considered one the world's worst invasive species and linked to biodiversity loss, competition for resources, predation of native species, and habitat modifications. In this study, we use camera traps to evaluate whether the invasive wild boar had an effect on the medium-sized mammal community of a protected area in southern Brazil. Based on photographic records, we evaluated whether the presence and relative abundance of wild boar was associated with a decrease in diversity or change in activity of medium-sized mammals. All comparisons were made between samples where wild boar were present or absent. The records of each camera during a season were considered a sample. The wild boar was the fourth most common species in the study area being present in 7.8% of the photographic records. The species richness of mammals was not negatively affected by the occurrence of wild boar and most common species did not exhibit changes in the daily activity pattern. However, we recorded an increase in the time elapsed between an observation of wild boar and the record of the next species relative to the average latency period observed among other mammalian species. This average latency period was similar to that observed in the case of large predators such as Puma, and its increase could be reflective partly of the avoidance of native species to wild boar. Nevertheless, our results show that the effect of invasive wild boar on the mammal community is not large as expected.

show abstract

“…This lower occupancy near running watercourses could represent a threat to young pig because of a higher danger of drowning when crossing deeper watercourses, because of hypothermia due to the low-fat content in the first months of live (Rosell et al 2001). Also, wild pig tends to avoid areas near watercourses probably because of lower protection from predators (Kurz & Marchinton 1972;Massei et al 1997), which can prey upon juveniles and piglets (Hegel & Marini 2018). However, wetlands are known to be used as a shelter, for breeding, feeding and mainly regulation of body temperature by mud baths (Mendina Filho et al 2015), which can also help clean out ectoparasites (West et al 2009).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Wild pig are one of the several invasive species present in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest (Deberdt & Scherer 2007, Hegel & Marini 2013, Pedrosa et al 2015. These native forests offer resources such as water, food, and humid areas, and have nowadays low density of large predators, like jaguars or pumas (Machado et al 2008), which have the potential to prey upon large ungulates (Hegel & Marini 2018). Wild pig impact on the Atlantic Forest is poorly known, but at a forest fragment in south Brazil, the impact on the native vegetation inside a reserve was evaluated and showed intense herbivory, rooting and soil overturning (Hegel & Marini 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wild pig (Sus scrofa L.) occupancy patterns in the Brazilian Atlantic forest

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the great impacts of invasive wild pig (Sus scrofa) to natural ecosystems, habitat use by this species in the neotropics remains poorly studied. Here, we investigated the effects of local habitat and landscape covariates (vegetation types, running watercourses and roads) on occupancy patterns of wild pig in the Atlantic Forest of southern Brazil. We used single season occupancy modeling to estimate detection (p) and occupancy (ψ) probabilities, using 8-day camera-trap monitoring of 100 sampled sites. The cameras detected wild pig in 64 sites (naïve occupancy = 64 %). The four best models explained 72.7 % of the occupancy patterns, and the top model (with "water" variable) had a weight of 28.5 %. Even though none of the tested variables had high explanatory power of wild pig occupancy, the water variable had a negative effect trend (β = -1.124; SE = 0.734), with 59 % of occupancy when water was present and 82 % when it was absent around the sampling sites. Vestiges of the presence of wild pig in different vegetation types revealed that they used plantations of Pinus sp., native forests, and corn and oat crops. The occupation pattern shows that wild pig are generalist at our study site at the Atlantic Forest being found everywhere, raising ecological and economic concerns about the high potential negative effects of its invasion.

show abstract

Large felids as predators of wild boars in the Atlantic Forest: reconciling Verdade et al. and Rosa et al.

Cited by 10 publications

References 7 publications

Conservation Detection Dogs Increase Efficacy for Prey Detection at Carnivore GPS Cluster Sites During Summer

Conservation Detection Dogs Increase Efficacy for Prey Detection at Carnivore GPS Cluster Sites During Summer

Who’s afraid of the big bad boar? Assessing the effect of wild boar presence on the occurrence and activity patterns of other mammals

Wild pig (Sus scrofa L.) occupancy patterns in the Brazilian Atlantic forest

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About