2013
DOI: 10.1007/s10344-013-0705-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sika deer distribution and habitat selection: the influence of the availability and distribution of food, cover, and threats

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
22
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
1
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Grazing levels are not too high on either heath type despite high overall population densities of approximately 1 deer per ha. Our study agrees with previous findings [52] and show that this is because sika deer use dry heaths and other habitats more than wet heaths. The grazing by C. nippon creates open ground for ants and stimulates fresh growth of the larval food plant, whether that is E. tetralix (in wet heath plots), or C. vulgaris (in dry heath plots).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 94%
“…Grazing levels are not too high on either heath type despite high overall population densities of approximately 1 deer per ha. Our study agrees with previous findings [52] and show that this is because sika deer use dry heaths and other habitats more than wet heaths. The grazing by C. nippon creates open ground for ants and stimulates fresh growth of the larval food plant, whether that is E. tetralix (in wet heath plots), or C. vulgaris (in dry heath plots).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 94%
“…Accordingly, the foraging area size decreased with legume availability in both sexes. A decrease in foraging area as food availability increases has been found in other species (Schradin et al, 2010;Uzal et al, 2013). Besides the legume availability effect on the size of morning foraging area, there could be a food distribution effect on animal mobility.…”
Section: Tablementioning
confidence: 79%
“…The area in which an animal lives and performs activities associated with foraging, social behaviours and resting is known as its home range (Burt, 1943). Its size has been shown to be influenced by many factors, such as food availability (Schradin et al, 2010;Uzal et al, 2013), body size (McNab, 1963;Jenkins et al, 1981;Belovsky & Slade, 1986;Lindstedt et al, 1986;Mysterud et al, 2001), sex (Mysterud et al, 2001;Dunbar & Shi, 2008;Pays & Jarman, 2008;Lees et al, 2012), age (Mikesic & Drickamer, 1992;Tufto et al, 1996), diet (McNab, 1963) and brood size (Säid et al, 2005). Among these factors, body size and food availability have been identified as the main determinants of home range size, which correlates positively with body size and inversely with food availability (McNab, 1963;Schoener, 1968;Peters, 1983;Jetz et al, 2004;Tamburello et al, 2015), both between species (Haskell et al, 2002) and within species (e.g., Cederlund & Sand, 1994;Palomares, 1994).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, the outcome of inter-specific competition may provide an alternative explanation to the observed patterns. Indeed, when selecting the habitat with the highest food biomass (i.e., shrubs and pole stage), female roe deer might try to decrease the competition for food resources with red deer 29 while eventually benefiting from cover to protect them from hunters 30 , 31 . Such selection for habitat offering cover in areas where animals are heavily harvested is also a common tactic allowing individuals to protect themselves from hunters 16 , 30 , 32 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%