Spelling suggestions: "subject:"iit fox."" "subject:"hiit fox.""
1 |
An ecological study of Vulpes velox in NebraskaHines, Terrence D. January 1980 (has links) (PDF)
Thesis (M.S.)--University of Nebraska--Lincoln, 1980. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 47-53).
|
2 |
An ecological study of Vulpes velox in Nebraska /Hines, Terrence D. January 1980 (has links) (PDF)
Thesis (M.S.)--University of Nebraska--Lincoln, 1980. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 47-53). Available also electronically via World Wide Web in PDF format.
|
3 |
San Joaquin kit fox home range, habitat use, and movements in urban Bakersfield /Frost, Nancy. January 2005 (has links)
Thesis (M.S.)--Humboldt State University, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 59-68). Also available via the Internet from the Humboldt Digital Scholar web site.
|
4 |
KIT FOX MOVEMENTS AND HOME RANGE USE IN WESTERN ARIZONA.Zoellick, Bruce William. January 1985 (has links)
No description available.
|
5 |
Distribution and Habitat Characteristics of the Kit Fox (Vulpes Macrotis) in UtahMcGrew, John C. 01 May 1977 (has links)
The distribution of the kit fox (Vulpes macrotis) in Utah was studied from 1974 to 1976 . A variety of methods were used, but a questionnaire sent annually to state and federal agencies, combined with interviews of fie ld personnel of these agencies, was found to be the most valuable. Kit foxes occur in western Utah and Washington County as previously reported. In addition, range extensions were noted in central Utah , and in Carbon, Emery, Grand, Wayne, and Garfield counties in east-central Utah. These range extensions total approximately 4,600- square miles (12,000 - square kilometers). The kit fox probably also inhabits San Juan County , but this was not confirmed.
Stepwise discriminant analysis ~1as performed on groups of skull s representing the three nominal subspecies of y_. macrotis reported to occur in Utah (V. m nevadensis, arsipus , and neomex i cana). The skulls were judged to represent three distinct populations significantly different from each other in at least seven skull characteristics. Six specimens from eastern Utah and western Colorado were tentatively assigned to V m nevadensis.
|
6 |
Effects of varying habitats on competition between endangered San Joaquin kit foxes (Vulpes macrotis mutica) and coyotes (Canis latrans)Nelson, Julia Lynn. January 2005 (has links) (PDF)
Thesis (M.S.)--Montana State University--Bozeman, 2005. / Title from PDF t.p. (viewed on June 12, 2006). Chairperson, Graduate Committee: Scott Creel. Includes bibliographical references (p. 71-80).
|
7 |
Kit fox diet in south-central ArizonaFisher, Jann Lindsay January 1981 (has links)
No description available.
|
8 |
Improving methodologies used for carnivore conservation and management : collection and analysis of fecal DNA samples from endangered San Joaquin kit fox populations in California /Smith, Deborah A. January 2006 (has links)
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2006. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 102-116).
|
9 |
Relationships Between Water Developments and Select Mammals on the U.S. Army Dugway Proving Ground, UtahKluever, Bryan M. 01 May 2015 (has links)
Water is essential to life. Three general forms of water exist: pre-formed water that is available in food, metabolic water that is created as a byproduct of life processes (e.g., metabolism of fat or breakdown of carbohydrates), and free water (i.e., water available for drinking). As humans settle arid environments, the addition of man-made free water sources (e.g., sewage ponds, catchment ponds) often occurs. In addition, a tool commonly used to increase the abundance or distribution of wildlife species in desert environments is the addition of water sources, usually specifically designed to benefit game species like bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), and chukar partridge (Alectoris chukar). In recent decades, some scientists have argued that adding water sources to deserts may have little to no effect on desert species because they are adapted to living in desert conditions, and have thus evolved to obtain their water needs in preformed and/or metabolic form. Scientists have also suggested that adding water sources to desert environments may actually harm some individual species and alter the arraignments of groups of similarly related species, known as communities. I conducted four studies at the U.S. Army Dugway Proving Ground to determine if man-made water sources have an influence on the rodent community, jackrabbits, and the canid community at the U.S. Army Dugway Proving Ground, Utah. I found that turning off water sources had no effect on abundance of rodent communities or jackrabbits. I found that a portion of coyotes used water sources and coyotes were only slightly less common near water sources once they were turned off. In addition, a portion of coyotes rarely or never drink from water sources and that coyotes did not leave their territories if water sources accessible to them were turned off. My final study revealed that turning off water sources did not influence kit fox survival or abundance, and that kit fox territories differed from areas associated with water sources in several key environmental characterizes, which may suggest that areas associated with water sources were not historically used by kit foxes. In summary, these findings suggest that water developments have little impact on the species that I studied.
|
10 |
Competition Dynamics Within Communities of Desert Wildlife at Water SourcesHall, Lucas Keith 01 June 2016 (has links)
Water is a vital resource for species inhabiting arid and semi-arid regions and can shape the biotic communities that we observe. Because water is considered a limiting resource for many species in desert environments, there is the potential for competitive interactions between species to occur at or around water sources. For this dissertation I tested hypotheses related to resource competition among different species of wildlife in the Great Basin and Mojave Deserts of western Utah. Chapter one evaluated the influence of feral horses (Equus caballus) on patterns of water use by communities of native birds and mammals. Chapter two determined if feral horses competed with pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) for access to water. In chapters one and two, we found evidence that horses compete with native wildlife for water. In chapter one, horses were associated with decreased richness and diversity of native species at water sources. Native species also had fewer visits and spent less time at water sources frequented by horses. In chapter two, we found that pronghorn and mule deer used water sources less often where horse activity was high. There were also significant differences in temporal activity for pronghorn, but not mule deer, at horse-occupied sites versus sites where horses were absent or uncommon. Our results indicated that horses spatially and temporally displaced other species at water sources providing evidence of a negative influence on how communities of native wildlife access a limited resource in an arid environment. Chapter three assessed whether dominant carnivores (coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)) negatively influenced the spatial use of water sources by the subordinate kit fox (Vulpes macrotis). Our results did not reveal strong negative associations between kit fox visits to water sources and visits by dominant carnivores; in fact, dominant carnivores contributed very little to the use of water by kit foxes. Instead, kit fox visits were more closely associated with habitat features at water sources. Our findings indicate that dominant carnivores are not the primary driver of use of water sources by subordinate carnivores. Chapter four evaluated whether a simulated loss of water due to climate change/increased human use would differentially affect desert bats based on flight morphology and maneuverability. When we experimentally reduced surface area of water sources, larger, less-maneuverable bats experienced a 69% decrease in drinking success and increased competition with smaller, maneuverable bats. Anticipated reductions in the sizes of water sources due to climate change may lead to species with less maneuverability being unable to access water efficiently and facing increased competition from more agile bats.
|
Page generated in 0.039 seconds