• Refine Query
  • Source
  • Publication year
  • to
  • Language
  • 1
  • 1
  • Tagged with
  • 3
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • About
  • The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is provided by the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
    Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
1

Survival and mammalian predation of Rio Grande Turkeys on the Edwards Plateau, Texas.

Willsey, Beau Judson 30 September 2004 (has links)
Trends in Rio Grande wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo intermedia) abundance on the Edwards Plateau (EP), Texas, have been either stable or in decline since the 1970s. Four study areas, 2 each within stable (Stable Area A, SAA; Stable Area B, SAB) and declining regions (Declining Area A, DAA; Declining Area B, DAB), were delineated to examine (1) both annual and seasonal survival, (2) relative mammalian predator mean abundance (RMA), and (3) potential effects of lunar phase on scent-station visitation. During February 2001-March 2003, 257 turkeys were captured and instrumented with radio transmitters. Survival probabilities were generated using a Kaplan-Meier product limit estimator; a log-rank test tested for differences among sites. Annual survival was statistically different between regions (stable 0.566 ± 0.081; declining 0.737 ± 0.094; X2 = 3.68, P = 0.055) in 2002. Seasonal survival differed between regions (stable 0.812 ± 0.103; declining 0.718 ± 0.130; X2 = 3.88, P = 0.049) in spring 2003. Annual survival results during 2002 were counterintuitive with turkey trend data. Scent-station transects were established on non-paved ranch roads within study regions. Scent-station indices revealed higher (H = 19.653, P ≤ 0.001) RMA of opossum (Didelphis virginiana) and skunk (eastern spotted [Spilogale putorius], striped [Mephitis mephitis], or western spotted [S. gracilis]) (SAA, x⎯ = 0.0148; SAB, x⎯ = 0.0151; DAA, x⎯ = 0.0042; DAB, x⎯ = 0.0065) on stable areas. Higher RMA of coyotes (Canis latrans) on declining areas (SAA, x⎯ = 0.0067; SAB, x⎯ = 0.0022; DAA x⎯ = 0.0234; DAB x⎯ = 0.0434) suggested a possible causative factor of the decline, but abundance indices were not verified by empirical data though. Lunar phase was not a significant (T = -0.225, P = 0.822) covariate in scent-station visits by raccoons, opossums (new, x⎯ = 0.0111; full, x⎯ = 0.0324), or unidentified tracks (new, x⎯ = 0.0649; full, x⎯ = 0.0375). Nightly precipitation and wind speed probably influence mammalian use of scent stations more so than lunar illumination.
2

Distribuce šelem uvnitř a na okraji lesních habitatů / Distribution of carnivores inside and at the edge of forest habitats

ČERVINKA, Jaroslav January 2010 (has links)
This thesis is focused on habitat preferences of carnivores in fragmented landscape. By using the scent station method, fine-scale utilization of forest-farm edges by mammalian predators in dependence on patch size was examined. Preferences for edge structures was detected and these structures were equally utilized by carnivores in large as well as in small forest fragments. This shows that edge effect was present in all fragments regardless the patch size.
3

The Influence of Anthropogenic Development of Water on Coyotes and Kit Foxes in the Great Basin and Mojave Deserts

Hall, Lucas Keith 13 March 2013 (has links) (PDF)
Anthropogenic provisioning of water (water developments) to enhance abundance and distribution of wildlife is a common management practice in arid regions where water is limiting. Despite the long-term and widespread use of water developments, little is known about how they influence distribution, competition dynamics, and behavior of native species. To elucidate the potential influences of water developments on native species, we tested hypotheses concerning the occurrence and behavior of native kit foxes (Vulpes macrotis). First, we tested the indirect effect of water hypothesis (IEWH) which proposes that water developments negatively affect the arid-adapted kit fox by enabling a water-dependent competitor (i.e., coyote; Canis latrans) to expand distribution in arid landscapes. We tested the two predictions of the IEWH (i.e., coyotes will visit areas with water more frequently and kit foxes will avoid coyotes) and evaluated relative use of water by canids in the Great Basin and Mojave Deserts from 2010 to 2012. We established scent stations in areas with (wet) and without (dry) water and monitored visitation by canids to scent stations and water sources using infrared-triggered cameras. There was no difference in the proportions of visits to scent stations in wet or dry areas by coyotes or kit foxes at either study area. There was no correlation between visits to scent stations by coyotes and kit foxes. Visitation to water sources was not different for coyotes between study areas, but kit foxes visited water sources more in Mojave than Great Basin. The intense visitation to water by kit foxes in Mojave challenges our understanding that this species does not readily drink water. Our results did not support the IEWH in the Great Basin or Mojave Deserts for these two canids. Second, we tested three hypotheses that have been proposed to explain spatial variation in vigilance behavior. The predator-vigilance hypothesis (PVH) proposes that prey increase vigilance where there is evidence of predators. The visibility-vigilance hypothesis (VVH) suggests that prey increase vigilance where detection of predators is impeded or visibility is obstructed. The refuge-vigilance hypothesis (RVH) proposes that prey may perceive areas with low visibility (greater cover) as refuges and decrease vigilance. We evaluated support for these hypotheses using the kit fox, a solitary carnivore subject to intraguild predation, as a model. From 2010 to 2012, we used infrared-triggered cameras to record video of kit fox behavior at water developments in the Mojave Desert. The RVH explained more variation in vigilance behavior of kit foxes than the other two hypotheses (AICc model weight = 0.37). Kit foxes were less vigilant at water developments with low overhead cover (refuge) obstructing visibility. Based on our results, the PVH and VVH may not be applicable to all species of prey. Solitary prey, unlike gregarious prey, may use areas with concealing cover to maximize resource acquisition and minimize vigilance.

Page generated in 0.0912 seconds