Testing foraging optimization models in brown bears: Time for a paradigm shift in nutritional ecology?

Abstract How organisms obtain energy to survive and reproduce is fundamental to ecology, yet researchers use theoretical concepts represented by simplified models to estimate diet and predict community interactions. Such simplistic models can sometimes limit our understanding of ecological principle...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Ecology
Main Authors: Mikkelsen, Ashlee J., Hobson, Keith A., Sergiel, Agnieszka, Hertel, Anne G., Selva, Nuria, Zedrosser, Andreas
Other Authors: Robert Bosch Stiftung
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ecy.4228
https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ecy.4228
id crwiley:10.1002/ecy.4228
record_format openpolar
spelling crwiley:10.1002/ecy.4228 2024-06-02T07:54:41+00:00 Testing foraging optimization models in brown bears: Time for a paradigm shift in nutritional ecology? Mikkelsen, Ashlee J. Hobson, Keith A. Sergiel, Agnieszka Hertel, Anne G. Selva, Nuria Zedrosser, Andreas Robert Bosch Stiftung 2023 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ecy.4228 https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ecy.4228 en eng Wiley http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Ecology volume 105, issue 2 ISSN 0012-9658 1939-9170 journal-article 2023 crwiley https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.4228 2024-05-03T11:39:21Z Abstract How organisms obtain energy to survive and reproduce is fundamental to ecology, yet researchers use theoretical concepts represented by simplified models to estimate diet and predict community interactions. Such simplistic models can sometimes limit our understanding of ecological principles. We used a polyphagous species with a wide distribution, the brown bear ( Ursus arctos ), to illustrate how disparate theoretical frameworks in ecology can affect conclusions regarding ecological communities. We used stable isotope measurements (δ 13 C, δ 15 N) from hairs of individually monitored bears in Sweden and Bayesian mixing models to estimate dietary proportions of ants, moose, and three berry species to compare with other brown bear populations. We also developed three hypotheses based on predominant foraging literature, and then compared predicted diets to field estimates. Our three models assumed (1) bears forage to optimize caloric efficiency (optimum foraging model), predicting bears predominately eat berries (~70% of diet) and opportunistically feed on moose ( Alces alces ) and ants ( Formica spp. and Camponotus spp; ~15% each); (2) bears maximize meat intake (maximizing fitness model), predicting a diet of 35%–50% moose, followed by ants (~30%), and berries (~15%); (3) bears forage to optimize macronutrient balance (macronutrient model), predicting a diet of ~22% (dry weight) or 17% metabolizable energy from proteins, with the rest made up of carbohydrates and lipids (~49% and 29% dry matter or 53% and 30% metabolizable energy, respectively). Bears primarily consumed bilberries ( Vaccinium myrtillus 50%–55%), followed by lingonberries ( V. vitis‐idaea 22%–30%), crowberries ( Empetrum nigrum 8%–15%), ants (5%–8%), and moose (3%–4%). Dry matter dietary protein was lower than predicted by the maximizing fitness model and the macronutrient balancing model, but protein made up a larger proportion of the metabolizable energy than predicted. While diets most closely resembled predictions from optimal ... Article in Journal/Newspaper Alces alces Empetrum nigrum Ursus arctos Wiley Online Library Ecology 105 2
institution Open Polar
collection Wiley Online Library
op_collection_id crwiley
language English
description Abstract How organisms obtain energy to survive and reproduce is fundamental to ecology, yet researchers use theoretical concepts represented by simplified models to estimate diet and predict community interactions. Such simplistic models can sometimes limit our understanding of ecological principles. We used a polyphagous species with a wide distribution, the brown bear ( Ursus arctos ), to illustrate how disparate theoretical frameworks in ecology can affect conclusions regarding ecological communities. We used stable isotope measurements (δ 13 C, δ 15 N) from hairs of individually monitored bears in Sweden and Bayesian mixing models to estimate dietary proportions of ants, moose, and three berry species to compare with other brown bear populations. We also developed three hypotheses based on predominant foraging literature, and then compared predicted diets to field estimates. Our three models assumed (1) bears forage to optimize caloric efficiency (optimum foraging model), predicting bears predominately eat berries (~70% of diet) and opportunistically feed on moose ( Alces alces ) and ants ( Formica spp. and Camponotus spp; ~15% each); (2) bears maximize meat intake (maximizing fitness model), predicting a diet of 35%–50% moose, followed by ants (~30%), and berries (~15%); (3) bears forage to optimize macronutrient balance (macronutrient model), predicting a diet of ~22% (dry weight) or 17% metabolizable energy from proteins, with the rest made up of carbohydrates and lipids (~49% and 29% dry matter or 53% and 30% metabolizable energy, respectively). Bears primarily consumed bilberries ( Vaccinium myrtillus 50%–55%), followed by lingonberries ( V. vitis‐idaea 22%–30%), crowberries ( Empetrum nigrum 8%–15%), ants (5%–8%), and moose (3%–4%). Dry matter dietary protein was lower than predicted by the maximizing fitness model and the macronutrient balancing model, but protein made up a larger proportion of the metabolizable energy than predicted. While diets most closely resembled predictions from optimal ...
author2 Robert Bosch Stiftung
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Mikkelsen, Ashlee J.
Hobson, Keith A.
Sergiel, Agnieszka
Hertel, Anne G.
Selva, Nuria
Zedrosser, Andreas
spellingShingle Mikkelsen, Ashlee J.
Hobson, Keith A.
Sergiel, Agnieszka
Hertel, Anne G.
Selva, Nuria
Zedrosser, Andreas
Testing foraging optimization models in brown bears: Time for a paradigm shift in nutritional ecology?
author_facet Mikkelsen, Ashlee J.
Hobson, Keith A.
Sergiel, Agnieszka
Hertel, Anne G.
Selva, Nuria
Zedrosser, Andreas
author_sort Mikkelsen, Ashlee J.
title Testing foraging optimization models in brown bears: Time for a paradigm shift in nutritional ecology?
title_short Testing foraging optimization models in brown bears: Time for a paradigm shift in nutritional ecology?
title_full Testing foraging optimization models in brown bears: Time for a paradigm shift in nutritional ecology?
title_fullStr Testing foraging optimization models in brown bears: Time for a paradigm shift in nutritional ecology?
title_full_unstemmed Testing foraging optimization models in brown bears: Time for a paradigm shift in nutritional ecology?
title_sort testing foraging optimization models in brown bears: time for a paradigm shift in nutritional ecology?
publisher Wiley
publishDate 2023
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ecy.4228
https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ecy.4228
genre Alces alces
Empetrum nigrum
Ursus arctos
genre_facet Alces alces
Empetrum nigrum
Ursus arctos
op_source Ecology
volume 105, issue 2
ISSN 0012-9658 1939-9170
op_rights http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.4228
container_title Ecology
container_volume 105
container_issue 2
_version_ 1800742782464163840