Revisions of Rump Fat and Body Scoring Indices for Deer, Elk, and Moose

Abstract: Because they do not require sacrificing animals, body condition scores (BCS), thickness of rump fat (MAXFAT), and other similar predictors of body fat have advanced estimating nutritional condition of ungulates and their use has proliferated in North America in the last decade. However, in...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of Wildlife Management
Main Authors: COOK, RACHEL C., COOK, JOHN G., STEPHENSON, THOMAS R., MYERS, WOODROW L., MCCORQUODALE, SCOTT M., VALES, DAVID J., IRWIN, LARRY L., HALL, P. BRIGGS, SPENCER, ROCKY D., MURPHIE, SHANNON L., SCHOENECKER, KATHRYN A., MILLER, PATRICK J.
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2010
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.2193/2009-031
https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.2193%2F2009-031
id crwiley:10.2193/2009-031
record_format openpolar
spelling crwiley:10.2193/2009-031 2024-09-15T17:36:19+00:00 Revisions of Rump Fat and Body Scoring Indices for Deer, Elk, and Moose COOK, RACHEL C. COOK, JOHN G. STEPHENSON, THOMAS R. MYERS, WOODROW L. MCCORQUODALE, SCOTT M. VALES, DAVID J. IRWIN, LARRY L. HALL, P. BRIGGS SPENCER, ROCKY D. MURPHIE, SHANNON L. SCHOENECKER, KATHRYN A. MILLER, PATRICK J. 2010 http://dx.doi.org/10.2193/2009-031 https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.2193%2F2009-031 en eng Wiley http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor The Journal of Wildlife Management volume 74, issue 4, page 880-896 ISSN 0022-541X 1937-2817 journal-article 2010 crwiley https://doi.org/10.2193/2009-031 2024-07-30T04:19:01Z Abstract: Because they do not require sacrificing animals, body condition scores (BCS), thickness of rump fat (MAXFAT), and other similar predictors of body fat have advanced estimating nutritional condition of ungulates and their use has proliferated in North America in the last decade. However, initial testing of these predictors was too limited to assess their reliability among diverse habitats, ecotypes, subspecies, and populations across the continent. With data collected from mule deer ( Odocoileus hemionus ), elk ( Cervus elaphus ), and moose ( Alces alces ) during initial model development and data collected subsequently from free‐ranging mule deer and elk herds across much of the western United States, we evaluated reliability across a broader range of conditions than were initially available. First, to more rigorously test reliability of the MAXFAT index, we evaluated its robustness across the 3 species, using an allometric scaling function to adjust for differences in animal size. We then evaluated MAXFAT, rump body condition score (rBCS), rLIVINDEX (an arithmetic combination of MAXFAT and rBCS), and our new allometrically scaled rump‐fat thickness index using data from 815 free‐ranging female Roosevelt and Rocky Mountain elk ( C. e. roosevelti and C. e. nelsoni ) from 19 populations encompassing 4 geographic regions and 250 free‐ranging female mule deer from 7 populations and 2 regions. We tested for effects of subspecies, geographic region, and captive versus free‐ranging existence. Rump‐fat thickness, when scaled allometrically with body mass, was related to ingesta‐free body fat over a 38–522‐kg range of body mass ( r 2 = 0.87; P < 0.001), indicating the technique is remarkably robust among at least the 3 cervid species of our analysis. However, we found an underscoring bias with the rBCS for elk that had >12% body fat. This bias translated into a difference between subspecies, because Rocky Mountain elk tended to be fatter than Roosevelt elk in our sample. Effects of observer error with the ... Article in Journal/Newspaper Alces alces Wiley Online Library The Journal of Wildlife Management 74 4 880 896
institution Open Polar
collection Wiley Online Library
op_collection_id crwiley
language English
description Abstract: Because they do not require sacrificing animals, body condition scores (BCS), thickness of rump fat (MAXFAT), and other similar predictors of body fat have advanced estimating nutritional condition of ungulates and their use has proliferated in North America in the last decade. However, initial testing of these predictors was too limited to assess their reliability among diverse habitats, ecotypes, subspecies, and populations across the continent. With data collected from mule deer ( Odocoileus hemionus ), elk ( Cervus elaphus ), and moose ( Alces alces ) during initial model development and data collected subsequently from free‐ranging mule deer and elk herds across much of the western United States, we evaluated reliability across a broader range of conditions than were initially available. First, to more rigorously test reliability of the MAXFAT index, we evaluated its robustness across the 3 species, using an allometric scaling function to adjust for differences in animal size. We then evaluated MAXFAT, rump body condition score (rBCS), rLIVINDEX (an arithmetic combination of MAXFAT and rBCS), and our new allometrically scaled rump‐fat thickness index using data from 815 free‐ranging female Roosevelt and Rocky Mountain elk ( C. e. roosevelti and C. e. nelsoni ) from 19 populations encompassing 4 geographic regions and 250 free‐ranging female mule deer from 7 populations and 2 regions. We tested for effects of subspecies, geographic region, and captive versus free‐ranging existence. Rump‐fat thickness, when scaled allometrically with body mass, was related to ingesta‐free body fat over a 38–522‐kg range of body mass ( r 2 = 0.87; P < 0.001), indicating the technique is remarkably robust among at least the 3 cervid species of our analysis. However, we found an underscoring bias with the rBCS for elk that had >12% body fat. This bias translated into a difference between subspecies, because Rocky Mountain elk tended to be fatter than Roosevelt elk in our sample. Effects of observer error with the ...
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author COOK, RACHEL C.
COOK, JOHN G.
STEPHENSON, THOMAS R.
MYERS, WOODROW L.
MCCORQUODALE, SCOTT M.
VALES, DAVID J.
IRWIN, LARRY L.
HALL, P. BRIGGS
SPENCER, ROCKY D.
MURPHIE, SHANNON L.
SCHOENECKER, KATHRYN A.
MILLER, PATRICK J.
spellingShingle COOK, RACHEL C.
COOK, JOHN G.
STEPHENSON, THOMAS R.
MYERS, WOODROW L.
MCCORQUODALE, SCOTT M.
VALES, DAVID J.
IRWIN, LARRY L.
HALL, P. BRIGGS
SPENCER, ROCKY D.
MURPHIE, SHANNON L.
SCHOENECKER, KATHRYN A.
MILLER, PATRICK J.
Revisions of Rump Fat and Body Scoring Indices for Deer, Elk, and Moose
author_facet COOK, RACHEL C.
COOK, JOHN G.
STEPHENSON, THOMAS R.
MYERS, WOODROW L.
MCCORQUODALE, SCOTT M.
VALES, DAVID J.
IRWIN, LARRY L.
HALL, P. BRIGGS
SPENCER, ROCKY D.
MURPHIE, SHANNON L.
SCHOENECKER, KATHRYN A.
MILLER, PATRICK J.
author_sort COOK, RACHEL C.
title Revisions of Rump Fat and Body Scoring Indices for Deer, Elk, and Moose
title_short Revisions of Rump Fat and Body Scoring Indices for Deer, Elk, and Moose
title_full Revisions of Rump Fat and Body Scoring Indices for Deer, Elk, and Moose
title_fullStr Revisions of Rump Fat and Body Scoring Indices for Deer, Elk, and Moose
title_full_unstemmed Revisions of Rump Fat and Body Scoring Indices for Deer, Elk, and Moose
title_sort revisions of rump fat and body scoring indices for deer, elk, and moose
publisher Wiley
publishDate 2010
url http://dx.doi.org/10.2193/2009-031
https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.2193%2F2009-031
genre Alces alces
genre_facet Alces alces
op_source The Journal of Wildlife Management
volume 74, issue 4, page 880-896
ISSN 0022-541X 1937-2817
op_rights http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor
op_doi https://doi.org/10.2193/2009-031
container_title The Journal of Wildlife Management
container_volume 74
container_issue 4
container_start_page 880
op_container_end_page 896
_version_ 1810488709501419520