Multi‐Scale Foraging Habitat Use and Interactions by Sympatric Cervids in Northeastern China

Abstract: Moose ( Alces alces ) and roe deer ( Capreolus pygargus ) are sympatric in the forest region of northeastern China. Using univariate analyses of feeding sign data, we found the 2 species were positively associated, but there were distinctions between their use of forage resources across la...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of Wildlife Management
Main Authors: JIANG, GUANGSHUN, MA, JIANZHANG, ZHANG, MINGHAI, STOTT, PHILIP
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2010
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.2193/2009-214
https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.2193%2F2009-214
id crwiley:10.2193/2009-214
record_format openpolar
spelling crwiley:10.2193/2009-214 2024-06-23T07:45:12+00:00 Multi‐Scale Foraging Habitat Use and Interactions by Sympatric Cervids in Northeastern China JIANG, GUANGSHUN MA, JIANZHANG ZHANG, MINGHAI STOTT, PHILIP 2010 http://dx.doi.org/10.2193/2009-214 https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.2193%2F2009-214 en eng Wiley http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor The Journal of Wildlife Management volume 74, issue 4, page 678-689 ISSN 0022-541X 1937-2817 journal-article 2010 crwiley https://doi.org/10.2193/2009-214 2024-05-31T08:15:32Z Abstract: Moose ( Alces alces ) and roe deer ( Capreolus pygargus ) are sympatric in the forest region of northeastern China. Using univariate analyses of feeding sign data, we found the 2 species were positively associated, but there were distinctions between their use of forage resources across landscape, patch, and microhabitat scales. We used resource selection function models to predict the influence of environmental covariates on moose and roe deer foraging; we detected covariate effects at the landscape and microhabitat scales but not at the patch scale. Forage resources used by the 2 species were similar, but moose used wetter areas and more low‐visibility habitats than did roe deer, which strongly avoided areas with sparse vegetation. Both species were influenced by forage abundance and distribution at the microhabitat scale but exhibited differences in intensity of use of plant species and microhabitats. Moose used areas with deeper snow and avoided hiding cover; roe deer avoided areas with higher total basal areas of tree stems and preferred areas with high plant species richness. For moose, there was a trade‐off in the use of concealment cover between the landscape and microhabitat scales. We detected avoidance by moose of roads where roe deer occurred. Roe deer exhibited more capacity for coping with human disturbance and interspecific interaction. In areas similar to our study area, road closures and suppression of roe deer near roads within 3–5 years postlogging may benefit moose. Furthermore, a mosaic of areas with different logging intervals may contribute to spatial separation of moose and roe deer and promote their coexistence. Article in Journal/Newspaper Alces alces Wiley Online Library The Journal of Wildlife Management 74 4 678 689
institution Open Polar
collection Wiley Online Library
op_collection_id crwiley
language English
description Abstract: Moose ( Alces alces ) and roe deer ( Capreolus pygargus ) are sympatric in the forest region of northeastern China. Using univariate analyses of feeding sign data, we found the 2 species were positively associated, but there were distinctions between their use of forage resources across landscape, patch, and microhabitat scales. We used resource selection function models to predict the influence of environmental covariates on moose and roe deer foraging; we detected covariate effects at the landscape and microhabitat scales but not at the patch scale. Forage resources used by the 2 species were similar, but moose used wetter areas and more low‐visibility habitats than did roe deer, which strongly avoided areas with sparse vegetation. Both species were influenced by forage abundance and distribution at the microhabitat scale but exhibited differences in intensity of use of plant species and microhabitats. Moose used areas with deeper snow and avoided hiding cover; roe deer avoided areas with higher total basal areas of tree stems and preferred areas with high plant species richness. For moose, there was a trade‐off in the use of concealment cover between the landscape and microhabitat scales. We detected avoidance by moose of roads where roe deer occurred. Roe deer exhibited more capacity for coping with human disturbance and interspecific interaction. In areas similar to our study area, road closures and suppression of roe deer near roads within 3–5 years postlogging may benefit moose. Furthermore, a mosaic of areas with different logging intervals may contribute to spatial separation of moose and roe deer and promote their coexistence.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author JIANG, GUANGSHUN
MA, JIANZHANG
ZHANG, MINGHAI
STOTT, PHILIP
spellingShingle JIANG, GUANGSHUN
MA, JIANZHANG
ZHANG, MINGHAI
STOTT, PHILIP
Multi‐Scale Foraging Habitat Use and Interactions by Sympatric Cervids in Northeastern China
author_facet JIANG, GUANGSHUN
MA, JIANZHANG
ZHANG, MINGHAI
STOTT, PHILIP
author_sort JIANG, GUANGSHUN
title Multi‐Scale Foraging Habitat Use and Interactions by Sympatric Cervids in Northeastern China
title_short Multi‐Scale Foraging Habitat Use and Interactions by Sympatric Cervids in Northeastern China
title_full Multi‐Scale Foraging Habitat Use and Interactions by Sympatric Cervids in Northeastern China
title_fullStr Multi‐Scale Foraging Habitat Use and Interactions by Sympatric Cervids in Northeastern China
title_full_unstemmed Multi‐Scale Foraging Habitat Use and Interactions by Sympatric Cervids in Northeastern China
title_sort multi‐scale foraging habitat use and interactions by sympatric cervids in northeastern china
publisher Wiley
publishDate 2010
url http://dx.doi.org/10.2193/2009-214
https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.2193%2F2009-214
genre Alces alces
genre_facet Alces alces
op_source The Journal of Wildlife Management
volume 74, issue 4, page 678-689
ISSN 0022-541X 1937-2817
op_rights http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor
op_doi https://doi.org/10.2193/2009-214
container_title The Journal of Wildlife Management
container_volume 74
container_issue 4
container_start_page 678
op_container_end_page 689
_version_ 1802638081532100608