Data from: Wildlife whodunnit: forensic identification of predators to inform wildlife management and conservation, collected in northern, Washington, USA from 2017-2021
Genetic evidence at predation mortality sites is rapidly improving predator-prey interaction studies and can provide information beyond field-based investigations alone. However, factors contributing to the retention of genetic evidence have received limited investigation in a field setting, and res...
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Dataset |
Language: | unknown |
Published: |
Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity
2022
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://search.dataone.org/view/urn:uuid:a884edb6-1473-48ec-b738-4a910b411f33 |
id |
dataone:urn:uuid:a884edb6-1473-48ec-b738-4a910b411f33 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
dataone:urn:uuid:a884edb6-1473-48ec-b738-4a910b411f33 2024-10-03T18:46:02+00:00 Data from: Wildlife whodunnit: forensic identification of predators to inform wildlife management and conservation, collected in northern, Washington, USA from 2017-2021 Taylor Ganz Melia DeVivo Ellen Reese Laura Prugh Data were collected in northern Washington, USA ENVELOPE(-120.9,-117.2,49.15,47.9) BEGINDATE: 2017-01-01T00:00:00Z ENDDATE: 2021-01-01T00:00:00Z 2022-01-01T00:00:00Z https://search.dataone.org/view/urn:uuid:a884edb6-1473-48ec-b738-4a910b411f33 unknown Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity carnivore DNA forensic analysis genetic mortality predation predator identification saliva ungulate Cervus elaphus Odocoileus hemionus Odocoileus virginianus Canis lupus Canis latrans Puma concolor Lynx rufux Ursus americanus Dataset 2022 dataone:urn:node:KNB 2024-10-03T18:18:45Z Genetic evidence at predation mortality sites is rapidly improving predator-prey interaction studies and can provide information beyond field-based investigations alone. However, factors contributing to the retention of genetic evidence have received limited investigation in a field setting, and researchers have yet to leverage genetic evidence to improve traditional field investigations. Using data from 61 mortality investigations of mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), white-tailed deer (O. virginianus), and elk (Cervus canadensis), we evaluated factors influencing predator DNA amplification success and misidentification of predators in field investigations. We found that predator DNA was detected more for prey with higher body mass (18.5% increase per standard deviation [23.1 kg] in carcass body mass above the mean [32.8 kg]). Predator DNA was also 27.0% more likely to amplify when collected from kill sites that had not undergone a freeze-thaw cycle between the mortality and the investigation. The delay between the kill and the investigation, the swabbing surface, and the amount of precipitation did not influence amplification of predator DNA. Misidentifications of the predator based on the field ID were not influenced by the investigation delay or investigator confidence level, suggesting that investigators should collect genetic evidence even when they feel certain about the predator. Errors in identifying the predator during the field investigation increased for prey with smaller body mass, and the predator was actually more likely to be misidentified than correctly identified for fawns and calves <~21 kg. Black bears (Ursus americanus), bobcats (Lynx rufus), cougars (Puma concolor), coyotes (Canis latrans), and wolves (Canis lupus) were equally likely to be missed in a field investigation, but bobcats tended to be falsely assigned more than expected and cougars were falsely assigned as the predator less than expected. Using genetic evidence as validation, we showed how patterns of predation and the field signs left by predators differed for some species depending on the size of the prey. Our findings should help researchers and managers to optimize their use of genetics to enhance field investigations. Dataset Canis lupus Lynx Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity (via DataONE) ENVELOPE(-120.9,-117.2,49.15,47.9) |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity (via DataONE) |
op_collection_id |
dataone:urn:node:KNB |
language |
unknown |
topic |
carnivore DNA forensic analysis genetic mortality predation predator identification saliva ungulate Cervus elaphus Odocoileus hemionus Odocoileus virginianus Canis lupus Canis latrans Puma concolor Lynx rufux Ursus americanus |
spellingShingle |
carnivore DNA forensic analysis genetic mortality predation predator identification saliva ungulate Cervus elaphus Odocoileus hemionus Odocoileus virginianus Canis lupus Canis latrans Puma concolor Lynx rufux Ursus americanus Taylor Ganz Melia DeVivo Ellen Reese Laura Prugh Data from: Wildlife whodunnit: forensic identification of predators to inform wildlife management and conservation, collected in northern, Washington, USA from 2017-2021 |
topic_facet |
carnivore DNA forensic analysis genetic mortality predation predator identification saliva ungulate Cervus elaphus Odocoileus hemionus Odocoileus virginianus Canis lupus Canis latrans Puma concolor Lynx rufux Ursus americanus |
description |
Genetic evidence at predation mortality sites is rapidly improving predator-prey interaction studies and can provide information beyond field-based investigations alone. However, factors contributing to the retention of genetic evidence have received limited investigation in a field setting, and researchers have yet to leverage genetic evidence to improve traditional field investigations. Using data from 61 mortality investigations of mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), white-tailed deer (O. virginianus), and elk (Cervus canadensis), we evaluated factors influencing predator DNA amplification success and misidentification of predators in field investigations. We found that predator DNA was detected more for prey with higher body mass (18.5% increase per standard deviation [23.1 kg] in carcass body mass above the mean [32.8 kg]). Predator DNA was also 27.0% more likely to amplify when collected from kill sites that had not undergone a freeze-thaw cycle between the mortality and the investigation. The delay between the kill and the investigation, the swabbing surface, and the amount of precipitation did not influence amplification of predator DNA. Misidentifications of the predator based on the field ID were not influenced by the investigation delay or investigator confidence level, suggesting that investigators should collect genetic evidence even when they feel certain about the predator. Errors in identifying the predator during the field investigation increased for prey with smaller body mass, and the predator was actually more likely to be misidentified than correctly identified for fawns and calves <~21 kg. Black bears (Ursus americanus), bobcats (Lynx rufus), cougars (Puma concolor), coyotes (Canis latrans), and wolves (Canis lupus) were equally likely to be missed in a field investigation, but bobcats tended to be falsely assigned more than expected and cougars were falsely assigned as the predator less than expected. Using genetic evidence as validation, we showed how patterns of predation and the field signs left by predators differed for some species depending on the size of the prey. Our findings should help researchers and managers to optimize their use of genetics to enhance field investigations. |
format |
Dataset |
author |
Taylor Ganz Melia DeVivo Ellen Reese Laura Prugh |
author_facet |
Taylor Ganz Melia DeVivo Ellen Reese Laura Prugh |
author_sort |
Taylor Ganz |
title |
Data from: Wildlife whodunnit: forensic identification of predators to inform wildlife management and conservation, collected in northern, Washington, USA from 2017-2021 |
title_short |
Data from: Wildlife whodunnit: forensic identification of predators to inform wildlife management and conservation, collected in northern, Washington, USA from 2017-2021 |
title_full |
Data from: Wildlife whodunnit: forensic identification of predators to inform wildlife management and conservation, collected in northern, Washington, USA from 2017-2021 |
title_fullStr |
Data from: Wildlife whodunnit: forensic identification of predators to inform wildlife management and conservation, collected in northern, Washington, USA from 2017-2021 |
title_full_unstemmed |
Data from: Wildlife whodunnit: forensic identification of predators to inform wildlife management and conservation, collected in northern, Washington, USA from 2017-2021 |
title_sort |
data from: wildlife whodunnit: forensic identification of predators to inform wildlife management and conservation, collected in northern, washington, usa from 2017-2021 |
publisher |
Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity |
publishDate |
2022 |
url |
https://search.dataone.org/view/urn:uuid:a884edb6-1473-48ec-b738-4a910b411f33 |
op_coverage |
Data were collected in northern Washington, USA ENVELOPE(-120.9,-117.2,49.15,47.9) BEGINDATE: 2017-01-01T00:00:00Z ENDDATE: 2021-01-01T00:00:00Z |
long_lat |
ENVELOPE(-120.9,-117.2,49.15,47.9) |
genre |
Canis lupus Lynx |
genre_facet |
Canis lupus Lynx |
_version_ |
1811923544525766656 |