Italian wolves prefer pork to venison

Some European wolves have a distinct preference for wild boar over other prey, according to new research.

Scientists from Durham University, UK, in collaboration with the University of Sassari in Italy, found that the diet of wolves was consistently dominated by the consumption of wild boar which accounted for about two thirds of total prey biomass, with roe deer accounting for around a third.

The study analysed the remains of prey items in almost 2000 samples of wolf dung over a nine year period and revealed that an increase in roe deer in the wolf diet only occurred in years when boar densities were very low. In years of high roe deer densities, the wolves still preferred to catch wild boar.

The results are published in the journal PLOS ONE.

The research team related the prey remains in wolf dung to the availability of possible prey in part of Tuscany, Italy - an area recently colonised by wolves. The findings have implications for wildlife conservation as the impact of changing predator numbers on prey species is important for managing populations of both predators and prey.

Lead author, Miranda Davis, from the School of Biological and Biomedical Sciences at Durham University, said: "Our research demonstrates a consistent selection for wild boar among wolves in the study area, which could affect other prey species such as roe deer."

"Intriguingly, in other parts of Europe where red deer are also available, wolves appear to prefer this prey to wild boar, suggesting that they discriminate between different types of venison."

In Europe, the wolf (Canis lupis) is recovering from centuries of persecution and the expansion of wolf populations has the potential to change the ecology of communities of ungulates (hooved animals) by exposing them to natural predation by wolves, according to the researchers.

The preference for boar is in contrast to other areas of Europe where wolves often avoid boar as prey. One factor may be the relatively smaller size of Mediterranean boar, making them less dangerous to wolves in Mediterranean regions, compared to the larger-sized boar that roam other parts of Europe.

Co-author, Dr Stephen Willis, from the School of Biological and Biomedical Sciences at Durham University, said: "Wolves were hunted to extinction in the UK, probably by the end of the 17th century. Our findings from Italy suggest that if they were reintroduced into an area with a healthy ungulate population their impact on livestock could be minimal."

Tuscany's woodlands support populations of both roe deer and wild boar, and are also grazed by sheep, goats and cattle; however, wild boar and roe deer made up over 95 per cent of wolf diet in the study area, with very little evidence of livestock predation.

The scientists identified prey items from fragments of bones and hair in the wolf dung collected in the region. The prey categories included wild boar, roe deer, red deer, hare, small rodents, goats, sheep and cattle.

For more than five years of the study, the percentage of wolf diet made up of wild boar was more than twice that of roe deer. Other prey represented only a very small proportion of the diet.

The researchers believe that further dietary studies are essential for understanding the true impact of wolves on European wildlife over time.

Co-author, Dr Phil Stephens, from the School of Biological and Biomedical Sciences at Durham University added: "Wolves and brown bears are gradually returning to their former strongholds in Europe. Understanding the needs of these species, as well as their potential impacts, is going to be fundamental to managing that welcome return."

Elk bones tell stories of life, death, and habitat use at Yellowstone National Park

Josh Miller likes to call himself a conservation paleobiologist. The label makes sense when he explains how he uses bones as up-to-last-season information on contemporary animal populations.

Bones, he says, provide baseline ecological data on animals complementary to aerial counts, adding a historical component to live observation. In his November cover article for the Ecological Society of America's journal Ecology, he assesses elk habitat use in Yellowstone National Park by their bones and antlers, testing his method against several decades of the Park Service's meticulous observations.

Now an assistant research professor in the new Quaternary and Anthropocene Research Group in the Department of Geology at the University of Cincinnati, Miller located and recorded the elk bone data while a doctoral student in paleontology at the University of Chicago, and finished analyzing the data during a brief stint at the Florida Museum of Natural History at the University of Florida, in Gainesville. His work with modern animals grew out of curiosity about the fidelity of the fossil record in archiving animals and ecosystems of the distant past.

"It turns out that bones are really informative," he said. At Yellowstone, bone and antler concentrations mirror patterns of animal landscape use known from years of aerial surveys. "This opened up a completely unexpected opportunity for studying modern ecosystems, particularly for areas where our knowledge of animal populations is more limited."

Reconstructing animal community structure and habitat use through the bones of past generations is a new idea. Until recently, common knowledge held that, on the landscape, bones just don't last that long. But Miller has found that they can last for hundreds of years. Bones weather in a stereotypical pattern, from fresh to falling apart. He calibrated weathering in the Yellowstone bones through radiocarbon dating, gaining a familiarity that would allow him to pick up a bone and know it had seen a year, 20 years, or 80 to 100 years or more on the open ground.

Bull elk shed their antlers in late winter, when forage is sparse. Too poor in nutrients to interest most scavengers, heavy, and awkwardly shaped for displacement by the elements, antlers tend to stay where they fall. Miller found that, for the most part, the bones of calves don't travel far either, even in the mouths of predators. The bones of calves mark the range where their mothers sought plentiful food to fuel months of nursing, and shelter to hide their vulnerable newborns.

Old bones from past decades outline a range consistent with the living herd. Miller saw only moderate shifts in a few areas, even given the many recent changes at Yellowstone: the prodigious wildfires of 1988, repatriation of grey wolves starting in 1995, and regrowth of willows, aspen, and cottonwoods over the last couple of decades following a long decline during the 20th century.

Because bones can last decades to centuries in the Yellowstone environment, Miller says they can put relatively recent data from direct observation into broader context for managers looking at long-range planning, helping to sort out important changes from the noise of cyclical booms, busts and shifts in landscape use. Bones are a minimally invasive tool for tracking the history of range animals. They are data just lying on the ground, waiting to be collected.

###
Spatial fidelity of skeletal remains: elk wintering and calving grounds revealed by bones on the Yellowstone landscape (2012) Joshua H. Miller. Ecology 93:11, 2474-2482.

Yellowstone wolf study reveals how to raise successful offspring

What are the key ingredients to raising successful, self-sufficient offspring? A new life sciences study using 14 years of data on gray wolves in Yellowstone National Park indicates that cooperative group behavior and a mother's weight are crucial. "A female's body weight is key in the survival of her offspring, and cooperation in the protection and feeding of young pups pays off in terms of the production of offspring," said Robert Wayne, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at UCLA and co-author of the new research, published this week in the online edition of the Journal of Animal Ecology. Wolves are social carnivores that live in territorial, kin-structured packs. Female wolves depend on other adults in the pack to help them provide food for their pups and defend the youngsters from predators — mainly, competing packs of wolves. The greater the group cooperation, the researchers say, the better the pack's survival advantage. "Consequently, larger packs tend to get larger and win the 'arms race' of holding territories against the aggressive actions of other packs," Wayne said. "Large packs get better at building armies of soldiers to defend their turf, and cooperative behavior and sociality are maintained by natural selection." Wolves were re-introduced into Yellowstone Park in the mid-1990s and are rapidly becoming one of the best-studied carnivore populations in the world; they are turning out to be an excellent model for the study of sociality and cooperation, Wayne said. Over many years of intensive collaborative study, former UCLA graduate student Dan Stahler (now a biologist with the National Park Service) and former UCLA postdoctoral scholar Bridgett vonHoldt (who worked in Wayne's laboratory and will soon become an assistant professor at Princeton University) analyzed genetic and life-history data on more than 300 gray wolves. They assessed survivorship and reproductive success, as well as the factors that influenced them, including body weight and pack size, among other variables. They found a striking association between pack size, body weight and offspring survival. "We discovered that mother wolves' body weight and pack size play a crucial role in enabling pups to survive and thrive from birth to young adulthood," said Utah State University assistant professor of wildlife resources Dan MacNulty, a co-author of the study. The research was funded by the National Science Foundation, the National Park Service and the Yellowstone Park Foundation, as well as private donors. Environmental conditions that impact wolf reproduction, the researchers say, include resource availability, population density and disease prevalence — especially deadly canine distemper, caused by a contagious virus to which pups are especially vulnerable. In addition to body weight and pack size, the researchers examined the effects of maternal age and color (gray or black coat) and wolf population size on reproductive success. "Each of these factors affects reproduction, but, overwhelmingly, female body weight and pack size are the main drivers of litter size and pup survival," said Stahler, the study's lead author. "Bigger females produce bigger litters; bigger packs are better equipped to hunt and defend pups and resources from competitors."

Group Dynamics of Yellowstone Pronghorn

The American pronghorn in the Yellowstone region have proven to be gregarious animals. Observations of group dynamics have found their interactions to be influenced by social, reproductive, and environmental factors. Pronghorn were also found to be somewhat unpredictable, making it more challenging to develop conservation strategies for this species. A study published in the Journal of Mammalogy reported about tracking the locations of 53 adult female pronghorn fitted with VHF and GPS radio collars in Yellowstone National Park for nearly 6 years. The Yellowstone population of pronghorn is a native species of special concern. They number fewer than 300, and are one of only a few pronghorn migrations remaining in the greater Yellowstone region. Observing changes in how animals behave as groups can give clues to the influence of environmental and human factors on their survival. The American pronghorn displays flexibility in behaviors of grouping and mating that could indicate resilience to changes in the environment, but this flexibility can make it difficult to create management strategies for the population. Grouping patterns of pronghorn change due to availability of food, density and demographic variables within the group, and human factors such as fencing and hunting. In this study, females switched groups frequently, and groups became smaller when females were giving birth and rearing their young. Snow pack and the number of predators also affected group sizes and cohesion, but habitat and vegetation had less influence. Examination of Yellowstone pronghorn found that they favor lower elevations during the winter, avoiding deep snow. Building on this information, the National Park Service has undertaken restoration efforts to ensure that native vegetation and migration routes to these favored areas are re-established. Conservation efforts seek to control disease, protect or restore key habitat, regulate harvests, and limit adverse effects of development and recreation. When planning the timing and location for conservation actions, biologists must consider what this grouping behavior can reveal about the species. Full text of “Group Dynamics of Yellowstone Pronghorn,” Journal of Mammalogy, Vol. 93, No. 4, 2012, is available at http://asmjournals.org/.

Wolf mange part of nature's cycle

Mange and viral diseases have a substantial, recurring impact on the health and size of reintroduced wolf packs living in Yellowstone National Park, according to ecologists.

Following the restoration of gray wolves to Yellowstone in 1996, researchers collected blood from the animals to monitor parasite-induced disease and death. They also tracked the wolves in each pack to follow their survival and allow additional data-gathering.

"Many invasive species flourish because they lack their native predators and pathogens, but in Yellowstone we restored a native predator to an ecosystem that had other canids present that were capable of sustaining a lot of infections in their absence," said Emily S. Almberg, graduate student in ecology, Penn State. "It's not terribly surprising that we were able to witness and confirm that there was a relatively short window in which the reintroduced wolves stayed disease-free."

The researchers found that within a year after the wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone, 100 percent of the wolves tested had at least one infection, but mange did not infect wolves living in the park until 2007.

"We can look at the biology of the diseases and predict which ones will come in first," said Peter J. Hudson, Willaman Professor of Biology and director of the Huck Institutes of the Life Sciences, Penn State. "What was surprising was that so many diseases came in so fast, but those were the ones we expected to come in first. It wasn't really a sequence, they were almost there immediately. That's very interesting in itself. "

The diseases that infected the wolves quickly were all viral, including canine distemper and canine parvovirus -- both contractible through bodily secretions. Mange, however, is a skin infection, caused by scabies mites, that makes the wolves scratch and lose fur. An infected wolf can lose enough body heat in the winter to freeze to death. Mange is spread by direct contact with another mite-infected animal or by contact with the mites themselves, as they can survive away from a host for several days, depending on the temperature.

"Where did those diseases come from?" asked Hudson. "Most of them initially came from other canid species, like coyotes or foxes. Wolves are animals that disperse far and move around fast, and once the wolves were established the diseases were spread from pack to pack."

Almberg and Hudson tracked how quickly mange spread from pack to pack after the disease entered the population. The number of infected wolves in a pack did not affect the likelihood of a neighboring pack to contract mange, but distance was a factor -- for every six miles of distance between an infected pack and an uninfected pack, there was a 66 percent drop in risk for the uninfected pack. Some wolves and packs were not severely affected by mange, while other packs were decimated, the researchers report in the current issue of Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B.

In January 2007, Mollie's pack was the first in Yellowstone to show signs of mange infection. As of March 2011, they had recovered. The Druid pack, which had been one of the most stable and visible packs in the park, according to Almberg, started to show signs of mange in August 2009.

"It was in a very short amount of time that the majority of the animals [in Druid] became severely infected," Almberg said. "The majority of their hair was missing from their bodies and it hit them right in the middle of winter. The summer before it got really bad, we saw that many of the pups had mange."

The Druid pack was gone by the end of the winter in 2010.

The researchers note that the wolf population in Yellowstone experienced several phases -- from 1995 to 2003 the wolves experienced rapid growth, from 2003 to 2007 the number of wolves stabilized, and the most recent data from 2007 to 2010 shows a decline.

"We're down to extremely low levels of wolves right now, we're down to [similar numbers as] the early years of reintroduction," said Almberg. "So it doesn't look like it's going to be as large and as a stable a population as was maybe initially thought."

Do beavers benefit Scottish wild salmon?

Reintroduced European beavers could have an overall positive impact on wild salmon populations in Scotland, according to a study by the University of Southampton.

Representatives of recreational fisheries interests north and south of the border are concerned that beavers can harm economically important fish stocks due to their dam building activities and potential to block migratory life phases. However, results of a study conducted by scientists at the University of Southampton, funded by Scottish Natural Heritage, indicate that beavers can also have substantial beneficial effects which may outweigh those that are negative.

The study's findings highlight that while the activities of beavers can result in localised and often temporary negative impacts on fish, primarily due to dams impeding their movements and reducing the availability of suitable spawning habitat, these can be at least off-set by the benefits of increased habitat diversity and resulting abundance and productivity of fish, including salmon.

Dr Paul Kemp, a researcher in freshwater fish ecology and fisheries management from the University's International Centre for Ecohydraulics Research, who lesd the study comments that, "the positive findings were more frequently based on quantitative evidence, while discussion of negative impacts was often speculative."

Dr Kemp and his colleagues were surprised that the "weight of evidence" tended to indicate an overall positive effect considering the background of those who participated in the survey. "Most participants were from a fisheries background and whom you might expect would tend to side with the fish, but based on their experience of beaver and fish interactions tended to be positive towards beaver," he says.

Beaver reintroduction has been a contentious issue in Scotland ever since a total of 16 individuals from Norway were released in Argyll in 2009 and 2010 as part of a scientific trial conducted by the Scottish Wildlife Trust, The Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, and the host partners, the Forestry Commission Scotland.

Even more controversy surrounds the establishment of a breeding population of escaped beavers on the River Tay. This has had ramifications south of the border as the Angling Trust has written to Richard Benyon, the UK minister for Fisheries and the Natural Environment, requesting that trapping and destruction of the beavers be urgently undertaken to prevent their spread to England where it is claimed they could damage fisheries.

Researchers carried out a critical view of over 100 sources of peer-reviewed information in which benefits were cited 184 times compared to 119 for the negative effects. Analysis of existing literature indicates that beaver activity can have both positive and negative effects on fish. Negative effects relate to the construction of beaver dams which can temporarily impede the movement of some fish, particularly in narrow rivers and streams, while siltation can cause loss of spawning habitat immediately upstream of dams. But beavers can also have beneficial effects on fish by increasing the variety and area of habitats in streams, and due to the presence of dams and ponds by increasing the abundance of invertebrates, which form the main component of the diet of many stream-dwelling fish, and providing refuge during periods of high or low water flows.

The study, which was published in the leading international fisheries journal Fish and Fisheries, also reports the findings of an expert opinion survey of 49 fisheries managers, scientists, and beaver ecology experts, from Europe and North America, where most of the research has been conducted. More than half (58 per cent) of those who responded believed that the overall impact of beavers on fish populations was positive.

Professor Roger Wheater, the Chair of the Beaver-Salmonid Working Group, says: "I would be very surprised if biodiversity were not increased but our concern continues to be the impact on salmonid spawning areas and the management required to deal with situations where salmonids in any particular system are at risk."

Bears, scavengers count on all-you-can-eat salmon buffet lasting for months

Salmon conservation shouldn't narrowly focus on managing flows in streams and rivers or on preserving only places that currently have strong salmon runs.

Instead, watersheds need a good mix of steep, cold-running streams and slower, meandering streams of warmer water to keep options open for salmon adapted to reproduce better in one setting than the other, new research shows. Preserving that sort of varied landscape serves not just salmon, it provides an all-summer buffet that brown bears, gulls and other animals need to sustain themselves the rest of the year.

"In any one stream, salmon might spawn for two to four weeks," said Peter Lisi, a University of Washington doctoral student in aquatic and fishery sciences, who studies the Wood River watershed in southwest Alaska.

"Animals like coastal brown bears and Glaucus-winged gulls gorge themselves at one stream for a few weeks and then just move to another stream that might have water temperatures a few degrees warmer and therefore support salmon populations that spawn at a later time," he said. "It's easy for animals to move when such streams are as little as a mile or two apart."

"A whole network of streams, some colder and some warmer, provides what Lisi and Daniel Schindler, UW professor of aquatic and fishery sciences, call "hydrological diversity." Such diversity more than triples the time predators have access to salmon in a summer, from just a few weeks to more than three months in the watershed studied.

The researchers' paper on landscape attributes that influence spawn times will be presented Aug. 8 in Portland, Ore., during the Ecological Society of America's annual meeting.

"Both Glaucus-winged gulls and brown bears have very short growing seasons at high latitudes. Salmon are a key resource that allows these species to fatten up and achieve the necessary annual growth in this short period of time," Schindler said. "A complex landscape results in streams of differing temperature so salmon populations don't spawn at the same time. Predators and scavengers have a much longer window of accessibility."

"We knew that salmon are an important seasonal resource for lots of predators and consumers. However, there is little appreciation for the importance of biological diversity within salmon for these consumers."

The response of salmon to hydrologic diversity is what makes stocks viable over time and will probably make them better able to respond to climate change, Lisi said. Instead of focusing narrowly on flow regimes or trying to decide which individual streams and rivers to protect, a better goal would be to protect a wide range of hydrologic conditions, the co-authors said.

""Biological diversity within salmon stocks has important benefits to terrestrial ecosystems," Schindler said. "This scale of variation in hydrology, geomorphology and biological diversity is often swept under the rug and dismissed as unimportant in activities such as river restoration, projections of climate impacts and fishery management."

The paper, part of a session on linkages between aquatic and terrestrial systems, also describes how biological diversity in returning salmon are linked to the pollination of a flowering plant, something no other group has described.

Populations of kneeling angelica, 3-to-6-foot plants loaded with clusters of tiny white blossoms, don't all bloom at the same time, even though sun and weather conditions might be uniform across a watershed. Instead, these streamside plants have evolved to bloom approximately 10 days after salmon typically arrive at a particular stream.

It takes about that long for salmon to start to die, many of which are killed by bears or die naturally after spawning. Blowflies lay eggs on the carcasses and the result is a population boom of maggots to take advantage of all the dead salmon. Those maggots emerge as adult blowflies the next summer just in time for the salmon run. Before laying their eggs, the blowflies swarm kneeling angelica flowers to feed on nectar, spreading pollen at the same time.

Previous research has looked at direct connections to plants, such as roots taking up nutrients when salmon carcasses decay, Lisi said. This is an indirect consumer pathway.

"Kneeling angelica are among the last plants to bloom. It's fall, everything else is dying, most of the insects are gone but these plants hold out for the arrival of salmon," Lisi said.