4.5 Article

Habitat quality influences population distribution, individual space use and functional responses in habitat selection by a large herbivore

Journal

OECOLOGIA
Volume 168, Issue 1, Pages 231-243

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00442-011-2072-3

Keywords

Functional response; Resource selection; Reproductive status; Resource utilisation; Sex; Spatial scales; Ungulate

Categories

Funding

  1. County Governor office in Nord-Trondelag
  2. Directorate for Nature Management
  3. Norwegian Research Council [184903/S30]
  4. National Road Administration
  5. National Rail Administration

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Identifying factors shaping variation in resource selection is central for our understanding of the behaviour and distribution of animals. We examined summer habitat selection and space use by 108 Global Positioning System (GPS)-collared moose in Norway in relation to sex, reproductive status, habitat quality, and availability. Moose selected habitat types based on a combination of forage quality and availability of suitable habitat types. Selection of protective cover was strongest for reproducing females, likely reflecting the need to protect young. Males showed strong selection for habitat types with high quality forage, possibly due to higher energy requirements. Selection for preferred habitat types providing food and cover was a positive function of their availability within home ranges (i.e. not proportional use) indicating functional response in habitat selection. This relationship was not found for unproductive habitat types. Moreover, home ranges with high cover of unproductive habitat types were larger, and smaller home ranges contained higher proportions of the most preferred habitat type. The distribution of moose within the study area was partly related to the distribution of different habitat types. Our study shows how distribution and availability of habitat types providing cover and high-quality food shape ungulate habitat selection and space use.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available