4.1 Article

Ranging behaviour and habitat selection of Alpine chamois

Journal

ETHOLOGY ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION
Volume 22, Issue 3, Pages 215-231

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/03949370.2010.502316

Keywords

home range; seasons; Rupicapra rupicapra; sex; vegetation type

Funding

  1. Gran Paradiso National Park Agency

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ranging behaviour and habitat selection of 23 male and 6 female adult (5-10 years old) Alpine chamois Rupicapra rupicapra (Linnaeus 1758) were monitored from February 2000 to December 2002, in an area of the Western Alps. The chamois were radio-located for a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 35 months, until failure of radio transmitters. A mean number of 13 locations/individual/month was recorded for a total of 7902 fixes. Adult males were divided in 19 residents (territorial males, with overlapping or adjacent warm and cold month ranges) and four migrants (with non-overlapping warm and cold month ranges, as well as attending higher altitude areas in the warm months). Home range and core area (kernel 95 and 50%, respectively) sizes of each individual were significantly greater in the warm (June-November) than in the cold (December-May) periods. During the warm period, home range and core area sizes significantly differed between resident (median home range: 49 ha; Q1-Q3: 31-110 ha) and migrant males (median home range: 749 ha; Q1-Q3: 539-850 ha), as well as between females (median home range: 711 ha; Q1-Q3: 388-1842 ha) and resident males. No significant difference was observed in the cold period. Home range size was not correlated to the presence of snow cover (epsilon 70%). Throughout the year, nearly all chamois used south- to south-east-facing slopes. Resident males strongly preferred pastures and meadows, but four of them used alder shrublands on the north-east slope more than expected, in the warm months. Females kept nearly always at altitudes greater than those used by resident males and inhabited higher-quality areas.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available