Review of \u3ci\u3eCarnivores of the World, Second Edition\u3c/i\u3e, by Luke Hunter

Cracking open this fully revised field guide invites a new appreciation for the diversity of carnivores (members of the order Carnivora) in the world. Dig a little deeper and you’ll uncover just how little we know about so many of them. This second edition of the Carnivores of the World features 250 mammalian species—from a species so tiny it can squeeze through a wedding ring to one weighing thousands of times more, the polar bear (Ursus maritimus). Each detailed species account includes an illustration of the species (and sometimes varying forms or subspecies), information on morphological and identifying features, distribution (including a map) and habitat, feeding ecology, social and spatial behavior, reproduction and demography, and status and threats. Compiling this global summary must have been a huge undertaking. Yet the author has managed to strike the right balance of breadth and depth, and has delivered a stellar reference. Title aside, this text focuses on terrestrial carnivores. Including primarily aquatic carnivores would have forced this handy (yet comprehensive) book into a multi-volume set, losing its nimbleness. This is a terrific book to have in your personal library (and in your suitcase!). It will be hard to open Carnivores of the World without walking away with a rejuvenated sense of wonder and care for our world

Evaluation of a Formula that Categorizes Female Gray Wolf Breeding Status by Nipple Size

The proportion by age class of wild Canis lupus (Gray Wolf) females that reproduce in any given year remains unclear; thus, we evaluated the applicability to our long-term (1972–2013) data set of the Mech et al. (1993) formula that categorizes female Gray Wolf breeding status by nipple size and time of year. We used the formula to classify Gray Wolves from 68 capture events into 4 categories (yearling, adult non-breeder, former breeder, current breeder). To address issues with small sample size and variance, we created an ambiguity index to allow some Gray Wolves to be classed into 2 categories. We classified 20 nipple measurements ambiguously: 16 current or former breeder, 3 former or adult non-breeder, and 1 yearling or adult non-breeder. The formula unambiguously classified 48 (71%) of the nipple measurements; based on supplemental field evidence, at least 5 (10%) of these were incorrect. When used in conjunction with an ambiguity index we developed and with corrections made for classifications involving very large nipples, and supplemented with available field evidence, the Mech et al. (1993) formula provided reasonably reliable classification of breeding status in wild female Gray Wolves

Gray Wolf (\u3ci\u3eCanis lupus\u3c/i\u3e) Dyad Monthly Association Rates by Demographic Group

Preliminary data from GPS-collared wolves (Canis lupus) in the Superior National Forest of northeastern Minnesota indicated wolves had low association rates with packmates during summer. However, aerial-telemetry locations of very high frequency (VHF)-radioed wolves in this same area showed high associations among packmates during winter. We analyzed aerial-telemetry-location data from VHF-collared wolves in several packs (n=18 dyads) in this same area from 1994-2012 by month, and found lowest association rates occurred during June. While other studies have found low association among wolf packmates during summer, information on differences in association patterns depending on the wolf associates’ demographics is sparse. During May-July, association rates were greatest for breeding pairs, followed by sibling dyads, and lowest for parent–offspring dyads. Our findings improve our understanding of how individual wolf relationships affect monthly association rates. We highlight some important remaining questions regarding wolf packmate associations

Yellowstone wolf (\u3ci\u3eCanis lupus\u3c/i\u3e) density predicted by elk (\u3ci\u3eCervus elaphus\u3c/i\u3e) biomass

The Northern Range (NR) of Yellowstone National Park (YNP) hosts a higher prey biomass density in the form of elk (Cervus elaphus L., 1758) than any other system of gray wolves (Canis lupus L., 1758) and prey reported. Therefore, it is important to determine whether that wolf–prey system fits a long-standing model relating wolf density to prey biomass. Using data from 2005 to 2012 after elk population fluctuations dampened 10 years subsequent to wolf reintroduction, we found that NR prey biomass predicted wolf density. This finding and the trajectory of the regression extend the validity of the model to prey densities 19% higher than previous data and suggest that the model would apply to wolf–prey systems of even higher prey biomass. Le domaine nord (Northern Range; NR) du parc national de Yellowstone (YNP) contient une biomasse de proies de plus grande densité, représentée par les wapitis (Cervus elaphus L., 1758), que tout autre système de loups gris (Canis lupus L., 1758) et proies connu. Il importe donc de déterminer si le système loups–proies concorde avec un modèle établi de longue date qui relie la densité des loups a` la biomasse des proies. En nous servant de données de 2005 a` 2012 après l’atténuation sur une période de 10 ans des fluctuations de la population de wapitis a` la suite de la réintroduction des loups, nous avons constaté que la biomasse des proies du NR prédisait la densité des loups. Cette constatation et la trajectoire de la régression élargissent la validité du modèle a` des densités de proies de 19 % supérieures aux données antérieures et donnent a` penser que le modèle s’appliquerait a` des systèmes loups–proies de biomasse de proies encore plus grande

Factors Influencing Predation on Juvenile Ungulates and Natural Selection Implications

Juvenile ungulates are generally more vulnerable to predation than are adult ungulates other than senescent individuals, not only because of their relative youth, fragility, and inexperience, but also because of congenital factors. Linnell et al.’s (Wildl. Biol. 1: 209-223) extensive review of predation on juvenile ungulates concluded that research was needed to determine the predisposition of these juveniles to predation. Since then, various characteristics that potentially predispose juvenile ungulates have emerged including blood characteristics, morphometric and other condition factors, and other factors such as birth period, the mother’s experience, and spatial and habitat aspects. To the extent that any of the physical or behavioral traits possessed by juvenile ungulates have a genetic or heritable and partly independent epigenetic component that predisposes them to predation, predators may play an important role in their natural selection. We review the possible influence of these characteristics on predisposing juvenile ungulates to predation and discuss natural selection implications and potential selection mechanisms. Although juvenile ungulates as a class are likely more vulnerable to predation than all but senescent adults, our review presents studies indicating that juveniles with certain tendencies or traits are killed more often than others. This finding suggests that successful predation on juveniles is more selective than is often assumed. Because we are unable to control for (or in some cases even measure) the myriad of other possible vulnerabilities such as differences in sensory abilities, intelligence, hiding abilities, tendency to travel, etc., finding selective predation based on the relatively few differences we can measure is noteworthy and points to the significant role that predation on juveniles has in the natural selection of ungulates. Future research should compare characteristics, especially those known to influence survival, between animals killed by predators versus those killed by other sources as well as survivors versus non-survivors to better understand predation’s role in natural selection

White-tailed Deer (\u3ci\u3eOdocoileus virginianus\u3c/i\u3e) Subsidize Gray Wolves (\u3ci\u3eCanis lupus\u3c/i\u3e) During a Moose (\u3ci\u3eAlces americanus\u3c/i\u3e) Decline: A Case of Apparent Competition?

Moose (Alces americanus) in northeastern Minnesota have declined by 55% since 2006. Although the cause is unresolved, some studies have suggested that Gray Wolves (Canis lupus) contributed to the decline. After the Moose decline, wolves could either decline or switch prey. To determine which occurred in our study area, we compared winter wolf counts and summer diet before and after the Moose decline. While wolf numbers in our study area nearly doubled from 23 in winter 2002 to an average of 41 during winters 2011–2013, calf:cow ratios (the number of calves per cow observed during winter surveys) in the wider Moose range more than halved from 0.93 in 2002 to an average of 0.31 during 2011–2013. Compared to summer 2002, wolves in summers 2011–2013 consumed fewer Moose and more White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus). While deer densities were similar during each period, average vulnerability, as reflected by winter severity, was greater during 2011–2013 than 2002, probably explaining the wolf increase. During the wolf increase Moose calves remained a summer food item. These findings suggest that in part of the Moose range, deer subsidized wolf numbers while wolves also preyed on Moose calves. This contributed to a Moose decline and is a possible case of apparent competition and inverse-density-dependent predation

White-tailed Deer (\u3ci\u3eOdocoileus virginianus\u3c/i\u3e) Fawn Risk from Gray Wolf (\u3ci\u3eCanis lupus\u3c/i\u3e) Predation During Summer

Little is known about how often various prey animals are at risk of predation by Gray Wolves (Canis lupus). We used a system to monitor the presence during the day of two radio-collared Gray Wolves within 2 km of a radio-collared White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus) with a fawn or fawns in August 2013 in the Superior National Forest of northeastern Minnesota. We concluded that the fawn or fawns were at risk of predation by at least one wolf at least daily

An Historical Overview and Update of Wolf-Moose Interactions in Northeastern Minnesota

Wolf (Canis lupus) and moose (Alces americanus) populations in northeastern Minnesota, USA, have fluctuated for decades and, based on helicopter counts, moose numbers declined to a new low from 2006 to about 2012. Other steep declines were found in 1991 and 1998 during periods when moose counts were done with fixed-wing aircraft; these declines also appeared to be real. Winter wolf numbers, monitored in part of the moose range, had been increasing since about 2002 to the highest population in decades in 2009. However, from 2009 to 2016, wolves decreased precipitously, and the moose- population decline leveled off from 2012 to 2017. Calf:population ratios from 1985 to 1997 and from 2005 to 2016 were inversely related to wolf numbers in the wolf-study area the previous winter both as wolves increased and decreased in abundance. Similarly, log annual growth rates of moose numbers were negatively correlated with counts of wolves in the prior year. Other factors such as nutrition and parasites, and possibly climate change, likely have been involved in the recent moose decline. However, wolves, as in other areas, appear to have contributed to the decline in the northeastern Minnesota moose population at least in part through predation on calves, supporting earlier reports

White-tailed Deer (\u3ci\u3eOdocoileus virginianus\u3c/i\u3e) Fawn Risk from Gray Wolf (\u3ci\u3eCanis lupus\u3c/i\u3e) Predation During Summer

Little is known about how often various prey animals are at risk of predation by Gray Wolves (Canis lupus). We used a system to monitor the presence during the day of two radio-collared Gray Wolves within 2 km of a radio-collared White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus) with a fawn or fawns in August 2013 in the Superior National Forest of northeastern Minnesota. We concluded that the fawn or fawns were at risk of predation by at least one wolf at least daily

White-tailed Deer (\u3ci\u3eOdocoileus virginianus\u3c/i\u3e) Fawn Risk from Gray Wolf (\u3ci\u3eCanis lupus\u3c/i\u3e) Predation During Summer

Little is known about how often various prey animals are at risk of predation by Gray Wolves (Canis lupus). We used a system to monitor the presence during the day of two radio-collared Gray Wolves within 2 km of a radio-collared White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus) with a fawn or fawns in August 2013 in the Superior National Forest of northeastern Minnesota. We concluded that the fawn or fawns were at risk of predation by at least one wolf at least daily