Search

For socially monogamous species, breeder bond dissolution has important consequences for population dynamics, but the extent to which extrinsic or intrinsic population factors causes pair dissolution remain poorly understood, especially among carnivores. Using an extensive life-history data set, a survival analysis and competing risks framework, we examined the fate of 153 different wolf (Canis lupus) pairs in the recolonizing Scandinavian wolf population, during 14 winters of snow tracking and DNA monitoring. Wolf pair dissolution was generally linked to a mortality event and was strongly affected by extrinsic (i.e. anthropogenic) causes. No divorce was observed, and among the pair dissolution where causes have been identified, death of one or both wolves was always involved. Median time from pair formation to pair dissolution was three consecutive winters (i.e. approximately 2 years). Pair dissolution was mostly human-related, primarily caused by legal control actions (36·7%), verified poaching (9·2%) and traffic-related causes (2·1%). Intrinsic factors, such as disease and age, accounted for only 7·7% of pair dissolutions. The remaining 44·3% of dissolution events were from unknown causes, but we argue that a large portion could be explained by an additional source of human-caused mortality, cryptic poaching. Extrinsic population factors, such as variables describing the geographical location of the pair, had a stronger effect on risk of pair dissolution compared to anthropogenic landscape characteristics. Population intrinsic factors, such as the inbreeding coefficient of the male pair member, had a negative effect on pair bond duration. The mechanism behind this result remains unknown, but might be explained by lower survival of inbred males or more complex inbreeding effects mediated by behaviour. Our study provides quantitative estimates of breeder bond duration in a social carnivore and highlights the effect of extrinsic (i.e. anthropogenic) and intrinsic factors (i.e. inbreeding) involved in wolf pair bond duration. Unlike the effects of intrinsic and extrinsic factors that are commonly reported on individual survival or population growth, here we provide quantitative estimates of their potential effect on the social unit of the population, the wolf pair., (© 2016 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society.)

The functional response of a predator describes the change in per capita kill rate to changes in prey density. This response can be influenced by predator densities, giving a predator-dependent functional response. In social carnivores which defend a territory, kill rates also depend on the individual energetic requirements of group members and their contribution to the kill rate. This study aims to provide empirical data for the functional response of wolves Canis lupus to the highly managed moose Alces alces population in Scandinavia. We explored prey and predator dependence, and how the functional response relates to the energetic requirements of wolf packs. Winter kill rates of GPS-collared wolves and densities of cervids were estimated for a total of 22 study periods in 15 wolf territories. The adult wolves were identified as the individuals responsible for providing kills to the wolf pack, while pups could be described as inept hunters. The predator-dependent, asymptotic functional response models (i.e. Hassell-Varley type II and Crowley-Martin) performed best among a set of 23 competing linear, asymptotic and sigmoid models. Small wolf packs acquired >3 times as much moose biomass as required to sustain their field metabolic rate (FMR), even at relatively low moose abundances. Large packs (6-9 wolves) acquired less biomass than required in territories with low moose abundance. We suggest the surplus killing by small packs is a result of an optimal foraging strategy to consume only the most nutritious parts of easy accessible prey while avoiding the risk of being detected by humans. Food limitation may have a stabilizing effect on pack size in wolves, as supported by the observed negative relationship between body weight of pups and pack size., (© 2014 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society.)

1. Understanding the role of predation in shaping the dynamics of animal communities is a fundamental issue in ecological research. Nevertheless, the complex nature of predator-prey interactions often prevents researchers from modelling them explicitly. 2. By using periodic Leslie-Usher matrices and a simulation approach together with parameters obtained from long-term field projects, we reconstructed the underlying mechanisms of predator-prey demographic interactions and compared the dynamics of the roe deer-red fox-Eurasian lynx-human harvest system with those of the moose-brown bear-gray wolf-human harvest system in the boreal forest ecosystem of the southern Scandinavian Peninsula. 3. The functional relationship of both roe deer and moose λ to changes in predation rates from the four predators was remarkably different. Lynx had the strongest impact among the four predators, whereas predation rates by wolves, red foxes, or brown bears generated minor variations in prey population λ. Elasticity values of lynx, wolf, fox and bear predation rates were -0·157, -0·056, -0·031 and -0·006, respectively, but varied with both predator and prey densities. 4. Differences in predation impact were only partially related to differences in kill or predation rates, but were rather a result of different distribution of predation events among prey age classes. Therefore, the age composition of killed individuals emerged as the main underlying factor determining the overall per capita impact of predation. 5. Our results confirm the complex nature of predator-prey interactions in large terrestrial mammals, by showing that different carnivores preying on the same prey species can exert a dramatically different demographic impact, even in the same ecological context, as a direct consequence of their predation patterns. Similar applications of this analytical framework in other geographical and ecological contexts are needed, but a more general evaluation of the subject is also required, aimed to assess, on a broader systematic and ecological range, what specific traits of a carnivore are most related to its potential impact on prey species., (© 2011 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology © 2011 British Ecological Society.)