Search

No systematic review has been conducted or centralized repository created for published research on wild mammals in Indiana, despite studies dating back two centuries. I conducted a systematic review in Web of Science[TM], which produced 714 research articles on wild Indiana mammals published in 156 outlets by 1131 authors since 1906. Thirty-one authors published [greater than or equal to] 10 articles, and 29 papers were cited [greater than or equal to] 100 times. The most frequently used outlet was Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of Science (n = 155). Most studies dealt with ecology or natural history (38.2%) and management (22.0%). Indiana myotis (Myotis sodalis) was the most frequent target of study, and bats ranked as 6 of the top 10 most-studied species. Cold spots, i.e., understudied species X discipline combinations that might merit increased future attention, were assessed using quantile analysis of chi-square residuals and normalized metrics of research effort. Understudied state species of current conservation concern included star-nosed mole (Condylura cristata), badger (Taxidea taxus), swamp rabbit (Sylvilagus aquaticus), Franklin's ground squirrel (Policocitellus franklinii), and least weasel (Mustela nivalis), with population declines suspected in the latter. Understudied nonlisted furbearers for which range-wide population declines have been documented included gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) and muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus). Cold spots for nongame, nonlisted species included Cryptotis and Sorex shrews and southern bog lemming (Synaptomys cooperi). This single digital source for the widely scattered primary literature on Indiana mammals should make the voluminous prior research more accessible and useful to scientists planning future studies. Keywords: bibliometrics, hotspot analysis, literature review, mammalogy, INTRODUCTION Knowledge of mammalian biology is key to the successful management and conservation of mammals, and knowledge is most reliably derived from scientific investigation. The Indiana Department of Natural Resources [...]

Declines in amphibian populations have led to greater research and monitoring of species of interest, including terrestrial salamanders. Several methods have been used to study salamanders, including artificial cover objects (ACOs). Artificial cover objects are easy to install and use, limit destruction to habitats, are easily reproducible both across and within studies, and can reduce variability between observers and sites by not relying on observer search time or effort, or on natural cover. However, different ACO designs and spacing may yield different capture rates, and thus different estimates of population densities. We examined the influence of ACO wood type, size, shape, and spacing arrays on the number of individually marked red‐backed salamanders (Plethodon cinereus) captured under ACOs. White pine (Pinus strobus) ACOs yielded the most (average of 14 across 3 replicates) individuals, while white ash (Fraxinus americana) ACOs had the least (average of 7 across 3 replicates). Larger ACOs had similar capture rates compared to equal sampled areas of smaller ACOs, but a single smaller ACO tended to have fewer individual salamander captures than a single large ACO. Our results suggested that high‐density ACO spacing arrays may increase capture probability but reduce the area uniquely sampled by each ACO. In contrast, low‐density ACO arrays may produce population estimates more comparable to other arrays. Future studies should consider monitoring goals and available sampling effort when choosing a spacing array. As ACO study design impacts salamander capture rates, a clear understanding of the effects of each element of ACO design is important when drawing inferences or making comparisons among studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Animals commonly form groups with conspecifics. Hypotheses on the drivers of group size often (but not always) pertain to fear of predation and food availability or quality. However, for a more complete understanding of group forming, multiple, possibly interacting mechanisms should be considered. We used camera traps, detectability estimates from distance sampling, and hierarchical Bayesian modeling to index group size and test multiple additive and interacting group‐formation hypotheses in white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), within Indiana, USA. We found a strong relationship between our index of group size and (1) a three‐way interaction between spatiotemporal pulses in fear of natural predation risk and anthropogenic development and (2) a three‐way interaction between the local cover (defined as the amount of vegetative cover in the immediate area of the camera), the area of concealment (defined as forests or wetlands) within the larger landscape, and time of day. Specifically, we documented larger groups in areas near anthropogenic development, in areas with high predator use intensity, and when predators were active. Additionally, we found larger groups during dawn and dusk when deer were most active in locations with sparse local cover when the area of concealment in the surrounding landscape was small, and within dense local cover when the area of concealment in the surrounding landscape was large. Our methods can aid future behavioral and ecological studies, as we present a clear and easily replicable strategy that infers group membership from spatiotemporal proximity, corrects for differences in detectability, and enables sampling across large spatial and long temporal scales. Our findings indicate that fear of natural predators and anthropogenic disturbance interactively explain variation in group size. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]