|
|
Begall, S., Malkemper, E. P., Cervený, J., Nemec, P., & Burda, H. (2013). Magnetic alignment in mammals and other animals. Mamm. Biol., 78(1), 10–20.
Abstract: Magnetic alignment (MA) constitutes the simplest directional response to the geomagnetic field. In contrast to magnetic compass orientation, MA is not goal directed and represents a spontaneous, fixed directional response. Because animals tend to align their bodies along or perpendicular to the magnetic field lines, MA typically leads to bimodal or quadrimodal orientation, although there is also growing evidence for a fixed unimodal orientation not necessarily coinciding with the magnetic cardinal directions. MA has been demonstrated in diverse animals including insects, amphibians, fish, and mammals. Alignment can be expressed by animals during resting as well as on the move (e.g. while grazing, hunting, feeding, etc.). Here, we briefly survey characteristic features and classical examples of MA and review the current knowledge about the occurrence of MA in mammals. In addition, we summarize what is known about mechanisms underlying MA and discuss its prospective biological functions. Finally, we highlight some physiological effects of alignment along the magnetic field axes reported in humans. We argue that the phenomenon of MA adds a new paradigm that can be exploited for investigation of magnetoreception in mammals.
|
|
|
|
Myslajek, R. W., Tracz, M., Tracz, M., Tomczak, P., Szewczyk, M., Niedzwiecka, N., et al. (2018). Spatial organization in wolves Canis lupus recolonizing north-west Poland: Large territories at low population density. Mamm. Biol., 92, 37–44.
Abstract: Monitoring of the wolf Canis lupus is a demanding task as it lives in low densities, utilizes vast home ranges and disperses over large areas. These factors make obtaining accurate data about population parameters over the whole distribution area of the species impossible. Thus detailed local studies on socio-spatial organization are essential to calibrate information obtained over a larger area. We applied GPS/GSM telemetry, non-invasive genetic sampling, year-round tracking, camera trapping and howling stimulations to determine the number of family groups, population density and home-range sizes of wolves in the Drawa Forest (DF, western Poland, 2500 km2), an area recently recolonized by the species. Home ranges of three collared male wolves ranged from 321.8 to 420.6 km2 (MCP 100%) and from 187.5 to 277.5 km2 (Kernel 95%), but core areas had a size of 30.5-84.7 km2 (MCP50%) and 35.0-88.8 km2 (Kernel 50%). Mean near neighbour distance between centres of 6 tracked pack homesites was 15.3 km. The number of wolves in DF increased from 14 individuals in 2013/2014 to 30 in 2016/2017. The annual rate of increase varied from 43% in 2014/2015 to 7% in the final year. Population density for the whole study area was relatively low (1.2 indiv./100 km2 in 2016/2017), but densities within territories of two packs studied with telemetry were 1.9 and 1.5 indiv./100 km2. Mean pack size varied between 3.5 and 5.6 individuals, with the largest pack comprising 8 wolves. Mean number of pups observed in summers (June-August) was 4.5. Differences in home range sizes between wolves in western and eastern Poland indicate that results of regional studies cannot be freely extrapolated despite close genetic relationships. Thus, decisions related to management of wolf habitats should be based on intensive local studies.
|
|
