|
Iliopoulos, Y., Youlatos, D., & Sgardelis, S. (2013). Wolf pack rendezvous site selection in Greece is mainly affected by anthropogenic landscape features. Eur J Wildl Res, 60.
|
|
|
Mori, E., Benatti, L., Lovari, S., & Ferretti, F. (2016). What does the wild boar mean to the wolf? European Journal of Wildlife Research, 63(1), 9.
Abstract: Generalist predators are expected to shape their diets according to the local availability of prey species. In turn, the extent of consumption of a prey would be influenced by the number of alternative prey species. We have tested this prediction by considering the wild boar and the grey wolf: two widespread species whose distribution ranges overlap largely in Southern Europe, e.g. in Italy. We have reviewed 16 studies from a total of 21 study areas, to assess whether the absolute frequency of occurrence of wild boar in the wolf diet was influenced by (i) occurrence of the other ungulate species in diet and (ii) the number of available ungulate species. Wild boar turned out to be the main prey of the wolf (49% occurrence, on average), followed by roe deer (24%) and livestock (18%). Occurrence of wild boar in the wolf diet decreased with increasing usage of roe deer, livestock, and to a lower extent, chamois and red deer. The number of prey species did not influence the occurrence of wild boar in the wolf diet. The wild boar is a gregarious, noisy and often locally abundant ungulate, thus easily detectable, to a predator. In turn, the extent of predation on this ungulate may not be influenced so much by the availability of other potential prey. Heavy artificial reductions of wild boar numbers, e.g. through numerical control, may concentrate predation by wolves on alternative prey (e.g. roe deer) and/or livestock, thus increasing conflicts with human activities.
|
|
|
Plumer, L., Talvi, T., Männil, P., & Saarma, U. (2018). Assessing the roles of wolves and dogs in livestock predation with suggestions for mitigating human-wildlife conflict and conservation of wolves. Conservat. Genet., 19(3), 665–672.
Abstract: Predation on livestock is a cause of serious and long-lasting conflict between farmers and wildlife, promoting negative public attitudes and endangering conservation of large carnivores. However, while large carnivores, especially the grey wolf (Canis lupus), are often blamed for killing sheep and other farm animals, free-ranging dogs may also act as predators. To develop appropriate measures for livestock protection, reliable methods for identifying predator species are critical. Identification of predators from visual examination of livestock wounds can be ambiguous and genetic analysis is strongly preferable for accurate species determination. To estimate the proportion of wolves and dogs implicated in sheep predation, we developed a sensitive genetic assay to distinguish between wolves and domestic dogs. A total of 183 predator saliva samples collected from killed sheep in Estonia were analysed. The assay identified the predator species in 143 cases (78%). Sheep were most often killed by wolves (81%); however, predation by dogs was substantial (15%). We compared the molecular results with field observations conducted by local environmental officials and recorded some disagreement, with the latter underestimating the role of dogs. As predator saliva samples collected from prey are often of poor quality, we suggest using mitochondrial DNA as a primary tool to maximise the number of successfully analysed samples. We also suggest adopting forensic DNA analysis more widely in livestock predation assessments as a legislative measure since misidentification that is biased against wolves can be counterproductive for conservation by enhancing conflict with society and leading to increased culling and poaching.
|
|
|
Fritts, S. H., Bangs, E. E., & Gore, J. F. (1994). The relationship of wolf recovery to habitat conservation and biodiversity in the northwestern United States. Landsc Urban Plan, 28.
|
|
|
Dugnol, B., Fernández, C., & Galiano, G. (2007). Wolf population counting by spectrogram image processing. Appl Math Comput, 186.
|
|
|
Dugnol, B., Fernández, C., Galiano, G., & Velasco, J. (2007). Implementation of a diffusive differential reassignment method for signal enhancement: An application to wolf population counting. Appl Math Comput, 193.
|
|
|
Apollonio, M., Mattioli, L., Scandura, M., Mauri, L., Gazzola, A., & Avanzinelli, E. (2004). Wolves in the Casentinesi Forests: insights for wolf conservation in Italy from a protected area with a rich wild prey community. Biol Conserv, 120.
|
|
|
Ripple, W. J., & Beschta, R. L. (2012). Trophic cascades in Yellowstone: The first 15 years after wolf reintroduction. Biol Conserv, 145.
|
|
|
Wallner, B., Palmieri, N., Vogl, C., Rigler, D., Bozlak, E., Druml, T., et al. (2017). Y Chromosome Uncovers the Recent Oriental Origin of Modern Stallions. Current Biology, 27(13), 2029–2035.e5.
Abstract: The Y chromosome directly reflects male genealogies, but the extremely low Y chromosome sequence diversity in horses has prevented the reconstruction of stallion genealogies [1, 2]. Here, we resolve the first Y chromosome genealogy of modern horses by screening 1.46 Mb of the male-specific region of the Y chromosome (MSY) in 52 horses from 21 breeds. Based on highly accurate pedigree data, we estimated the de novo mutation rate of the horse MSY and showed that various modern horse Y chromosome lineages split much later than the domestication of the species. Apart from few private northern European haplotypes, all modern horse breeds clustered together in a roughly 700-year-old haplogroup that was transmitted to Europe by the import of Oriental stallions. The Oriental horse group consisted of two major subclades: the Original Arabian lineage and the Turkoman horse lineage. We show that the English Thoroughbred MSY was derived from the Turkoman lineage and that English Thoroughbred sires are largely responsible for the predominance of this haplotype in modern horses.
|
|
|
McGreevy, P. D., Harman, A., McLean, A., & Hawson, L. (2010). Over-flexing the horse's neck: A modern equestrian obsession? Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 5(4), 180–186.
Abstract: We used an opportunistic review of photographs of different adult and juvenile horses walking, trotting, and cantering (n = 828) to compare the angle of the nasal plane relative to vertical in feral and domestic horses at liberty (n = 450) with ridden horses advertised in a popular Australian horse magazine (n = 378). We assumed that horses in advertisements were shown at, what was perceived by the vendors to be, their best. Of the ridden horses, 68% had their nasal plane behind the vertical. The mean angle of the unridden horses at walk, trot, and canter (30.7 ± 11.5; 27.3 ± 12.0; 25.5 ± 11.0) was significantly greater than those of the ridden horses (1.4 ± 14.1; ?5.1 ± ?11.1; 3.1 ± 15.4, P < 0.001). Surprisingly, unridden domestic horses showed greater angles than feral horses or domestic horses at liberty. We compared adult and juvenile horses in all 3 gaits and found no significant difference. Taken together, these findings demonstrate that the longitudinal neck flexion of the degree desirable by popular opinion in ridden horses is not a common feature of unridden horses moving naturally. Moreover, they suggest that advertised horses in our series are generally being ridden at odds with their natural carriage and contrary to the international rules of dressage (as published by the International Equestrian Federation). These findings are discussed against the backdrop of the established doctrine, which states that carrying a rider necessitates changes in longitudinal flexion, and in the context of the current debate around hyperflexion.
|
|