Spatial ecology of wolverines at the southern periphery of distribution
Wolverines (Gulo gulo) in the conterminous United States have experienced range contraction, are uncommon, and have been designated as warranted for protection under the United States Endangered Species Act. Data from the southern edge of the wolverine's circumpolar distribution is sparse, and...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of wildlife management 2012-05, Vol.76 (4), p.778-792 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 792 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 778 |
container_title | The Journal of wildlife management |
container_volume | 76 |
creator | Inman, Robert M. Packila, Mark L. Inman, Kristine H. Mccue, Anthony J. White, Gary C. Persson, Jens Aber, Bryan C. Orme, Mark L. Alt, Kurt L. Cain, Steven L. Fredrick, Jay A. Oakleaf, Bob J. Sartorius, Shawn S. |
description | Wolverines (Gulo gulo) in the conterminous United States have experienced range contraction, are uncommon, and have been designated as warranted for protection under the United States Endangered Species Act. Data from the southern edge of the wolverine's circumpolar distribution is sparse, and development of effective conservation strategies would benefit from a more complete understanding of the species' ecology. We captured and radio-monitored 30 wolverines in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), tested for seasonal habitat selection by elevation band, and examined a suite of spatial characteristics to clarify our understanding of the wolverine's niche. Wolverines in GYE selected for areas > 2,600 m latitude-adjusted elevation (LAE; n = 2,257 wolverine locations [12 F, 6 M]). Wolverines avoided areas < 2,150 m LAE, including during winter when the vast majority of ungulates are pushed to these elevations by deep snow. Wolverine home ranges were large relative to body size, averaging 303 km² for adult females and 797 km² for adult males (n = 13 [8 F, 5 M] and 33 wolverine-years). Resident adults fit with Global Positioning System (GPS) collars used an area > 75% the size of their multi-year home range in an average of 32 days (n = 7 [5 F, 2 M]). Average movement rates of 1.3 km/2-hr indicated that both sexes move distances equivalent to the diameter of their home range every 2 days or the circumference of their home range in < 1 week (n = 1,329 2-hr movements, n = 12 individuals [7 F, 5 M]). This capability for movement, the short time-frame over which home ranges were developed, and a lack of home range overlap by same sex adults ( \[\bar x\] = 2.1% overlap, 90% CI = 0.0-4.8%, n = 22 pairs) suggested territoriality. We estimated wolverine density to be 3.5/1,000 km² of area > 2,150 m LAE (95% CI = 2.8-9.6). Dispersal movements extended to at least 170 km for both sexes (n = 5 F, 2 M). At the southern edge of distribution, where suitable and unsuitable conditions exist in close proximity, wolverines selected high-elevation areas near alpine tree-line where a mix of forest, meadow, and boulder fields were present, deep snow-cover existed during winter, and low temperatures near freezing can occur throughout the year. Persistence in these areas where the growing season is brief requires large home ranges that are regularly patrolled, a social system that provides exclusive access to resources, and low densities. These characteristics, along with low rep |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/jwmg.289 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_swepu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_swepub_primary_oai_slubar_slu_se_41822</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>41519417</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>41519417</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4909-919fb1902c0e7c570ffbb2e4aa5a0fdf2428ef5b65e216a94a265e3b95711e733</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU9v1DAQxa0KpC4tEl-gUiQuXFI8_hPHR1TRpdDCgaLlZjnpuPWSjVM7YbvfHm8X7UpInN5o5qenmXmEvAF6DpSy98v16v6c1fqIzEBzVbIa1AsyyyNWSgE_j8mrlJaUcoC6mpH598GO3nYFtqEL95siuGIdut8YfY-psGMxPmCRwpQl9sWQ-0Ounrk7n8bom2n0oT8lL53tEr7-qyfkx-XH24tP5fW3-dXFh-uyFZrqUoN2DWjKWoqqlYo61zQMhbXSUnfnmGA1OtlUEhlUVgvLcskbLRUAKs5PSLnzTWscpsYM0a9s3JhgvUnd1Ni4FZPQCKgZy_y7HT_E8DhhGs3Kpxa7zvYYpmRAcEE5V8_Wb_9Bl2GKfb4mU4wyVVGAg2EbQ0oR3X4FoGabgNkmYHICh13XvsPNfznzeXEz3_FnO36ZxhD3vAAJWoA6-OW_49N-buMvUymupFl8nZtbWUt9-UWbBf8DoX2hCA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1420276011</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Spatial ecology of wolverines at the southern periphery of distribution</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Inman, Robert M. ; Packila, Mark L. ; Inman, Kristine H. ; Mccue, Anthony J. ; White, Gary C. ; Persson, Jens ; Aber, Bryan C. ; Orme, Mark L. ; Alt, Kurt L. ; Cain, Steven L. ; Fredrick, Jay A. ; Oakleaf, Bob J. ; Sartorius, Shawn S.</creator><creatorcontrib>Inman, Robert M. ; Packila, Mark L. ; Inman, Kristine H. ; Mccue, Anthony J. ; White, Gary C. ; Persson, Jens ; Aber, Bryan C. ; Orme, Mark L. ; Alt, Kurt L. ; Cain, Steven L. ; Fredrick, Jay A. ; Oakleaf, Bob J. ; Sartorius, Shawn S. ; Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet</creatorcontrib><description>Wolverines (Gulo gulo) in the conterminous United States have experienced range contraction, are uncommon, and have been designated as warranted for protection under the United States Endangered Species Act. Data from the southern edge of the wolverine's circumpolar distribution is sparse, and development of effective conservation strategies would benefit from a more complete understanding of the species' ecology. We captured and radio-monitored 30 wolverines in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), tested for seasonal habitat selection by elevation band, and examined a suite of spatial characteristics to clarify our understanding of the wolverine's niche. Wolverines in GYE selected for areas > 2,600 m latitude-adjusted elevation (LAE; n = 2,257 wolverine locations [12 F, 6 M]). Wolverines avoided areas < 2,150 m LAE, including during winter when the vast majority of ungulates are pushed to these elevations by deep snow. Wolverine home ranges were large relative to body size, averaging 303 km² for adult females and 797 km² for adult males (n = 13 [8 F, 5 M] and 33 wolverine-years). Resident adults fit with Global Positioning System (GPS) collars used an area > 75% the size of their multi-year home range in an average of 32 days (n = 7 [5 F, 2 M]). Average movement rates of 1.3 km/2-hr indicated that both sexes move distances equivalent to the diameter of their home range every 2 days or the circumference of their home range in < 1 week (n = 1,329 2-hr movements, n = 12 individuals [7 F, 5 M]). This capability for movement, the short time-frame over which home ranges were developed, and a lack of home range overlap by same sex adults ( \[\bar x\] = 2.1% overlap, 90% CI = 0.0-4.8%, n = 22 pairs) suggested territoriality. We estimated wolverine density to be 3.5/1,000 km² of area > 2,150 m LAE (95% CI = 2.8-9.6). Dispersal movements extended to at least 170 km for both sexes (n = 5 F, 2 M). At the southern edge of distribution, where suitable and unsuitable conditions exist in close proximity, wolverines selected high-elevation areas near alpine tree-line where a mix of forest, meadow, and boulder fields were present, deep snow-cover existed during winter, and low temperatures near freezing can occur throughout the year. Persistence in these areas where the growing season is brief requires large home ranges that are regularly patrolled, a social system that provides exclusive access to resources, and low densities. These characteristics, along with low reproductive rates, are prevalent throughout the species range, indicating that wolverines are specialists at exploiting a cold, unproductive niche where interspecific competition is limited. The vulnerability inherent in occupying this unproductive niche was likely influential in previous declines within the conterminous United States and will remain a factor as wolverines encounter modern human influences. Conserving wolverines in the conterminous United States will require collaborative management over a large geographic scale.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-541X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1937-2817</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.289</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JWMAA9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Animal populations ; Behavioral Sciences Biology ; Body size ; Conservation biology ; density ; Density estimation ; Dispersal ; Ecology ; Ecosystems ; Ekologi ; Elevation ; Endangered species ; Etologi ; Fish and Wildlife Management ; Freezing ; Global positioning systems ; GPS ; Growing season ; Gulo gulo ; Habitat conservation ; Habitat Relations ; Habitat selection ; home range ; Homes ; Human influences ; Low temperature ; Mammals ; movement ; niche ; Niches ; Population estimates ; Snow ; territory ; Treeline ; Ungulates ; Vilt- och fiskeförvaltning ; Wildlife ; Wildlife conservation ; Wildlife ecology ; Wildlife management ; Winter ; wolverine ; Yellowstone ; Zoologi ; Zoology</subject><ispartof>The Journal of wildlife management, 2012-05, Vol.76 (4), p.778-792</ispartof><rights>Copyright© 2012 The Wildlife Society</rights><rights>Copyright © The Wildlife Society, 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4909-919fb1902c0e7c570ffbb2e4aa5a0fdf2428ef5b65e216a94a265e3b95711e733</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4909-919fb1902c0e7c570ffbb2e4aa5a0fdf2428ef5b65e216a94a265e3b95711e733</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/41519417$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/41519417$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,799,881,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://res.slu.se/id/publ/41822$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Inman, Robert M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Packila, Mark L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inman, Kristine H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mccue, Anthony J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>White, Gary C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Persson, Jens</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aber, Bryan C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Orme, Mark L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alt, Kurt L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cain, Steven L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fredrick, Jay A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oakleaf, Bob J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sartorius, Shawn S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet</creatorcontrib><title>Spatial ecology of wolverines at the southern periphery of distribution</title><title>The Journal of wildlife management</title><addtitle>The Journal of Wildlife Management</addtitle><description>Wolverines (Gulo gulo) in the conterminous United States have experienced range contraction, are uncommon, and have been designated as warranted for protection under the United States Endangered Species Act. Data from the southern edge of the wolverine's circumpolar distribution is sparse, and development of effective conservation strategies would benefit from a more complete understanding of the species' ecology. We captured and radio-monitored 30 wolverines in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), tested for seasonal habitat selection by elevation band, and examined a suite of spatial characteristics to clarify our understanding of the wolverine's niche. Wolverines in GYE selected for areas > 2,600 m latitude-adjusted elevation (LAE; n = 2,257 wolverine locations [12 F, 6 M]). Wolverines avoided areas < 2,150 m LAE, including during winter when the vast majority of ungulates are pushed to these elevations by deep snow. Wolverine home ranges were large relative to body size, averaging 303 km² for adult females and 797 km² for adult males (n = 13 [8 F, 5 M] and 33 wolverine-years). Resident adults fit with Global Positioning System (GPS) collars used an area > 75% the size of their multi-year home range in an average of 32 days (n = 7 [5 F, 2 M]). Average movement rates of 1.3 km/2-hr indicated that both sexes move distances equivalent to the diameter of their home range every 2 days or the circumference of their home range in < 1 week (n = 1,329 2-hr movements, n = 12 individuals [7 F, 5 M]). This capability for movement, the short time-frame over which home ranges were developed, and a lack of home range overlap by same sex adults ( \[\bar x\] = 2.1% overlap, 90% CI = 0.0-4.8%, n = 22 pairs) suggested territoriality. We estimated wolverine density to be 3.5/1,000 km² of area > 2,150 m LAE (95% CI = 2.8-9.6). Dispersal movements extended to at least 170 km for both sexes (n = 5 F, 2 M). At the southern edge of distribution, where suitable and unsuitable conditions exist in close proximity, wolverines selected high-elevation areas near alpine tree-line where a mix of forest, meadow, and boulder fields were present, deep snow-cover existed during winter, and low temperatures near freezing can occur throughout the year. Persistence in these areas where the growing season is brief requires large home ranges that are regularly patrolled, a social system that provides exclusive access to resources, and low densities. These characteristics, along with low reproductive rates, are prevalent throughout the species range, indicating that wolverines are specialists at exploiting a cold, unproductive niche where interspecific competition is limited. The vulnerability inherent in occupying this unproductive niche was likely influential in previous declines within the conterminous United States and will remain a factor as wolverines encounter modern human influences. Conserving wolverines in the conterminous United States will require collaborative management over a large geographic scale.</description><subject>Animal populations</subject><subject>Behavioral Sciences Biology</subject><subject>Body size</subject><subject>Conservation biology</subject><subject>density</subject><subject>Density estimation</subject><subject>Dispersal</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Ecosystems</subject><subject>Ekologi</subject><subject>Elevation</subject><subject>Endangered species</subject><subject>Etologi</subject><subject>Fish and Wildlife Management</subject><subject>Freezing</subject><subject>Global positioning systems</subject><subject>GPS</subject><subject>Growing season</subject><subject>Gulo gulo</subject><subject>Habitat conservation</subject><subject>Habitat Relations</subject><subject>Habitat selection</subject><subject>home range</subject><subject>Homes</subject><subject>Human influences</subject><subject>Low temperature</subject><subject>Mammals</subject><subject>movement</subject><subject>niche</subject><subject>Niches</subject><subject>Population estimates</subject><subject>Snow</subject><subject>territory</subject><subject>Treeline</subject><subject>Ungulates</subject><subject>Vilt- och fiskeförvaltning</subject><subject>Wildlife</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><subject>Wildlife ecology</subject><subject>Wildlife management</subject><subject>Winter</subject><subject>wolverine</subject><subject>Yellowstone</subject><subject>Zoologi</subject><subject>Zoology</subject><issn>0022-541X</issn><issn>1937-2817</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kU9v1DAQxa0KpC4tEl-gUiQuXFI8_hPHR1TRpdDCgaLlZjnpuPWSjVM7YbvfHm8X7UpInN5o5qenmXmEvAF6DpSy98v16v6c1fqIzEBzVbIa1AsyyyNWSgE_j8mrlJaUcoC6mpH598GO3nYFtqEL95siuGIdut8YfY-psGMxPmCRwpQl9sWQ-0Ounrk7n8bom2n0oT8lL53tEr7-qyfkx-XH24tP5fW3-dXFh-uyFZrqUoN2DWjKWoqqlYo61zQMhbXSUnfnmGA1OtlUEhlUVgvLcskbLRUAKs5PSLnzTWscpsYM0a9s3JhgvUnd1Ni4FZPQCKgZy_y7HT_E8DhhGs3Kpxa7zvYYpmRAcEE5V8_Wb_9Bl2GKfb4mU4wyVVGAg2EbQ0oR3X4FoGabgNkmYHICh13XvsPNfznzeXEz3_FnO36ZxhD3vAAJWoA6-OW_49N-buMvUymupFl8nZtbWUt9-UWbBf8DoX2hCA</recordid><startdate>201205</startdate><enddate>201205</enddate><creator>Inman, Robert M.</creator><creator>Packila, Mark L.</creator><creator>Inman, Kristine H.</creator><creator>Mccue, Anthony J.</creator><creator>White, Gary C.</creator><creator>Persson, Jens</creator><creator>Aber, Bryan C.</creator><creator>Orme, Mark L.</creator><creator>Alt, Kurt L.</creator><creator>Cain, Steven L.</creator><creator>Fredrick, Jay A.</creator><creator>Oakleaf, Bob J.</creator><creator>Sartorius, Shawn S.</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>ADTPV</scope><scope>AOWAS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201205</creationdate><title>Spatial ecology of wolverines at the southern periphery of distribution</title><author>Inman, Robert M. ; Packila, Mark L. ; Inman, Kristine H. ; Mccue, Anthony J. ; White, Gary C. ; Persson, Jens ; Aber, Bryan C. ; Orme, Mark L. ; Alt, Kurt L. ; Cain, Steven L. ; Fredrick, Jay A. ; Oakleaf, Bob J. ; Sartorius, Shawn S.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4909-919fb1902c0e7c570ffbb2e4aa5a0fdf2428ef5b65e216a94a265e3b95711e733</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Animal populations</topic><topic>Behavioral Sciences Biology</topic><topic>Body size</topic><topic>Conservation biology</topic><topic>density</topic><topic>Density estimation</topic><topic>Dispersal</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Ecosystems</topic><topic>Ekologi</topic><topic>Elevation</topic><topic>Endangered species</topic><topic>Etologi</topic><topic>Fish and Wildlife Management</topic><topic>Freezing</topic><topic>Global positioning systems</topic><topic>GPS</topic><topic>Growing season</topic><topic>Gulo gulo</topic><topic>Habitat conservation</topic><topic>Habitat Relations</topic><topic>Habitat selection</topic><topic>home range</topic><topic>Homes</topic><topic>Human influences</topic><topic>Low temperature</topic><topic>Mammals</topic><topic>movement</topic><topic>niche</topic><topic>Niches</topic><topic>Population estimates</topic><topic>Snow</topic><topic>territory</topic><topic>Treeline</topic><topic>Ungulates</topic><topic>Vilt- och fiskeförvaltning</topic><topic>Wildlife</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><topic>Wildlife ecology</topic><topic>Wildlife management</topic><topic>Winter</topic><topic>wolverine</topic><topic>Yellowstone</topic><topic>Zoologi</topic><topic>Zoology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Inman, Robert M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Packila, Mark L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inman, Kristine H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mccue, Anthony J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>White, Gary C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Persson, Jens</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aber, Bryan C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Orme, Mark L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alt, Kurt L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cain, Steven L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fredrick, Jay A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oakleaf, Bob J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sartorius, Shawn S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>SwePub</collection><collection>SwePub Articles</collection><jtitle>The Journal of wildlife management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Inman, Robert M.</au><au>Packila, Mark L.</au><au>Inman, Kristine H.</au><au>Mccue, Anthony J.</au><au>White, Gary C.</au><au>Persson, Jens</au><au>Aber, Bryan C.</au><au>Orme, Mark L.</au><au>Alt, Kurt L.</au><au>Cain, Steven L.</au><au>Fredrick, Jay A.</au><au>Oakleaf, Bob J.</au><au>Sartorius, Shawn S.</au><aucorp>Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Spatial ecology of wolverines at the southern periphery of distribution</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of wildlife management</jtitle><addtitle>The Journal of Wildlife Management</addtitle><date>2012-05</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>76</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>778</spage><epage>792</epage><pages>778-792</pages><issn>0022-541X</issn><eissn>1937-2817</eissn><coden>JWMAA9</coden><abstract>Wolverines (Gulo gulo) in the conterminous United States have experienced range contraction, are uncommon, and have been designated as warranted for protection under the United States Endangered Species Act. Data from the southern edge of the wolverine's circumpolar distribution is sparse, and development of effective conservation strategies would benefit from a more complete understanding of the species' ecology. We captured and radio-monitored 30 wolverines in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), tested for seasonal habitat selection by elevation band, and examined a suite of spatial characteristics to clarify our understanding of the wolverine's niche. Wolverines in GYE selected for areas > 2,600 m latitude-adjusted elevation (LAE; n = 2,257 wolverine locations [12 F, 6 M]). Wolverines avoided areas < 2,150 m LAE, including during winter when the vast majority of ungulates are pushed to these elevations by deep snow. Wolverine home ranges were large relative to body size, averaging 303 km² for adult females and 797 km² for adult males (n = 13 [8 F, 5 M] and 33 wolverine-years). Resident adults fit with Global Positioning System (GPS) collars used an area > 75% the size of their multi-year home range in an average of 32 days (n = 7 [5 F, 2 M]). Average movement rates of 1.3 km/2-hr indicated that both sexes move distances equivalent to the diameter of their home range every 2 days or the circumference of their home range in < 1 week (n = 1,329 2-hr movements, n = 12 individuals [7 F, 5 M]). This capability for movement, the short time-frame over which home ranges were developed, and a lack of home range overlap by same sex adults ( \[\bar x\] = 2.1% overlap, 90% CI = 0.0-4.8%, n = 22 pairs) suggested territoriality. We estimated wolverine density to be 3.5/1,000 km² of area > 2,150 m LAE (95% CI = 2.8-9.6). Dispersal movements extended to at least 170 km for both sexes (n = 5 F, 2 M). At the southern edge of distribution, where suitable and unsuitable conditions exist in close proximity, wolverines selected high-elevation areas near alpine tree-line where a mix of forest, meadow, and boulder fields were present, deep snow-cover existed during winter, and low temperatures near freezing can occur throughout the year. Persistence in these areas where the growing season is brief requires large home ranges that are regularly patrolled, a social system that provides exclusive access to resources, and low densities. These characteristics, along with low reproductive rates, are prevalent throughout the species range, indicating that wolverines are specialists at exploiting a cold, unproductive niche where interspecific competition is limited. The vulnerability inherent in occupying this unproductive niche was likely influential in previous declines within the conterminous United States and will remain a factor as wolverines encounter modern human influences. Conserving wolverines in the conterminous United States will require collaborative management over a large geographic scale.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/jwmg.289</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-541X |
ispartof | The Journal of wildlife management, 2012-05, Vol.76 (4), p.778-792 |
issn | 0022-541X 1937-2817 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_swepub_primary_oai_slubar_slu_se_41822 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Animal populations Behavioral Sciences Biology Body size Conservation biology density Density estimation Dispersal Ecology Ecosystems Ekologi Elevation Endangered species Etologi Fish and Wildlife Management Freezing Global positioning systems GPS Growing season Gulo gulo Habitat conservation Habitat Relations Habitat selection home range Homes Human influences Low temperature Mammals movement niche Niches Population estimates Snow territory Treeline Ungulates Vilt- och fiskeförvaltning Wildlife Wildlife conservation Wildlife ecology Wildlife management Winter wolverine Yellowstone Zoologi Zoology |
title | Spatial ecology of wolverines at the southern periphery of distribution |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T01%3A52%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_swepu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Spatial%20ecology%20of%20wolverines%20at%20the%20southern%20periphery%20of%20distribution&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20wildlife%20management&rft.au=Inman,%20Robert%20M.&rft.aucorp=Sveriges%20lantbruksuniversitet&rft.date=2012-05&rft.volume=76&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=778&rft.epage=792&rft.pages=778-792&rft.issn=0022-541X&rft.eissn=1937-2817&rft.coden=JWMAA9&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jwmg.289&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_swepu%3E41519417%3C/jstor_swepu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1420276011&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=41519417&rfr_iscdi=true |