Territory size of wolves Canis lupus : linking local (Białowieża Primeval Forest, Poland) and Holarctic‐scale patterns

Territory size of wolves Canis lupus : linking local (Białowieża Primeval Forest, Poland) and... Factors affecting territory size in wolves Canis lupus were studied at 2 scales, the local population (Białowieża Primeval Forest (BPF), eastern Poland) and the geographic range of species (literature review from 14 localities in the Holarctic). Four packs of wolves were studied by radio‐tracking in BPF from 1994 to 1999. The annual territories of packs (Minimum convex polygons with 95% of locations) averaged 201 km2 (SD 63, range 116–310). Core areas of territories (50% MCP) covered from 14 to 78 km2 (mean 35). Territory sizes and core areas both were negatively correlated to the encounter rates of ungulates (mean number of ungulates seen per unit time spent in the forest by human observers). Pack size (3–8 wolves) did not influence territory size. Home ranges of individual wolves from the same pack varied with season as well as the age, sex, and reproductive status of the wolf. Review of literature from North America and Europe (42–66oN), showed that latitude and prey biomass were essential factors shaping the biogeographic variation in wolf territory size. Territories increased with latitude and declined with growing biomass of prey. The analysis showed that latitude acted partly independently of the south–north gradient in prey abundance. At similar standing crop of ungulate biomass (100 kg km−2), wolf territories would average 140 km2 at 40oN, 370 km2 at 50oN, and 950 km2 at 60oN. Pack size was larger at northern latitudes, but the increase did not keep pace with enlargement of territories. Within‐territory density of wolves declined from 2.5–3 wolves 100 km−2 at 40–45oN to 0.7 wolves 100 km−2 at 60oN. Our analyses documented similarities regarding the role of prey resources in shaping wolf territoriality at the different scales. Furthermore, a macroecological approach revealed additional factors affecting wolf territory size that were not emergent from knowledge of local population. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Ecography Wiley

Territory size of wolves Canis lupus : linking local (Białowieża Primeval Forest, Poland) and Holarctic‐scale patterns

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/territory-size-of-wolves-canis-lupus-linking-local-bia-owie-a-primeval-aYwhM3v43E
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0906-7590
eISSN
1600-0587
D.O.I.
10.1111/j.0906-7590.2007.04826.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Factors affecting territory size in wolves Canis lupus were studied at 2 scales, the local population (Białowieża Primeval Forest (BPF), eastern Poland) and the geographic range of species (literature review from 14 localities in the Holarctic). Four packs of wolves were studied by radio‐tracking in BPF from 1994 to 1999. The annual territories of packs (Minimum convex polygons with 95% of locations) averaged 201 km2 (SD 63, range 116–310). Core areas of territories (50% MCP) covered from 14 to 78 km2 (mean 35). Territory sizes and core areas both were negatively correlated to the encounter rates of ungulates (mean number of ungulates seen per unit time spent in the forest by human observers). Pack size (3–8 wolves) did not influence territory size. Home ranges of individual wolves from the same pack varied with season as well as the age, sex, and reproductive status of the wolf. Review of literature from North America and Europe (42–66oN), showed that latitude and prey biomass were essential factors shaping the biogeographic variation in wolf territory size. Territories increased with latitude and declined with growing biomass of prey. The analysis showed that latitude acted partly independently of the south–north gradient in prey abundance. At similar standing crop of ungulate biomass (100 kg km−2), wolf territories would average 140 km2 at 40oN, 370 km2 at 50oN, and 950 km2 at 60oN. Pack size was larger at northern latitudes, but the increase did not keep pace with enlargement of territories. Within‐territory density of wolves declined from 2.5–3 wolves 100 km−2 at 40–45oN to 0.7 wolves 100 km−2 at 60oN. Our analyses documented similarities regarding the role of prey resources in shaping wolf territoriality at the different scales. Furthermore, a macroecological approach revealed additional factors affecting wolf territory size that were not emergent from knowledge of local population.

Journal

EcographyWiley

Published: Feb 1, 2007

References

  • Biological and logistical explanations of variation in wolf population density
    Fuller, Fuller; Murray, Murray
  • Home range scaling: intraspecific and comparative trends
    Gompper, Gompper; Gittleman, Gittleman

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off