FIFTY YEARS OF FOOD AND FORAGING IN MOOSE: LESSONS IN ECOLOGY FROM A MODEL HERBIVORE

作者: Lisa Shipley

DOI:

关键词:

摘要: Normal 0 false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 For more than half a century, biologists have intensively studied food habits and forag­ing behavior of moose ( Alces alces ) across their circumpolar range. This focus stems, in part, from the economic, recreational, ecosystem values moose, because they are relatively easy to observe. As result this research effort simple intact ecosystems which often reside, emerged as model herbivore through many key ecological ques­tions been examined. First, dietary specialization has traditionally defined solely based on narrow, realized diet (e.g., obtaining >60% its 1 plant genus). definition not particularly useful understanding adaptations >99% mammalian herbi­vores thus classified generalists. Although consume variety browses range, populations 50-99% diets genus Salix ). Like obligatory herbivores, demonstrated chemistry morphology nearly monospecific diets, precludes them eating large amounts grass forbs. New classifications for niche suggest that fit continuum between facultative special­ists Second, subject early influential models predicting foraging tradeoffs quality quantity plants. Subsequent predicted size stems selected by fast harvest­ing (large twigs) quick digestion (small twigs). Because size, require hours harvest food, selecting bites browse density declines. Finally, long-term monitoring provided evidence how communities regulated. Low reproductive rates population trends shaped forage availability Isle Royale strong bottom-up effect populations. Empirical data simulation may shape own supply, influencing community populations, especially when predators scarce. Likewise, predation is primary fac­tor affecting calf survival Alaska, demonstrating important role top-down factors. Moose will continue provide examining questions such tolerances chemistry, what governs animal movements over landscapes, reciprocal interactions reproduction.

参考文章(34)
Andrew T. Smith, Conservation of Endangered Lagomorphs Springer Berlin Heidelberg. pp. 297- 315 ,(2008) , 10.1007/978-3-540-72446-9_20
A. R. E. Sinclair, The role of mammals as ecosystem landscapers. Alces. ,vol. 39, pp. 161- 176 ,(2003)
V. VanBallenberghe, D.A. Weixelman, R.T. Bowyer, Diet selection by Alaskan moose during winter: effects of fire and forest succession ,(1997)
K. I. Morris, Impact of moose on aquatic vegetation in northern Maine. Alces. ,vol. 38, pp. 213- 218 ,(2002)
Jennifer S. Sorensen, James D. McLister, M. Denise Dearing, NOVEL PLANT SECONDARY METABOLITES IMPACT DIETARY SPECIALISTS MORE THAN GENERALISTS (NEOTOMA SPP) Ecology. ,vol. 86, pp. 140- 154 ,(2005) , 10.1890/03-0669
Lyle A. Renecker, Robert J. Hudson, Seasonal activity budgets of moose in aspen-dominated boreal forests Journal of Wildlife Management. ,vol. 53, pp. 296- 302 ,(1989) , 10.2307/3801126
Elizabeth A. Bernays, Daniel J. Funk, Specialists make faster decisions than generalists: experiments with aphids. Proceedings of The Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. ,vol. 266, pp. 151- 156 ,(1999) , 10.1098/RSPB.1999.0615
John H. Roese, Ken L. Risenhoover, L.Joseph Folse, Habitat heterogeneity and foraging efficiency: an individual-based model Ecological Modelling. ,vol. 57, pp. 133- 143 ,(1991) , 10.1016/0304-3800(91)90058-9
Lauri Oksanen, Stephen D. Fretwell, Joseph Arruda, Pekka Niemela, Exploitation Ecosystems in Gradients of Primary Productivity The American Naturalist. ,vol. 118, pp. 240- 261 ,(1981) , 10.1086/283817