Mule deer–cattle interactions in managed coniferous forests during seasonal grazing periods in southern British Columbia, Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Context In young forests of the Pacific North-west of North America, the potential impacts of domestic grazing by cattle (Bos taurus) on forest ecosystems and native ungulates such as mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) are poorly understood. It is not clear how cattle and deer may interact in young forests used for summer range by both ungulates, and winter range used by deer, where pre-commercial thinning (PCT) and fertilisation enhance both timber and forage. Aims To test the following two hypotheses: (H1) that PCT and repeated fertilisation of young lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) stands would increase relative habitat use by cattle; and (H2) that increased use of forested range by cattle would result in decreased use by mule deer. Methods Replicate study areas were located near Summerland, Kelowna, and Williams Lake in south-central British Columbia, Canada. Each study area had the following nine treatments: four pairs of stands thinned to densities of ~250 (very low), ~500 (low), ~1000 (medium), and ~2000 (high) stems ha–1 with one stand of each pair fertilised five times at 2-year intervals. Relative habitat use was measured by counting cowpies for cattle in summer and pellet groups for deer in summer and winter periods 1998–2003. Key results Relative habitat use by cattle was significantly enhanced by fertiliser treatments and heavy thinning, supporting H1. Relative habitat use by deer during summer periods was not affected by stand density, but was significantly higher in fertilised than unfertilised stands, with no difference in winter months, thereby not supporting H2. Conclusions Summer habitat use by mule deer appeared to be a function of forage opportunities and no significant correlations in relative habitat use between cattle and mule deer during the summer were detected. Negative correlations were better explained by the need for tree cover by deer during severe winter conditions than a negative response to cattle grazing. Implications Domestic grazing by cattle may be compatible with native ungulates such as mule deer, at least in those forest sites that are managed intensively for timber production. Fertilisation may result in sufficient forage production in the understorey vegetation of these forest ecosystems, to compensate for cattle grazing that reduces the live forage biomass.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».