scholarly journals A brown bear, Ursus arctos, catching a sockeye salmon, Oncorhynchus nerka. Katmai National Park, Alaska. Photo reproduced by permission of Oliver Krüger, University of Bielefeld.

Ethology ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 118 (4) ◽  
pp. i-i
2017 ◽  
Vol 114 (39) ◽  
pp. 10432-10437 ◽  
Author(s):  
William W. Deacy ◽  
Jonathan B. Armstrong ◽  
William B. Leacock ◽  
Charles T. Robbins ◽  
David D. Gustine ◽  
...  

Climate change is altering the seasonal timing of life cycle events in organisms across the planet, but the magnitude of change often varies among taxa [Thackeray SJ, et al. (2016) Nature 535:241–245]. This can cause the temporal relationships among species to change, altering the strength of interaction. A large body of work has explored what happens when coevolved species shift out of sync, but virtually no studies have documented the effects of climate-induced synchronization, which could remove temporal barriers between species and create novel interactions. We explored how a predator, the Kodiak brown bear (Ursus arctos middendorffi), responded to asymmetric phenological shifts between its primary trophic resources, sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) and red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa). In years with anomalously high spring air temperatures, elderberry fruited several weeks earlier and became available during the period when salmon spawned in tributary streams. Bears departed salmon spawning streams, where they typically kill 25–75% of the salmon [Quinn TP, Cunningham CJ, Wirsing AJ (2016) Oecologia 183:415–429], to forage on berries on adjacent hillsides. This prey switching behavior attenuated an iconic predator–prey interaction and likely altered the many ecological functions that result from bears foraging on salmon [Helfield JM, Naiman RJ (2006) Ecosystems 9:167–180]. We document how climate-induced shifts in resource phenology can alter food webs through a mechanism other than trophic mismatch. The current emphasis on singular consumer-resource interactions fails to capture how climate-altered phenologies reschedule resource availability and alter how energy flows through ecosystems.


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (23) ◽  
pp. 13278-13293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yunchuan Dai ◽  
Charlotte E. Hacker ◽  
Yuguang Zhang ◽  
Wenwen Li ◽  
Yu Zhang ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 133 (2) ◽  
pp. 151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathew S. Sorum ◽  
Kyle Joly ◽  
Matthew D. Cameron

Salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) is a key dietary item for temperate coastal Brown Bears (Ursus arctos) across much of their circumpolar range. Brown Bears living in Arctic, interior, and montane environments without large annual runs of salmon tend to be smaller bodied and occur at much lower densities than coastal populations. We conducted ground and aerial surveys to assess whether Brown Bears fished for salmon above the Arctic Circle, in and around Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve. Here, we document the use of salmon by interior Brown Bears in the Arctic mountains of the central Brooks Range of Alaska. We believe our findings could be important for understanding the breadth of the species’ diet across major biomes, as well as visitor safety in the park and Brown Bear conservation in the region.


2000 ◽  
Vol 78 (6) ◽  
pp. 974-981 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory T Ruggerone ◽  
Renn Hanson ◽  
Donald E Rogers

Selective predation by and predation rates of brown bears (Ursus arctos) foraging on spawning sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in a small shallow creek in the Wood River lake system near Bristol Bay, Alaska, were quantified during 1986 and 1990–1992. Bears killed a high proportion of spawning salmon when few salmon entered the creek (92% of 505 fish) and a much smaller proportion when the spawning population reached a historical high (16% of 15 631 fish). Selective predation on salmon that differed in length, sex, and spawning condition was measured by tagging salmon at the mouth of the creek immediately prior to upstream migration and then recovering dead tagged fish during daily surveys of the entire creek. The relative frequencies of large, medium-sized, and small salmon killed by bears indicated that the risk of predation was more than 150% greater for large than for small salmon. A higher proportion of the male salmon population was killed and a greater proportion of male bodies were consumed than female salmon. Selectivity for male salmon increased as the spawning season progressed, possibly because male salmon weakened earlier and lived longer in a weakened state than female salmon. Male salmon were attacked mostly along the dorsal hump area, whereas female salmon tended to be attacked along the abdomen, where eggs could be exposed. Bears selectively killed female salmon prior to spawning during 1 of the 3 years, but only 6.1–7.8% of the female spawning populations were killed prior to spawning. These data support the hypothesis that selective predation by bears may influence the body morphology of spawning salmon.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 29-42
Author(s):  
S. karimi ◽  
M.R. Hemami ◽  
M. Tarkesh Esfahani ◽  
Ch. Baltzinger ◽  
◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 158-164
Author(s):  
Usman Ali ◽  
Naeem Iftikhar ◽  
Nuzhat Shafi ◽  
Khawaja Basharat Ahmad ◽  
Muhammad Siddique Awan ◽  
...  

The Himalayan brown bear (Ursus arctos isabellinus) is considered as .Endangered. in Pakistan. However, a small population of this species still exists in northern Pakistan including Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK). A study was conducted to determine population status and distribution of Himalayan brown bear in Musk Deer National Park (MDNP), from April 2011 to September 2012. MDNP, covering an area of 528.16 km2, is situated in the extreme north of AJ&K (upper Neelum Valley) about 155 km away from Muzaffarabad. Study area was divided into three zones (Phulawai, Sardari and Loser) and searched for brown bear signs and evidences. A total of 17 transect surveys were carried out to collect the data on current population status and distribution of Himalayan brown bear in the study area. In addition, questionnaires based surveys were carried out in the area to gather maximum information about this species. Based on direct and indirect signs collected, a total population of about 12 individuals with a population density of 0.42 bear/km2 was estimated in the MDNP with maximum (0.45 bear/km2) in Loser and minimum (0.37 bear/km2) in Phulawai zone. Altitudinal preference was recorded highest (0.46 bear/km2) at the elevation level of >3000 m asl. For the proper management and conservation of Himalayan brown bear, more comprehensive study should be carried out throughout its potential habitat.  


Oryx ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 511-519 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dário Hipólito ◽  
Slaven Reljić ◽  
Luís Miguel Rosalino ◽  
Seth M. Wilson ◽  
Carlos Fonseca ◽  
...  

AbstractHuman–bear conflicts resulting from livestock depredation and crop use are a common threat to the brown bear Ursus arctos throughout its range. Understanding these conflicts requires the recording and categorization of incidents, assessment of their geographical distribution and frequency, and documentation of the financial costs and the presence of any preventative measures. Damage compensation schemes can help mitigate conflicts and, in some cases, improve acceptance of bears. This study aims to elucidate the major factors determining the patterns of damage caused by bears, examine the effectiveness of preventative measures in reducing such damage, and identify bear damage hotspots in Croatia. Our analysis is based on damage reports provided by hunting organizations to the Croatian Ministry of Agriculture during 2004–2014. The highest number of claims were made for damage to field crops and orchards. Damage to livestock, agricultural crops and beehives resulted in the highest total cost to farmers. Damage to beehives and to automatic corn feeders for game species incurred the highest cost per damage event. We identified a hotspot for bear damage claims in Croatia, located near Risnjak National Park and the border with Slovenia. Damage appears higher in areas that have more villages closer to protected areas and a greater per cent of forest cover, indicating a synergistic effect of protected environments that facilitate bear movements and the presence of human activities that provide easily accessible food for bears.


2012 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-162
Author(s):  
Anna Spalona

Abstract This paper investigates the awareness of visitors to Bieszczady National Park (BNP) and Tatra National Park (TNP) of human influence on brown bears (Ursus arctos Linnaeus, 1758), i.e. what causes human-habituated bears to become food-conditioned. In the parks studied, 928 questionnaires were collected in July and August 2007. The survey was supplemented with data on the amount of garbage collected in both parks by municipal services in 2007. Respondents in BPN displayed significantly greater knowledge about the causes of human-food conditioning of bears than respondents in TNP (64.2% and 52.7%, respectively, had more than the average of 3.54 correct answers per 5 questions in the questionnaire). As many as 60.1% of visitors in both parks incorrectly associated human-food conditioning with a lack of natural food and 34.4% withan excessive number of bears. Most respondents did not realise that to prevent human-bear conflict, decisive actions must be taken towards every food conditioned bear observed in the free-living population. Unlike in BNP, in TNP there is a large amount of rubbish left by visitors along trails. In 2007, municipal services collected in both parks a similar amount of garbageper 1000 visitors (0.39 m3 and 0.37 m3 in BNP and TNP, respectively) but the annual number of visitors is nearly 8‑fold lower inBNP than in TNP. In BNP, only visitors put rubbish in containers, while in TNP, additional 6 cleaning companies are employed to collect rubbish thrown by visitors along trails. In contrast to TNP, however, in BNP there are no bear-proof containers. Both parks need to prevent the access of bears to rubbish. It is also advisable to initiate an effective information campaign among visitors about prevention of human-food conditioning of bears.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document