On Leucocytozoon in Swedish Capercaillie, Black Grouse and Hazel Grouse

1954 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 142
Author(s):  
Arnold B. Erickson ◽  
Karl Borg
Keyword(s):  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 597-607
Author(s):  
Boris E. Zarubin ◽  
Vyacheslav V. Kolesnikov ◽  
Anna V. Kozlova ◽  
Maria S. Shevnina ◽  
Alexander V. Economov

An assessment of the species structure and size of small game prey for the spring and autumn-winter hunting seasons on the territory of the Kirov region was made, using a questionnaire survey based on the analysis of the prey of 3220 individuals. Small game includes such species (groups of species) as mallard, Northern shoveler, pintail, teal-whistle, teal cracker (Garganey), Eurasian wigeon, diving ducks, white-fronted goose, bean goose, wood grouse, black grouse, hazel grouse, woodcock, double snipe, snipe, corncrake, wood pigeon, turtle doves, white hare, European hare. The average index of production by species and groups of species per 1 hunter, who went hunting in the spring and autumn-winter seasons, has been calculated. The size of game catch during the spring hunting was 135.8 thousand individuals, in the autumn-winter hunting season -470 thousand individuals. The summation of the results obtained made it possible to estimate the volume of the total (annual) catch of small game in the amount of almost 606 thousand individuals. The main species are the mallard, hazel grouse, white hare, woodcock, black grouse, Eurasian wigeon, teal cracker (Garganey), Northern shoveler, wood grouse, white-fronted goose, bean goose, teal-whistle, their total share is 94.88% of the annual production of small game. The first five species can be assessed as the most massive in production (or popular), the share of each of them is over 10% of the total production, and in total they amount to 70.4%.


1993 ◽  
Vol 71 (7) ◽  
pp. 1303-1310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon E. Swenson ◽  
Per Angelstam

Sympatric forest grouse in intensively managed conifer-dominated forests of the southern boreal zone in Sweden occupied different forest successional stages. Black grouse (Tetrao tetrix) selected forest stands 0 – 20 years old, hazel grouse (Bonasa bonasia) selected those 20 – 50 years old, and capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) selected those ≥90 years old. Moreover, hazel grouse also selected stands with 1 – 10% deciduous trees, whereas capercaillie selected stands with no deciduous trees. The relative numbers of each grouse species were similar in two areas of intensively managed industrial forest, but differed in an area where forestry was less intensive and where forests had old-growth characteristics, i.e., they were old and multi-layered. Black grouse dominated in the intensively managed areas, whereas hazel grouse dominated in the less intensively managed area. We suggest that under natural conditions, black grouse inhabited the early-successional stages of forest following burns, hazel grouse inhabited the next, denser, successional stage and also old-growth spruce-dominated forests in fire refugia, and capercaillie inhabited stands of open, old, pine-dominated forest maintained by forest fire. The black grouse appears to be preadapted to the modern system of clearcut forest management. However, this system is clearly detrimental to the hazel grouse and capercaillie. To maintain all three species in a managed landscape, forest managers must strive to mimic more closely the natural variation in types and sizes of forest stands.


Oikos ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Lindström ◽  
Esa Ranta ◽  
Harto Lindén ◽  
Jan Lindstrom ◽  
Harto Linden

2012 ◽  
Vol 153 (4) ◽  
pp. 999-1009 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. E. Chamberlain ◽  
M. Bocca ◽  
L. Migliore ◽  
E. Caprio ◽  
A. Rolando

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document