DOCSLIB.ORG

Global Usage Suprelorin Summary - Carnivores

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Global Usage Suprelorin Summary - Carnivores Global Usage Suprelorin Summary - Carnivores The total number of unique individuals treated with Suprelorin and the total number of treatments (bouts) per species are presented for both females and males by product formulation (3, 4.7, 6, or 9.4 mg). The minimum and maximum number of implants per treatment are also presented. NA = not applicable, UNK = unknown Females Males Taxonomic classification Total Total Min Max Min Max Implant formulation individuals bouts Individuals Bouts Individuals Bouts implants implants implants implants CARNIVORES 1484 3673 1226 3047 1 6 258 626 1 6 Ailuridae 37 67 35 65 1 1 2 2 1 1 Ailurus fulgens 37 67 35 65 1 1 2 2 1 1 4.7 mg 27 35 27 35 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 16 32 14 30 1 1 2 2 1 1 Canidae 313 549 260 450 1 4 53 99 1 4 Alopex lagopus 5 13 4 12 1 1 1 1 1 1 4.7 mg 2 7 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 9.4 mg 3 6 3 6 1 1 0 0 NA NA Canis latrans 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA Canis lupus 102 193 89 159 1 4 13 34 1 4 4.7 mg 88 135 77 113 1 4 11 22 1 4 9.4 mg 36 58 27 46 1 4 9 12 1 4 Canis rufus 36 51 31 46 1 4 5 5 1 3 4.7 mg 28 41 26 39 1 4 2 2 3 3 6 mg 8 8 5 5 1 1 3 3 1 1 9.4 mg 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 NA NA Chrysocyon brachyurus 18 38 16 30 2 2 2 8 1 1 4.7 mg 7 13 6 8 2 2 1 5 1 1 9.4 mg 16 25 14 22 2 2 2 3 1 1 Cuon alpinus 10 10 8 8 1 2 2 2 1 1 4.7 mg 5 5 5 5 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 5 5 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 1 Lycaon pictus 93 149 70 109 1 3 23 40 1 3 Unknown 2 4 2 4 UNK UNK 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 23 39 19 35 1 3 4 4 1 3 9.4 mg 78 106 57 70 1 3 21 36 1 3 Nyctereutes procyonoides 3 5 3 5 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 2 4 2 4 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA Otocyon megalotis 9 28 7 25 1 1 2 3 1 1 4.7 mg 4 11 3 9 1 1 1 2 1 1 9.4 mg 7 17 6 16 1 1 1 1 1 1 Speothos venaticus 6 17 4 14 1 3 2 3 1 2 Unknown 1 1 1 1 UNK UNK 0 0 NA NA 3 mg 2 2 0 0 NA NA 2 2 1 2 4.7 mg 3 9 3 9 1 2 0 0 NA NA 6 mg 1 1 0 0 NA NA 1 1 1 1 9.4 mg 3 4 3 4 2 3 0 0 NA NA Vulpes velox 7 13 6 12 1 1 1 1 1 1 4.7 mg 4 4 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 9.4 mg 5 9 5 9 1 1 0 0 NA NA Vulpes zerda 23 31 21 29 1 1 2 2 1 1 Unknown 3 3 3 3 UNK UNK 0 0 NA NA 3 mg 6 6 6 6 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 6 8 5 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 9.4 mg 10 14 9 13 1 1 1 1 1 1 Eupleridae 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA Cryptoprocta ferox 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA Felidae 505 1149 474 1083 1 6 31 66 1 6 Acinonyx jubatus 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 4.7 mg 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 2 0 0 NA NA 1 2 2 2 Caracal caracal 4 9 4 9 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 2 7 2 7 1 1 0 0 NA NA 1 Global Usage Suprelorin Summary - Carnivores Females Males Taxonomic classification Total Total Min Max Min Max Implant formulation individuals bouts Individuals Bouts Individuals Bouts implants implants implants implants Felis catus 5 5 0 0 NA NA 5 5 1 1 4.7 mg 5 5 0 0 NA NA 5 5 1 1 Felis margarita 1 4 1 4 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 3 1 3 1 1 0 0 NA NA Felis nigripes 5 11 5 11 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 4 9 4 9 1 1 0 0 NA NA Felis silvestris 2 4 2 4 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 2 4 2 4 1 1 0 0 NA NA Leopardus pardalis 7 11 6 9 1 1 1 2 2 2 4.7 mg 3 4 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 9.4 mg 4 7 4 7 1 1 0 0 NA NA Leopardus wiedii 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA Leptailurus serval 12 43 11 41 1 1 1 2 1 1 Unknown 1 4 1 4 UNK UNK 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 7 10 6 8 1 1 1 2 1 1 9.4 mg 7 29 7 29 1 1 0 0 NA NA Lynx canadensis 3 3 3 3 1 2 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 0 NA NA Lynx lynx 7 11 6 9 1 1 1 2 1 1 Unknown 2 2 2 2 UNK UNK 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 4 7 3 5 1 1 1 2 1 1 Lynx rufus 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA Neofelis nebulosa 17 29 12 24 1 2 5 5 3 3 4.7 mg 13 18 8 13 1 2 5 5 3 3 9.4 mg 4 11 4 11 1 1 0 0 NA NA Oncifelis geoffroyi 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA Otocolobus manul 7 34 2 2 1 1 5 32 1 2 4.7 mg 7 12 2 2 1 1 5 10 1 2 9.4 mg 5 22 0 0 NA NA 5 22 1 1 Panthera (no species) 1 1 1 1 3 3 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 1 1 1 3 3 0 0 NA NA Panthera leo 264 670 261 667 1 6 3 3 2 3 Unknown 20 29 20 29 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 78 114 78 114 1 6 0 0 NA NA 6 mg 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 224 525 221 522 1 4 3 3 2 3 Panthera onca 24 49 21 42 1 3 3 7 1 3 Unknown 1 1 1 1 UNK UNK 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 13 19 11 15 1 2 2 4 2 3 9.4 mg 18 29 15 26 1 3 3 3 1 2 Panthera pardus 23 45 22 44 1 2 1 1 3 3 Unknown 3 4 3 4 UNK UNK 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 7 10 7 10 1 2 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 16 31 15 30 1 2 1 1 3 3 Panthera tigris 91 172 87 168 1 4 4 4 1 6 Unknown 9 9 9 9 2 2 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 33 42 33 42 1 4 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 66 121 62 117 1 3 4 4 1 6 Panthera uncia 18 25 17 24 1 2 1 1 1 1 4.7 mg 12 13 11 12 1 2 1 1 1 1 9.4 mg 10 12 10 12 1 2 0 0 NA NA Prionailurus viverrinus 1 7 1 7 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 6 1 6 1 1 0 0 NA NA 2 Global Usage Suprelorin Summary - Carnivores Females Males Taxonomic classification Total Total Min Max Min Max Implant formulation individuals bouts Individuals Bouts Individuals Bouts implants implants implants implants Puma concolor 6 8 6 8 1 2 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 2 2 2 2 1 2 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 4 6 4 6 1 2 0 0 NA NA Puma yaguarondi 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA Herpestidae 200 723 177 650 1 2 23 73 1 1 Cynictis penicillata 5 13 4 11 1 1 1 2 1 1 4.7 mg 4 6 4 6 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 3 7 2 5 1 1 1 2 1 1 Helogale parvula 7 16 7 16 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 5 6 5 6 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 5 10 5 10 1 1 0 0 NA NA Mungos mungo 27 159 25 150 1 1 2 9 1 1 4.7 mg 16 31 15 30 1 1 1 1 1 1 9.4 mg 27 128 25 120 1 1 2 8 1 1 Suricata suricatta 161 535 141 473 1 2 20 62 1 1 4.7 mg 101 180 85 152 1 1 16 28 1 1 9.4 mg 125 355 112 321 1 2 13 34 1 1 Hyaenidae 23 70 19 56 1 4 4 14 1 2 Crocuta crocuta 18 57 14 43 1 4 4 14 1 2 4.7 mg 7 9 7 9 1 3 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 17 48 13 34 1 4 4 14 1 2 Hyaena hyaena 5 13 5 13 2 3 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 5 12 5 12 2 3 0 0 NA NA Mustelidae 319 930 193 588 1 2 126 342 1 2 Aonyx capensis 1 3 1 3 2 2 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 3 1 3 2 2 0 0 NA NA Aonyx cinereus 135 574 86 364 1 2 49 210 1 1 Unknown 3 5 0 0 NA NA 3 5 1 1 4.7 mg 73 180 44 106 1 1 29 74 1 1 6 mg 3 3 3 3 1 2 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 120 386 80 255 1 1 40 131 1 1 Eira barbara 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA Enhydra lutris 31 92 17 46 1 2 14 46 1 2 4.7 mg 18 36 9 20 1 2 9 16 2 2 9.4 mg 23 56 13 26 1 2 10 30 1 2 Gulo gulo 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA Hydrictis maculicollis 9 35 7 33 1 1 2 2 1 1 4.7 mg 7 12 5 10 1 1 2 2 1 1 9.4 mg 7 23 7 23 1 1 0 0 NA NA Lontra canadensis 28 78 21 55 1 1 7 23 1 2 4.7 mg 11 37 7 17 1 1 4 20 1 2 9.4 mg 20 41 17 38 1 1 3 3 1 1 Lutra lutra 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA Martes pennanti 2 6 2 6 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 2 5 2 5 1 1 0 0 NA NA Mustela nigripes 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA Mustela putorius 92 105 39 45 1 1 53 60 1 1 Unknown 26 27 10 11 UNK UNK 16 16 UNK UNK 4.7 mg 50 51 18 19 1 1 32 32 1 1 9.4 mg 25 27 14 15 1 1 11 12 1 1 Pteronura brasiliensis 16 30 15 29 1 2 1 1 1 1 4.7 mg 1 3 1 3 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 16 27 15 26 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 Global Usage Suprelorin Summary - Carnivores Females Males Taxonomic classification Total Total Min Max Min Max Implant formulation individuals bouts Individuals Bouts Individuals Bouts implants implants implants implants Taxidea taxus 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA Procyonidae 29 50 22 38 1 1 7 12 1 1 Bassariscus astutus 2 4 2 4 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA Nasua narica 8 15 4 10 1 1 4 5 1 1 4.7 mg 3 5 2 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 9.4 mg 7 10 4 7 1 1 3 3 1 1 Nasua nasua 11 16 8 9 1 1 3 7 1 1 Unknown 1 1 1 1 UNK UNK 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 9 12 7 8 1 1 2 4 1 1 9.4 mg 1 3 0 0 NA NA 1 3 1 1 Potos flavus 2 3 2 3 1 1 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 NA NA Procyon lotor 6 12 6 12 1 1 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 6 12 6 12 1 1 0 0 NA NA Ursidae 51 119 40 102 1 5 11 17 1 6 Helarctos malayanus 8 28 6 23 1 2 2 5 2 2 4.7 mg 3 6 3 6 2 2 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 7 22 5 17 1 2 2 5 2 2 Melursus ursinus 5 14 5 14 1 3 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 5 14 5 14 1 3 0 0 NA NA Tremarctos ornatus 8 9 5 6 1 3 3 3 1 3 9.4 mg 8 9 5 6 1 3 3 3 1 3 Ursus americanus 12 33 12 33 1 4 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 5 5 5 5 2 2 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 10 28 10 28 1 4 0 0 NA NA Ursus arctos 8 12 4 6 1 4 4 6 2 4 Unknown 1 1 1 1 UNK UNK 0 0 NA NA 4.7 mg 4 5 1 1 1 1 3 4 2 2 9.4 mg 4 6 3 4 1 4 1 2 4 4 Ursus maritimus 7 19 6 18 2 5 1 1 6 6 4.7 mg 4 11 3 10 4 5 1 1 6 6 9.4 mg 5 8 5 8 2 4 0 0 NA NA Ursus thibetanus 3 4 2 2 3 3 1 2 3 3 4.7 mg 2 2 2 2 3 3 0 0 NA NA 9.4 mg 1 2 0 0 NA NA 1 2 3 3 Viverridae 6 14 5 13 1 2 1 1 1 1 Arctictis binturong 6 14 5 13 1 2 1 1 1 1 4.7 mg 4 10 3 9 1 2 1 1 1 1 9.4 mg 3 4 3 4 1 2 0 0 NA NA 4.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Classification of Mammals 61
    © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FORCHAPTER SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION Classification © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC 4 NOT FORof SALE MammalsOR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION. 2ND PAGES 9781284032093_CH04_0060.indd 60 8/28/13 12:08 PM CHAPTER 4: Classification of Mammals 61 © Jones Despite& Bartlett their Learning,remarkable success, LLC mammals are much less© Jones stress & onBartlett the taxonomic Learning, aspect LLCof mammalogy, but rather as diverse than are most invertebrate groups. This is probably an attempt to provide students with sufficient information NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FORattributable SALE OR to theirDISTRIBUTION far greater individual size, to the high on the various kinds of mammals to make the subsequent energy requirements of endothermy, and thus to the inabil- discussions of mammalian biology meaningful.
    [Show full text]
  • Helogale Parvula)
    Vocal Recruitment in Dwarf Mongooses (Helogale parvula) Janneke Rubow Thesis presented in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in the Faculty of Science at Stellenbosch University Supervisor: Prof. Michael I. Cherry Co-supervisor: Dr. Lynda L. Sharpe March 2017 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za DECLARATION By submitting this thesis electronically, I declare that the entirety of the work contained therein is my own, original work, that I am the sole author thereof (save to the extent explicitly otherwise stated), that reproduction and publication thereof by Stellenbosch University will not infringe any third party rights and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it for obtaining any qualification. Janneke Rubow, March 2017 Copyright © 2017 Stellenbosch University All rights reserved Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Abstract Vocal communication is important in social vertebrates, particularly those for whom dense vegetation obscures visual signals. Vocal signals often convey secondary information to facilitate rapid and appropriate responses. This function is vital in long-distance communication. The long-distance recruitment vocalisations of dwarf mongooses (Helogale parvula) provide an ideal opportunity to study informative cues in acoustic communication. This study examined the information conveyed by two recruitment calls given in snake encounter and isolation contexts, and whether dwarf mongooses are able to respond differently on the basis of these cues. Vocalisations were collected opportunistically from four wild groups of dwarf mongooses. The acoustic parameters of recruitment calls were then analysed for distinction between contexts within recruitment calls in general, distinction within isolation calls between groups, sexes and individuals, and the individuality of recruitment calls in comparison to dwarf mongoose contact calls.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Forest Logging and Fragmentation on Carnivore Species Composition, Density and Occupancy in Madagascar’S Rainforests
    The impact of forest logging and fragmentation on carnivore species composition, density and occupancy in Madagascar’s rainforests B RIAN D. GERBER,SARAH M. KARPANTY and J OHNY R ANDRIANANTENAINA Abstract Forest carnivores are threatened globally by Introduction logging and forest fragmentation yet we know relatively little about how such change affects predator populations. arnivores are one of the most threatened groups of 2009 This is especially true in Madagascar, where carnivores Cterrestrial mammals (Karanth & Chellam, ). have not been extensively studied. To understand better the Declines of predators are often attributed to habitat loss effects of logging and fragmentation on Malagasy carnivores and fragmentation but few quantitative studies have we evaluated species composition, density of fossa examined how carnivore populations and communities 2002 Cryptoprocta ferox and Malagasy civet Fossa fossana, and change with habitat loss or fragmentation (Crooks, ; 2005 carnivore occupancy in central-eastern Madagascar. We Michalski & Peres, ). This is particularly true for ’ photographically-sampled carnivores in two contiguous Madagascar s carnivores, with knowledge lacking about ff (primary and selectively-logged) and two fragmented rain- their ecology and the e ects of anthropogenic disturbances 2010 forests (fragments , 2.5 and . 15 km from intact forest). (Irwin et al., ), especially in the eastern rainforest where Species composition varied, with more native carnivores in only short-term studies have been conducted (Gerber et al., 2010 16 the contiguous than fragmented rainforests. F. fossana was ). With only % of the original primary forests extant absent from fragmented rainforests and at a lower density in Madagascar and those remaining becoming smaller and 2007 in selectively-logged than in primary rainforest (mean more isolated over time (Harper et al., ), habitat loss −2 1.38 ± SE 0.22 and 3.19 ± SE 0.55 individuals km , respect- and fragmentation are serious threats to many endemic 2010 ively).
    [Show full text]
  • Mammalian Predators Appropriating the Refugia of Their Prey
    Mamm Res (2015) 60:285–292 DOI 10.1007/s13364-015-0236-y ORIGINAL PAPER When prey provide more than food: mammalian predators appropriating the refugia of their prey William J. Zielinski 1 Received: 30 September 2014 /Accepted: 20 July 2015 /Published online: 31 July 2015 # Mammal Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, Białowieża, Poland (outside the USA) 2015 Abstract Some mammalian predators acquire both food and predators) may play disproportionately important roles in their shelter from their prey, by eating them and using the refugia communities. the prey construct. I searched the literature for examples of predators that exhibit this behavior and summarize their taxo- Keywords Predator–prey . Dens . Herbivore . Behavior . nomic affiliations, relative sizes, and distributions. I hypothe- Habitat . Resting . Foraging sized that size ratios of species involved in this dynamic would be near 1.0, and that most of these interactions would occur at intermediate and high latitudes. Seventeen species of Introduction Carnivorans exploited at least 23 species of herbivores as food and for their refugia. Most of them (76.4 %) were in the Mammals require food and most require shelter, either to pro- Mustelidae; several small species of canids and a few tect them from predators or from thermal stress. Carnivorous herpestids were exceptions. Surprisingly, the average mammals are unique in that they subsist on mobile food predator/prey weight ratio was 10.51, but few species of pred- sources which, particularly if these sources are vertebrates, ators were more than ten times the weight of the prey whose may build their own refuges to help regulate their body tem- refugia they exploit.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.TRENDS in RESEARCH on TERRESTRIAL SPECIES of THE
    Mastozoología Neotropical ISSN: 0327-9383 [email protected] Sociedad Argentina para el Estudio de los Mamíferos Argentina Pérez-Irineo, Gabriela; Santos-Moreno, Antonio TRENDS IN RESEARCH ON TERRESTRIAL SPECIES OF THE ORDER CARNIVORA Mastozoología Neotropical, vol. 20, núm. 1, 2013, pp. 113-121 Sociedad Argentina para el Estudio de los Mamíferos Tucumán, Argentina Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=45728549008 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative Mastozoología Neotropical, 20(1):113-121, Mendoza, 2013 Copyright ©SAREM, 2013 Versión impresa ISSN 0327-9383 http://www.sarem.org.ar Versión on-line ISSN 1666-0536 Artículo TRENDS IN RESEARCH ON TERRESTRIAL SPECIES OF THE ORDER CARNIVORA Gabriela Pérez-Irineo and Antonio Santos-Moreno Laboratorio de Ecología Animal, Centro Interdisciplinario de Investigación para el Desarrollo Integral Regional, Unidad Oaxaca, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Hornos 1003, 71230 Santa Cruz Xoxocotlán, Oaxaca, México [Correspondence: Gabriela Pérez Irineo <[email protected]>]. ABSTRACT. Information regarding trends in research on terrestrial species of the order Carnivora can provide an understanding of the degree of knowledge of the order, or lack thereof, as well as help identifying areas on which to focus future research efforts. With the aim of providing information on these trends, this work presents a review of the thematic focuses of studies addressing this order published over the past three de- cades. Relevant works published in 16 scientific journals were analyzed globally and by continent with respect of topics, species, and families.
    [Show full text]
  • Cranial Morphological Distinctiveness Between Ursus Arctos and U
    East Tennessee State University Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University Electronic Theses and Dissertations Student Works 5-2017 Cranial Morphological Distinctiveness Between Ursus arctos and U. americanus Benjamin James Hillesheim East Tennessee State University Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.etsu.edu/etd Part of the Biodiversity Commons, Evolution Commons, and the Paleontology Commons Recommended Citation Hillesheim, Benjamin James, "Cranial Morphological Distinctiveness Between Ursus arctos and U. americanus" (2017). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 3261. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/3261 This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Works at Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Cranial Morphological Distinctiveness Between Ursus arctos and U. americanus ____________________________________ A thesis presented to the Department of Geosciences East Tennessee State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science in Geosciences ____________________________________ by Benjamin Hillesheim May 2017 ____________________________________ Dr. Blaine W. Schubert, Chair Dr. Steven C. Wallace Dr. Josh X. Samuels Keywords: Ursidae, Geometric morphometrics, Ursus americanus, Ursus arctos, Last Glacial Maximum ABSTRACT Cranial Morphological Distinctiveness Between Ursus arctos and U. americanus by Benjamin J. Hillesheim Despite being separated by millions of years of evolution, black bears (Ursus americanus) and brown bears (Ursus arctos) can be difficult to distinguish based on skeletal and dental material alone. Complicating matters, some Late Pleistocene U. americanus are significantly larger in size than their modern relatives, obscuring the identification of the two bears.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2008 IUCN Red Listings of the World's Small Carnivores
    The 2008 IUCN red listings of the world’s small carnivores Jan SCHIPPER¹*, Michael HOFFMANN¹, J. W. DUCKWORTH² and James CONROY³ Abstract The global conservation status of all the world’s mammals was assessed for the 2008 IUCN Red List. Of the 165 species of small carni- vores recognised during the process, two are Extinct (EX), one is Critically Endangered (CR), ten are Endangered (EN), 22 Vulnerable (VU), ten Near Threatened (NT), 15 Data Deficient (DD) and 105 Least Concern. Thus, 22% of the species for which a category was assigned other than DD were assessed as threatened (i.e. CR, EN or VU), as against 25% for mammals as a whole. Among otters, seven (58%) of the 12 species for which a category was assigned were identified as threatened. This reflects their attachment to rivers and other waterbodies, and heavy trade-driven hunting. The IUCN Red List species accounts are living documents to be updated annually, and further information to refine listings is welcome. Keywords: conservation status, Critically Endangered, Data Deficient, Endangered, Extinct, global threat listing, Least Concern, Near Threatened, Vulnerable Introduction dae (skunks and stink-badgers; 12), Mustelidae (weasels, martens, otters, badgers and allies; 59), Nandiniidae (African Palm-civet The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is the most authorita- Nandinia binotata; one), Prionodontidae ([Asian] linsangs; two), tive resource currently available on the conservation status of the Procyonidae (raccoons, coatis and allies; 14), and Viverridae (civ- world’s biodiversity. In recent years, the overall number of spe- ets, including oyans [= ‘African linsangs’]; 33). The data reported cies included on the IUCN Red List has grown rapidly, largely as on herein are freely and publicly available via the 2008 IUCN Red a result of ongoing global assessment initiatives that have helped List website (www.iucnredlist.org/mammals).
    [Show full text]
  • University of Florida Thesis Or Dissertation Formatting
    UNDERSTANDING CARNIVORAN ECOMORPHOLOGY THROUGH DEEP TIME, WITH A CASE STUDY DURING THE CAT-GAP OF FLORIDA By SHARON ELIZABETH HOLTE A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2018 © 2018 Sharon Elizabeth Holte To Dr. Larry, thank you ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my family for encouraging me to pursue my interests. They have always believed in me and never doubted that I would reach my goals. I am eternally grateful to my mentors, Dr. Jim Mead and the late Dr. Larry Agenbroad, who have shaped me as a paleontologist and have provided me to the strength and knowledge to continue to grow as a scientist. I would like to thank my colleagues from the Florida Museum of Natural History who provided insight and open discussion on my research. In particular, I would like to thank Dr. Aldo Rincon for his help in researching procyonids. I am so grateful to Dr. Anne-Claire Fabre; without her understanding of R and knowledge of 3D morphometrics this project would have been an immense struggle. I would also to thank Rachel Short for the late-night work sessions and discussions. I am extremely grateful to my advisor Dr. David Steadman for his comments, feedback, and guidance through my time here at the University of Florida. I also thank my committee, Dr. Bruce MacFadden, Dr. Jon Bloch, Dr. Elizabeth Screaton, for their feedback and encouragement. I am grateful to the geosciences department at East Tennessee State University, the American Museum of Natural History, and the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard for the loans of specimens.
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Panda Facts (Ailuropoda Melanoleuca)
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Giant Panda Facts (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) Giant panda. John J. Mosesso What animal is black and white Giant pandas are bears with one or two cubs weighing 3 to 5 and loved all over the world? If you striking black and white markings. ounces each is born in a sheltered guessed the giant panda, you’re The ears, eye patches, legs and den. Usually only one cub survives. right! shoulder band are black; the rest The eyes open at 1 1/2 to 2 months of the body is whitish. They have and the cub becomes mobile at The giant panda is also known as thick, woolly coats to insulate them approximately three months of the panda bear, bamboo bear, or in from the cold. Adults are four to six age. At 12 months the cub becomes Chinese as Daxiongmao, the “large feet long and may weigh up to 350 totally independent. While their bear cat.” In fact, its scientific pounds—about the same size as average life span in the wild is name means “black and white cat- the American black bear. However, about 15 years, giant pandas in footed animal.” unlike the black bear, giant pandas captivity have been known to live do not hibernate and cannot walk well into their twenties. Giant pandas are found only in on their hind legs. the mountains of central China— Scientists have debated for more in small isolated areas of the The giant panda has unique front than a century whether giant north and central portions of the paws—one of the wrist bones is pandas belong to the bear family, Sichuan Province, in the mountains enlarged and elongated and is used the raccoon family, or a separate bordering the southernmost part of like a thumb, enabling the giant family of their own.
    [Show full text]
  • References: Future Works
    Phylogenomics and Evolution of the Ursidae Family Department of Biology Ammary Jackson, Keanu Spencer, & Alissya Theis Fig 8. Red Panda Fig. 6. American Black Bear (Ailurus fulgens) (Ursus americanus) Introduction: Ursidae is a family of generally omnivorous mammals colloquially Objectives: Results: referred to as bears. The family consists of five genera: Ailuropoda ● To determine the relatedness among the 30 individual bear taxa. Red Panda (giant panda), Helarctos (sun bear), Melursus (sloth bear), Tremarctos Spectacled Bear ● To determine if Ailurus fulgens obtained its common Spectacled Bear (spectacled bear), and Ursus (black, brown, and polar bears) all of Polar Bear name (Red Panda) from similarities to the genes Polar Bear which are found in North and South America, Europe, Asia, and Africa Polar Bear belonging to the Ursidae family or if it’s simply based on Polar Bear (Kumar et al. 2017.) The phylogenetic relationship between Ursidae Polar Bear phenotypic attributes. Polar Bear bears and the red panda (Ailurus fulgens) has been somewhat Brown Bear inconsistent and controversial. Previous phylogenetic analyses have Brown Bear Brown Bear placed the red panda within the families Ursidae (bears), Procyonidae Polar Bear Brown Bear (raccoons), Pinnepedia (seals), and Musteloidea (raccoons and weasels, Brown Bear Brown Bear skunks, and badgers) (Flynn et al. 2000.) Determining monophyly Methods: Cave Bear Cave Bear would elucidate the evolutionary relationship between Ursidae bears Sloth Bear ● Mitochondrial gene sequences of the ATP6 and ND1 genes Sloth Bear and the Red Panda. This analysis (i) tested the monophyly of the family Sun Bear were taken from a sample of 31 species (30 Ursidae family Sun Bear Ursidae; and (ii) determined how the Red Panda fits within the Black Bear and 1 Ailuridae family).
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Small Private Game Reserves in Leopard Panthera Pardus and Other Carnivore Conservation in South Africa
    The role of small private game reserves in leopard Panthera pardus and other carnivore conservation in South Africa Tara J. Pirie Thesis submitted in accordance with the requirements of The University of Reading for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Biological Sciences November 2016 Acknowledgements I would first like to thank my supervisors Professor Mark Fellowes and Dr Becky Thomas, without whom this thesis would not have been possible. I am sincerely grateful for their continued belief in the research and my ability and have appreciated all their guidance and support. I especially would like to thank Mark for accepting this project. I would like to acknowledge Will & Carol Fox, Alan, Lynsey & Ronnie Watson who invited me to join Ingwe Leopard Research and then aided and encouraged me to utilize the data for the PhD thesis. I would like to thank Andrew Harland for all his help and support for the research and bringing it to the attention of the University. I am very grateful to the directors of the Protecting African Wildlife Conservation Trust (PAWct) and On Track Safaris for their financial support and to the landowners and participants in the research for their acceptance of the research and assistance. I would also like to thank all the Ingwe Camera Club members; without their generosity this research would not have been possible to conduct and all the Ingwe Leopard Research volunteers and staff of Thaba Tholo Wilderness Reserve who helped to collect data and sort through countless images. To Becky Freeman, Joy Berry-Baker
    [Show full text]
  • Causes and Consequences of Coati Sociality
    chapter 28 Causes and consequences of coati sociality Ben T. Hirsch and Matthew E. Gompper Ring-tailed coatis (Nasua nasua) © B. Hirsch Introduction of Kaufmann’s work, and similar studies on pri- mates and other carnivores, have greatly enhanced Over fifty years ago John Kaufmann conducted a our understanding of how and why animals live in two-year study on the white-nosed coati (Nasua groups. Such issues frame the core of the modern narica) on Barro Colorado Island, Panama. The field of behavioural ecology. resulting monograph (Kaufmann 1962) is a solid Animals live in groups when the benefits (e.g. examination of the natural history of the species, a greater ability to survive threats from predators with an emphasis on understanding its social struc- and pathogens) are greater than the costs (e.g. in- ture. Although many such studies now exist, Kauf- creased competition for resources such as food or mann’s study bordered on revolutionary at the time mates) (Krause and Ruxton 2002). Overlaying such because this was one of the first studies to gather cost–benefit ratios are the genetic relatedness of in- detailed ethological data of wild vertebrates via dividuals and the willingness of animals to coop- habituation of free-living social animals. The idea erate in a manner that increases the benefits and of following animals from a distance of just a few decreases the costs of sociality. Among the mus- metres, and observing the nuances of their behav- teloid carnivores, studies of coatis have contrib- iour, was relatively novel at the time. The results uted more to our understanding of the causes and Hirsch, B.
    [Show full text]