Charles A. DeYoung, Timothy E. Fulbright, David G. Hewitt, David B. Wester, Don A. Draeger
Density-dependent behavior underpins white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) theory and management application in North America, but strength or frequency of the phenomenon has varied across the geographic range of the species. The modifying effect of stochastic environments and poor-quality habitats on density-dependent behavior has been recognized for ungulate populations around the world, including white-tailed deer populations in South Texas, USA. Despite the importance of understanding mechanisms influencing density dependence, researchers have concentrated on demographic and morphological implications of deer density. Researchers have not focused on linking vegetation dynamics, nutrition, and deer dynamics. We conducted a series of designed experiments during 2004–2012 to determine how strongly white-tailed deer density, vegetation composition, and deer nutrition (natural and supplemented) are linked in a semi-arid environment where the coefficient of variation of annual precipitation exceeds 30%. We replicated our study on 2 sites with thornshrub vegetation in Dimmit County, Texas. During late 2003, we constructed 6 81-ha enclosures surrounded by 2.4-m-tall woven wire fence on each study site. The experimental design included 2 nutrition treatments and 3 deer densities in a factorial array, with study sites as blocks. Abundance targets for low, medium, and high deer densities in enclosures were 10 deer (equivalent to 13 deer/km2), 25 deer (31 deer/km2), and 40 deer (50 deer/km2), respectively. Each study site had 2 enclosures with each deer density. We provided deer in 1 enclosure at each density with a high-quality pelleted supplement ad libitum, which we termed enhanced nutrition; deer in the other enclosure at each density had access to natural nutrition from the vegetation. We conducted camera surveys of deer in each enclosure twice per year and added or removed deer as needed to approximate the target densities. We maintained >50% of deer ear-tagged for individual recognition. We maintained adult sex ratios of 1:1–1:1.5 (males:females) and a mix of young and older deer in enclosures. We used reconstruction, validated by comparison to known number of adult males, to make annual estimates of density for each enclosure in analysis of treatment effects. We explored the effect of deer density on diet composition, diet quality, and intake rate of tractable female deer released into low- and high-density enclosures with natural nutrition on both study sites (4 total enclosures) between June 2009 and May 2011, 5 years after we established density treatments in enclosures. We used the bite count technique and followed 2–3 tractable deer/enclosure during foraging bouts across 4 seasons. Proportion of shrubs, forbs, mast, cacti, and subshrubs in deer diets did not differ (P > 0.57) between deer density treatments. Percent grass in deer diets was higher (P = 0.05) at high de
{"title":"Linking White-Tailed Deer Density, Nutrition, and Vegetation in a Stochastic Environment\u0000 Relier la Densité de Cerf de Virginie, la Nutrition et la Végétation dans un Environnement Stochastique\u0000 Relación entre la Densidad de Venado Cola Blanca, la Nutrición y la Vegetación en Ambientes Variables","authors":"Charles A. DeYoung, Timothy E. Fulbright, David G. Hewitt, David B. Wester, Don A. Draeger","doi":"10.1002/wmon.1040","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wmon.1040","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Density-dependent behavior underpins white-tailed deer (<i>Odocoileus virginianus</i>) theory and management application in North America, but strength or frequency of the phenomenon has varied across the geographic range of the species. The modifying effect of stochastic environments and poor-quality habitats on density-dependent behavior has been recognized for ungulate populations around the world, including white-tailed deer populations in South Texas, USA. Despite the importance of understanding mechanisms influencing density dependence, researchers have concentrated on demographic and morphological implications of deer density. Researchers have not focused on linking vegetation dynamics, nutrition, and deer dynamics. We conducted a series of designed experiments during 2004–2012 to determine how strongly white-tailed deer density, vegetation composition, and deer nutrition (natural and supplemented) are linked in a semi-arid environment where the coefficient of variation of annual precipitation exceeds 30%. We replicated our study on 2 sites with thornshrub vegetation in Dimmit County, Texas. During late 2003, we constructed 6 81-ha enclosures surrounded by 2.4-m-tall woven wire fence on each study site. The experimental design included 2 nutrition treatments and 3 deer densities in a factorial array, with study sites as blocks. Abundance targets for low, medium, and high deer densities in enclosures were 10 deer (equivalent to 13 deer/km<sup>2</sup>), 25 deer (31 deer/km<sup>2</sup>), and 40 deer (50 deer/km<sup>2</sup>), respectively. Each study site had 2 enclosures with each deer density. We provided deer in 1 enclosure at each density with a high-quality pelleted supplement <i>ad libitum</i>, which we termed enhanced nutrition; deer in the other enclosure at each density had access to natural nutrition from the vegetation. We conducted camera surveys of deer in each enclosure twice per year and added or removed deer as needed to approximate the target densities. We maintained >50% of deer ear-tagged for individual recognition. We maintained adult sex ratios of 1:1–1:1.5 (males:females) and a mix of young and older deer in enclosures. We used reconstruction, validated by comparison to known number of adult males, to make annual estimates of density for each enclosure in analysis of treatment effects. We explored the effect of deer density on diet composition, diet quality, and intake rate of tractable female deer released into low- and high-density enclosures with natural nutrition on both study sites (4 total enclosures) between June 2009 and May 2011, 5 years after we established density treatments in enclosures. We used the bite count technique and followed 2–3 tractable deer/enclosure during foraging bouts across 4 seasons. Proportion of shrubs, forbs, mast, cacti, and subshrubs in deer diets did not differ (<i>P</i> > 0.57) between deer density treatments. Percent grass in deer diets was higher (<i>P</i> = 0.05) at high de","PeriodicalId":235,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Monographs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2019-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/wmon.1040","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"5748034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}