ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2020
Reintroduced wolves and hunting limit the abundance of a subordinate apex predator in a multi-use landscape.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Next-Generation Sequencing Insights into the Oral Microbiome and Antibiotic Resistance Genes in Grey Wolves (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Population Density and Spatial-Temporal Activity Pattern of the Tibetan Wolf in Dulan, Qinghai, China.Biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Lion lords and sharing hyaenas: Carnivore guild dynamics around elephant carcasses.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Place-Based Bias in Environmental Scholarship Derived from Social-Ecological Landscapes of Fear.Bioscience · 2023Article
- Article
- Reintroduced wolves and hunting limit the abundance of a subordinate apex predator in a multi-use landscape.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Top-down effects of apex predators are modulated by human impacts on community composition and species abundances. Consequently, research supporting top-down effects of apex predators occurs almost entirely within protected areas rather than the multi-use landscapes dominating modern ecosystems. Here, we developed an integrated population model to disentangle the concurrent contributions of a reintroduced apex predator, the grey wolf, human hunting and prey abundances on vital rates and abundance of a subordinate apex predator, the puma. Increasing wolf numbers had strong negative effects on puma fecundity, and subadult and adult survival. Puma survival was also influenced by density dependence. Overall, puma dynamics in our multi-use landscape were more strongly influenced by top-down forces exhibited by a reintroduced apex predator, than by human hunting or bottom-up forces (prey abundance) subsidized by humans. Quantitatively, the average annual impact of human hunting on equilibrium puma abundance was equivalent to the effects of 20 wolves. Historically, wolves may have limited pumas across North America and dictated puma scarcity in systems lacking sufficient refugia to mitigate the effects of competition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.