Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36530413›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2022

Population development and landscape preference of reintroduced wild ungulates: successful rewilding in Southern Italy.

Eleonora Rivieccio, Claudia Troiano, Simona Petrelli, Valeria Maselli, Gabriele de Filippo, Domenico Fulgione, Maria Buglione

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Eleonora RivieccioDepartment of Humanities, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Claudia TroianoIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale del Mezzogiorno, Naples, Italy.
Simona PetrelliDepartment of Biology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Valeria MaselliDepartment of Biology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Gabriele de FilippoIstituto Di Gestione Della Fauna, Naples, Italy.
Domenico FulgioneDepartment of Biology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Maria BuglioneDepartment of Biology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In the past decades, the abandonment of traditional land use practices has determined landscape changes inducing reforestation dynamics. This phenomenon can be contrasted with rewilding practices, Methods: By using direct and indirect information on the two species, collected by nocturnal and diurnal surveys and camera trapping, we modelled a habitat suitability map, and estimated the density and distribution of the populations. We also performed a land use changes analysis, combining the presence of wild ungulates and livestock. Results and Discussion: We demonstrated that deer dispersed gradually from their release location, increasing in population size, and this occurred in the entire study area. Moreover, we show that areas with lower grazing density are significantly affected by forest encroachment. A possible interpretation of this result could be that wild grazers (roe deer and red deer) prefer semi-open areas surrounded by the forest. This, in association with other factors, such as domestic grazing, could be one of the main responsible in maintaining landscape mosaic typical of the Apennine mountain, confirming the value of grazers as a landscape management tool. Moreover, we show the possibility to conserve through reintroduction the vulnerable

Indexed as

DeerAnimalsEcosystemForestsLivestockPopulation DensityApennineDeerLandscapeReintroduction

Identifiers

PMID36530413
PMCPMC9756874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.