Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37264027›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Multiscale assessment of habitat selection and avoidance of sympatric carnivores by the endangered ocelot.

Maksim Sergeyev, Michael J Cherry, Evan P Tanner, Jason V Lombardi, Michael E Tewes, Tyler A Campbell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Maksim SergeyevCaesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Texas A&M University Kingsville, 205 Howe Agricultural Bldg, Kingsville, TX, 78363, USA. ecomaksimsergeyev@gmail.com.
Michael J CherryCaesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Texas A&M University Kingsville, 205 Howe Agricultural Bldg, Kingsville, TX, 78363, USA.
Evan P TannerCaesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Texas A&M University Kingsville, 205 Howe Agricultural Bldg, Kingsville, TX, 78363, USA.
Jason V LombardiCaesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Texas A&M University Kingsville, 205 Howe Agricultural Bldg, Kingsville, TX, 78363, USA.
Michael E TewesCaesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Texas A&M University Kingsville, 205 Howe Agricultural Bldg, Kingsville, TX, 78363, USA.
Tyler A CampbellEast Foundation, San Antonio, TX, 78216, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Habitat selection by animals is a complex, dynamic process that can vary across spatial and temporal scales. Understanding habitat selection is a vital component of managing endangered species. Ocelots (Leopardus pardalis), a medium-sized endangered felid, overlap in their northern range with bobcats (Lynx rufus) and coyotes (Canis latrans), with all three species sharing similar space and resource use. As the potential for competition between these three carnivores is high, understanding differences in habitat use and the effect of these potential competitors on habitat selection of ocelots is essential to conservation. Our objective was to compare habitat selection between species and examine if ocelots avoided areas used by competitors at broad and fine scales. We captured and collared 8 ocelots, 13 bobcats, and 5 coyotes on the East Foundation's El Sauz Ranch and the Yturria San Francisco Ranch in South Texas, USA from 2017 to 2021. We compared 2nd (position of home range) and 3rd (use within the home range) order selection across species and examined whether ocelots avoided areas categorized as high probability of use by bobcats and coyotes across both orders of selection. We found a preference for heterogeneous landscapes by bobcats and coyotes while ocelots were strongly tied to woody cover across both orders. At the 2nd order, ocelots selected areas with higher probability of use by bobcats and showed no response to higher probability of use by coyotes, suggesting ocelots did not avoid either species. However, at the 3rd order, ocelots avoided areas used by coyotes. Ocelots selected for areas of use by bobcats at the 2nd order and 3rd order. Results suggest that at the broader scale, placement of the home range is not affected by the presence of sympatric carnivores, however, at a finer scale, ocelots are avoiding coyotes but not bobcats. Our study emphasizes the importance of woody and herbaceous cover at the broad scale and dense vegetation at the finer scale to sustain ocelots. In addition, we show differing patterns of interspecific avoidance by ocelots across species and scales.

Indexed as

CarnivoraCoyotesFelidaeLynxAnimalsEcosystem

Identifiers

PMID37264027
PMCPMC10235131

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.