Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40481565›Full record

ArticleMovement ecology2025

Cropland restricts occurrence and alters spatial ecology near the mule deer geographical range limit.

Levi J Heffelfinger, David G Hewitt, Joshua P Vasquez, Timothy E Fulbright, Randy W DeYoung, Louis A Harveson, Warren C Conway, Shawn S Gray

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Movement ecology, 2025. 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. Status of the Mule Deer Population in Western Sonora, Mexico.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    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

8 authors.

Levi J HeffelfingerCaesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Texas A&M University - Kingsville, Kingsville, TX, USA. levi.heffelfinger@tamuk.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7833-7119
David G HewittCaesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Texas A&M University - Kingsville, Kingsville, TX, USA.
Joshua P VasquezCaesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Texas A&M University - Kingsville, Kingsville, TX, USA.
Timothy E FulbrightCaesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Texas A&M University - Kingsville, Kingsville, TX, USA.
Randy W DeYoungCaesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Texas A&M University - Kingsville, Kingsville, TX, USA.
Louis A HarvesonBorderlands Research Institute, Sul Ross State University, Alpine, TX, USA.
Warren C ConwayDepartment of Natural Resources Management, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA.
Shawn S GrayTexas Parks and Wildlife Department, Alpine, TX, USA.

Funding

Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration TX W-157-R-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHabitat fragmentation can influence the spatial ecology of wildlife populations, with downstream effects on population dynamics and sustainability. Row-crop farming is a common anthropogenic landscape alteration, yet the effects on animal movement and space use is understudied in some species. Cropland can benefit wildlife nutritionally but may result in habitat loss because of changes in landscape composition and human disturbance.

methodsWe quantified the influence of cropland presence and coverage on mule deer spatial ecology in the southern Great Plains. We GPS-collared 146 adult mule deer in four regions of the Texas Panhandle and monitored movement relative to spatio-temporal fluctuations in cropland and particular crop species availability for 2 years. We modeled the effects of cropland on space use and resource selection at multiple spatio-temporal scales to characterize population and individual habitat components of mule deer.

resultsWe observed a functional response in cropland use, where at low coverage, use was proportional to availability but decreased with > 20% cropland coverage at the home range and within-home range scales. Few mule deer exhibited long-distance movements towards cropland. Individuals within 1.6 km of cropland exhibited greater cropland use, whereas deer > 4.2 km from cropland rarely used these areas. At the population level, mule deer selected cropland during the winter and late summer, probably for nutritional benefit when rangeland nutrients are low. At a finer scale, step-selection functions identified individual heterogeneity in crop species selection. Winter wheat, alfalfa, and fallow fields had greater use relative to other crop types. Generally, 15-60% of mule deer with access to cropland selected alfalfa year-round, and up to 63% of deer selected winter wheat post-reproduction.

conclusionsOur results suggest that at a low spatial coverage, cropland alters the spatial ecology of mule deer at several spatio-temporal scales and may provide nutritional benefits, but at a cost of lost habitat when cropland exceeds 20% of the landscape. Declining groundwater resources and an exponentially growing human population will alter future farming practices. Understanding how species occupying these environments, such as mule deer, are influenced by human-induced landscape changes can enhance mitigation of human-wildlife interactions and aid conservation actions as policy and social pressures shape future agricultural practices.

Indexed as

CroplandFunctional responseGreat plainsOdocoileus hemionusOgallala aquiferResource selectionRow-crop farmingStep selection

Identifiers

PMID40481565
PMCPMC12142936

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.