Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40855502›Full record

ArticleMovement ecology2025

Wild pigs impact reproductive season movements and space use of wild turkeys.

Travis E Stoakley, Stephen J Zenas, Vienna R Brown, Mark D Smith, William D Gulsby, Bret A Collier, Stephen S Ditchkoff

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Prevalence and genetic characterization of haemosporidian blood parasites in wild turkeys (Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 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

7 authors.

Travis E StoakleyCollege of Forestry, Wildlife and Environment, Auburn University, 602 Duncan Dr, Auburn, AL, 36849, USA. tes0042@auburn.edu.
Stephen J ZenasCollege of Forestry, Wildlife and Environment, Auburn University, 602 Duncan Dr, Auburn, AL, 36849, USA.
Vienna R BrownDepartment of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, National Feral Swine Damage Management Program, National Wildlife Research Center, 4101 LaPorte Ave, Fort Collins, CO, 80521, USA.
Mark D SmithCollege of Forestry, Wildlife and Environment, Auburn University, 602 Duncan Dr, Auburn, AL, 36849, USA.
William D GulsbyCollege of Forestry, Wildlife and Environment, Auburn University, 602 Duncan Dr, Auburn, AL, 36849, USA.
Bret A CollierSchool of Renewable Natural Resources, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, 70803, USA.
Stephen S DitchkoffCollege of Forestry, Wildlife and Environment, Auburn University, 602 Duncan Dr, Auburn, AL, 36849, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImpacts of invasive species on the movements and space use of native fauna have potential implications during the reproductive period. Over the last three decades, native wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo) have experienced a notable decline in productivity while invasive wild pigs (Sus scrofa) have expanded populations throughout the southeastern United States. Camera studies have shown that the presence of wild pigs can negatively impact detection of wild turkeys in areas of overlapping use. We explored whether wild turkeys avoided areas with greater wild pig densities during spring breeding season for wild turkeys.

methodsWe deployed 22 GPS units on wild turkeys prior to the spring reproductive season and conducted a 1-km2 gridded camera survey in early summer to estimate densities of wild pigs across our 9,000-ha study area in east-central Alabama. We addressed reproductive season movement ecology of wild turkeys in relation to relative densities of wild pigs in terms of (1) step length, (2) daytime space use, (3) roost site selection, and (4) nest site selection. We hypothesized that wild turkeys would exhibit longer step lengths and avoid daytime use, nighttime roost selection, and nest placement in areas with greater densities of wild pigs.

resultsWe found that greater densities of wild pigs negatively impacted movement metrics of wild turkeys. Specifically, greater densities of wild pigs were associated with longer step lengths and lower probabilities of daytime use, roost site selection, and nest site selection in wild turkeys.

conclusionsRate of movement and probability of use are associated with preference for the ecological attributes of an area. Our results suggested that wild turkeys avoided or were excluded from areas with greater densities of wild pigs due to perceived disturbance risk or wild pigs making areas less usable. Our results have implications for interspecific spatial interactions as well as management activities to reduce the impacts of invasive wild pigs on native species.

Indexed as

AvoidanceDisturbanceInterspecific interactionPerceived riskResource selection functionSpatial interactionWild pigWild turkey

Identifiers

PMID40855502
PMCPMC12376481

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.