ArticleThe Journal of animal ecology2026
Understanding natal emigration in group-living carnivores.
Article in The Journal of animal ecology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Understanding natal emigration in group-living carnivores.The Journal of animal ecology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dispersal is a critical ecological and evolutionary process, yet the drivers of individual variation in emigration, particularly under human-modified conditions, remain relatively understudied. We investigate the determinants and patterns of emigration in a managed population of cooperative breeders using genetic samples from harvested individuals. We used a novel genetic approach to identify natal emigration through sibship analyses of DNA from harvested grey wolves (Canis lupus), a cooperative-breeding species, and evaluated how prey biomass, wolf density, human-caused mortality and sex influenced natal emigration across Idaho, USA, from 2017 to 2023. From our analysis of 182 sibling groups (representing packs), we evaluated natal emigration status for 224 individuals. Of these, 86 were classified as emigrants and 138 as non-dispersers. We assessed how covariates influenced the probability of emigration and evaluated sex differences in apparent dispersal distance. We found no sex differences in emigration propensity or apparent dispersal distance. Emigrants dispersed an average of 81.8 km (range: 30.0-338.9 km) from their inferred natal territories. Emigration was more likely from territories with higher prey biomass and lower wolf density, while human-caused mortality had no detectable effect. We found that ecological drivers, such as prey availability and population density, have a stronger effect on the propensity to emigrate than harvest intensity. These results highlight the importance of resource availability and population dynamics in shaping dispersal patterns in a cooperative breeder. Our study used a novel genetic method to assess natal emigration in a group-living carnivore and developed a framework broadly applicable to social systems where kin structures can be traced to dispersers. Our findings identify landscape-scale conditions that influence dispersal and can inform the management of wild populations.
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.