Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBender, Louis C.
dc.contributor.authorLomas, Laurie A.
dc.contributor.authorKamienski, Tomas
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-05T07:44:39Z
dc.date.available2020-09-05T07:44:39Z
dc.date.issued2007-05-01
dc.identifier.citationBender, L. C., Lomas, L. A., & Kamienski, T. (2007). Habitat effects on condition of doe mule deer in arid mixed woodland-grassland. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 60(3), 277-284.
dc.identifier.issn0022-409X
dc.identifier.doi10.2111/1551-5028(2007)60[277:HEOCOD]2.0.CO;2
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/643158
dc.description.abstractProductivity of mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus Raf.) populations is closely linked to individual nutritional condition. We modeled body fat of individual does as a function of vegetation cover, composition, and water characteristics of their annual, summer, and winter home ranges in north-central New Mexico. We also modeled home range size as a function of the same characteristics. Levels of body fat were most closely and negatively related to the amount of pinyon-juniper in an individual deer’s annual home range (F1,21 = 7.6; P = 0.012; r2 = 0.26). Pinyon-juniper types provided little (combined ground cover of preferred forbs and shrubs = 5.7%) mule deer forage but were included in home ranges in excess of their availability on the landscape, likely because of security cover attributes. Proportion of grasslands in home ranges was most strongly related to both annual (F1,23 = 4.9; P = 0.037; r2 = 0.18) and summer (F2,25 = 5.7; P = 0.009; r2 = 0.31) home range sizes, and home ranges increased as the grassland component increased, indicating that this habitat type was providing little value to mule deer. Grassland (0.2% combined cover of preferred forb and shrub) and montane conifer (3.2% ground cover of preferred forb and shrub) habitat types similarly lacked preferred mule deer food, and grasslands also lacked cover. Most immediate gains in mule deer habitat in north-central New Mexico may be attained by management of pinyon-juniper communities to increase forage quantity and quality while maintaining cover attributes. Gains can also be realized in grasslands, but here management must establish both cover and forage. 
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSociety for Range Management
dc.relation.urlhttps://rangelands.org/
dc.rightsCopyright © Society for Range Management.
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
dc.subjectbody condition
dc.subjectconifer forest
dc.subjecthabitats
dc.subjectOdocoileus hemionus
dc.subjectpinyon-juniper
dc.titleHabitat Effects on Condition of Doe Mule Deer in Arid Mixed Woodland-Grassland
dc.typetext
dc.typeArticle
dc.identifier.journalRangeland Ecology & Management
dc.description.collectioninformationThe Rangeland Ecology & Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact lbry-journals@email.arizona.edu for further information.
dc.eprint.versionFinal published version
dc.description.admin-noteMigrated from OJS platform August 2020
dc.source.volume60
dc.source.issue3
dc.source.beginpage277-284
refterms.dateFOA2020-09-05T07:44:40Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
19759-34035-1-PB.pdf
Size:
220.7Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record