Effect of a landfill on the home range and group size of coyotes (Canis latrans) in a tropical deciduous forest

Journal of Zoology

Volumn 263, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 55-63

  Hidalgo Mihart, Mircea G ^a   Cantú Salazar, Lisette ^a   López González, Carlos A ^b   Fernandez, Erin C ^c   González Romero, Alberto ^a  

^a INSTITUTO DE ECOLOGÍA   (Mexico)

^b UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE QUERÉTARO   (Mexico)

^c NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Canis latrans; Group size; Home range; Landfill; Tropical deciduous forest

Indexed keywords

DECIDUOUS FOREST; GROUP SIZE; HOME RANGE; LANDFILL; SEASONALITY;

JALISCO; MEXICO [NORTH AMERICA]; NORTH AMERICA;

CANIDAE; CANIS; CANIS LATRANS;

EID: 2542439104     PISSN: 09528369     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0952836904004868     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Andelt, W. F. (1985). Behavioral ecology of coyotes in south Texas. Wildl. Monogr. 94: 1-45.
2. Animal Care and Use Committee (1997). Guidelines for the capture, handling, and care of mammals as approved by the American Society of Mammalogists. Lawrence, Kansas: American Society of Mammalogists.
3. Atkinson, K. T. & Shackleton, D. M. (1991). Coyote, Canis latrans, ecology in a rural-urban environment. Can. Field-Nat. 105: 49-54.
4. Bekoff, M. (1977). The coyote Canis latrans Say. Mammal. Spec. 79: 1-9.
5. Bekoff, M., Diamond, J. & Mitton, J. B. (1981). Life-story patterns and sociality in canids: body size, reproduction, and behavior. Oecologia 50: 386-390.
6. Bekoff, M. & Wells, M. C. (1981). Behavioral budgeting by wild coyotes: the influence of food resources and social organization. Anim. Behav. 29: 794-801.
7. Bounds, D. L. & Shaw, W. W. (1997). Movements of suburban and rural coyotes at Saguaro National Park, Arizona. Southwest. Nat. 42: 94-99.
8. Bowen, W. D. (1981). Variation in coyotes social organization: the influence of prey size. Can. J. Zool. 59: 639-652.
9. Brillhart, D. E. & Kaufman, D. W. (1994). Temporal variation in coyote prey in tallgrass prairie of eastern Kansas. Prairie Nat. 26: 93-104.
10. Bullock, S. H. (1988). Rasgos del ambiente físico y biológico de Chamela, Jalisco, México. Folia Entomol. Mex. 77: 5-17.
11. Butler, J. R. A. & du Toit, J. T. (2002). Diet of free-ranging domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) in rural Zimbabwe: implications for wild scavengers on the periphery of wildlife reserves. Anim. Cons. 5: 29-37.
12. Cantú-Salazar, L., Hidalgo-Mihart, M. G. & López-González, C. A. (1998). Efecto del cambio de uso de suelo sobre la abundancia de algunos mamíferos en un bosque tropical seco de la costa de Jalisco. In Memorias del XVI Simposio sobre Fauna Silvestre Gral. MV. Manuel Cabrera Valtierra, Monterrey, N. L.: 65-72. México D. F.: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia.
13. Carreón, H. E. (1998). Área de actividad y características poblacionales del coyote (Canis latrans) en el Altiplano Potosino. MSc thesis, Colegio de Postgraduados, Texcoco, México.
14. Chamberlain, M. J., Lovell, C. D. & Leopold, B. D. (2000). Spatial-use patterns, movements, and interactions among adult coyotes in central Mississipi. Can. J. Zool. 78: 2087-2095.
15. Doncaster, C. P. (1990). Non-parametric estimates of interaction from radio-tracking data. J. theor. Biol. 143: 431-443.
16. Fedriani, J. M., Fuller, T. K. & Sauvajot, R. M. (2001). Does availability of anthropogenic food enhance densities of omnivorous mammals? An example with coyotes in southern California. Ecography 24: 325-331.
17. Fedriani, J. M., Fuller, T. K., Sauvajot, R. M. & York, E. C. (2000). Competition and intraguild predation among three sympatric carnivores. Oecologia 125: 258-270.
18. Geffen, E., Gommpper, M. E., Gittleman, J. L., Hang-Kwang, L., Macdonald, D. W. & Wayne, R. K. (1996). Size, life-history traits, and social organization in the Canidae: a reevaluation. Am. Nat. 147: 225-249.
19. Geffen, E., Hefner, R., Macdonald, D. W. & Ucko, M. (1992). Habitat selection and home range in the Blanford's fox Vulpes cana: compatibility with the resource dispersion hypothesis. Ocecologia 91: 75-81.
20. Gese, E. M., Rongstand, O. J. & Mytton, W. R. (1988a). Home range and habitat use of coyotes in southeastern Colorado. J. Wildl. Manage. 52: 640-646.
21. Gese, E. M., Rongstad, O. J. & Mytton, W. R. (1988b). Relationship between coyote group size and diet in southeastern Colorado. J. Wildl. Manage. 52: 647-653.
22. Gridner, M. I. & Krausman, P. R. (2001). Home range, habitat use, and nocturnal activity of coyotes in an urban environment. J. Wildl. Manage 65: 887-898.
23. Hernández, L., Delibes, M. & Ezcurra, E. (1993). Activity pattern, home range and habitat preference by coyotes (Canis latrans) in the Mapimi Biosphere Reserve of the Chihuahuan Desert, México. Doñana, Acta Vetebrata 20: 276-282.
24. Hidalgo-Mihart, M. G., Cantú-Salazar, L., López- González, C. A., Martínez-Meyer, E. & González-Romero, A. (2001). Coyote (Canis latrans) food habits in a tropical deciduous forest of western México. Am. Midl. Nat. 146: 210-216
25. Instituto Nacional de Ecología. (1997). Estadísticas e indicadores de inversión sobre residuos sólidos municipales en los principales centros urbanos de México. México, D. F: Instituto Nacional de Ecología.
26. Instituto Nacional de Estadistica Geografía e Informática. (2000). XII Censo General de Población y Vivienda, 2000. Aguascalientes, México: Instituto Nacional de Estadística Geografía e Informática.
27. Janzen, D. (1988). Tropical dry forests. The most endangered major tropical ecosystem. In Biodiversity: 130-137. Wilson, D. E. (Ed.). Washington: National Academy Press.
28. Johnson, D. D. P., Baker, S., Morecroft, M. D. & Macdonald, D. W. (2001). Long-term resource variation and group size: a large-sample field test of the resource dispersion hypothesis. BMC Ecology 1: 2.
29. Johnson, D. D. P., Kays, R. Blackwell, P. G. & Macdonald, D. W. (2002). Does the resource dispersion hypothesis explain group living? TREE 17: 563-570.
30. Kie, J. G., Baldwin, J. A. & Evans, C. J. (1996). CALHOME: A program for estimating animal home ranges. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 24: 342-344.
31. Kruuk, H. & Macdonald, D. W. (1985). Group territories of carnivores: empire and enclaves. In Behavioral ecology: 521-536. Silby, R. & Smith, R. (Eds). Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.
32. List, R. (1997). Ecology of the kit fox (Vulpes macrotis) and coyote (Canis latrans) and the conservation of the prairie dog ecosystem in northern Mexico. PhD dissertation, University of Oxford, Oxford, England.
33. Lister, B. C. & García, A. (1992). Seasonality, predation, and the behavior of a tropical mainland anole. J. Anim. Ecol. 61: 717-733.
34. Lott, E. J. (1993). Annotated checklist of the vascular flora of the Chamela bay region, Jalisco, Mexico. Occas. Pap. Calif. Acad. Sci. 148: 1-60.
35. Macdonald, D. W. (1983), The ecology of carnivore social behavior, Nature 301: 379-384.
36. Martínez-Yrízar, A. & Sarukhán, J. (1990), Litterfall patterns in a tropical deciduous forest in Mexico over a five-year period. J. Trop. Ecol. 6: 433-444.
37. Martínez-Yrízar, A., Maass, J. M., Pérez- Jiménez, L. A. & Sarukhán, J. (1996), Net primary productivity of a tropical deciduous forest ecosystem in western Mexico. J. Trop. Ecol. 12: 169-175.
38. McClure, M. F., Smith, N. S. & Shaw, W. W. (1995). Diets of coyotes near the boundary of Saguaro National Monument and Tucson, Arizona. Southwest. Nat. 40: 101-104.
39. Milliken, G. A. & Johnson, D. E. (1992). Analysis of messy data. 1: Designed experiments. Boca Raton, Florida: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
40. Mills, L. S. & Knowlton, F. F. (1991). Coyote space use in relation to prey abundance. Can. J. Zool. 69: 1516-1521.
41. Moehlman, P. D. (1989). Intraspecific variation in canid social systems. In Carnivore behavior, ecology and evolution: 143-163. Gittleman J. L. (Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
42. Nuñez, R., Miller, B. & Lindzey, F. (2002). Ecología del jaguar en la Reserva de la Biosfera Chamela-Cuixmala, Jalisco, México. In El jaguar en el nuevo milenio: 107-126. Medellín, R. A., Equihua, C., Chetkiwicz, C. L. B., Crashaw P. G., Rabinowitz, A., Redford, K. H., Robinson, J. G., Sanderson, E. W. & Taber, A. B. (Eds). México, D. F.: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Wildlife Conservation Society.
43. Olsen, G. H., Linhart, S., Holmes, R. A., Dash, G. J. & Male, C. B. (1986). Injuries to coyotes caught in padded and unpadded steel foothold traps. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 14: 219-223.
44. Palomares, F. & Caro, T. M. (1999). Iterspecific killing among mammalian carnivores. Am. Nat. 153: 492-508.
45. Patterson, B. R. & Messier, F. (2001). Social organization and space use of coyotes in eastern Canada relative to prey distribution and abundance. J. Mammal. 82: 463-477.
46. Platt, S. G., Miller, B. W. & Miller, C. M. (1998). First record of the coyote (Canis latrans) in Beliza. Vida Silv. Neotrop. 7: 139-140.
47. Quinn, T. (1997). Coyote (Canis latrans) food habits in three urban habitat types of Western Washington. Northwest. Sci. 71: 1-5.
48. Ray, J. C. (1998). Temporal variation of predation on rodents and shrews by small African forest carnivores. J. Zool. (Lond.) 244: 363-370.
49. Rose, M. D. & Polis, G. A. (1998). The distribution and abundance of coyotes: the effects of allochthonous food subsidies from the sea. Ecology 79: 998-1007.
50. Servín, J. & Huxley, C. (1995). Coyote home-range size in Durango, México. Z. Säugetierkunde 60: 119-120.
51. Servín, J., Huxley, C. & Veneces, M. (1989), El uso combinado de hidrocloruro de ketamina (khcl) e hidrocloruro de xilacina (xhcl) para inmovilizar coyotes silvestres (Canis latrans). Acta Zool Mex. 36: 27-37.
52. Shivik, J. A. & Gese, E. M. (2000). Territorial significance of home range estimator for coyotes. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 28: 940-946.
53. Sosa-Escalante, X., Hernández, S., Segovia, A. & Sánchez-Cordero, V. (1997). First record of the coyote, Canis latrans (Carnivora:Canidae) in the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. Southwest. Nat. 42: 494-495.
54. Swihart, R. K., Slade, N. A. & Bergstrom, B. J. (1988). Relating body size to the rate of home range use in mammals. Ecology 69: 393-399.
55. Valenzuela, D. & Macdonald, D. W. (2002). Home-range use by white-nosed coatis (Nasua narica): limited water and a test of the resource dispersion hypothesis. J. Zool. (Lond.) 258: 247-256.
56. Vaughan, C. (1983). Coyote range expansion in Costa Rica and Panama. Brenesia 21: 27-32.
57. Worton, B. J. (1989). Kernel methods for estimating the utilization distribution in home-range studies. Ecology 70: 164-168.
58. Zar, J. H. (1999). Biostatistical analysis. Upper Slade River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.