Do the sexes tend to segregate in roe deer in agricultural environments? An analysis of group composition

Canadian Journal of Zoology

Volumn 84, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 787-796

  Villerette, Nicolas ^a,b   Marchal, Carole ^a,c   Pays, Olivier ^c   Delorme, Daniel ^c   Gerard, Jean François ^a  

^a CEMAGREF   (France)

^b 2C2A Centre de Recherche et de Formation en Eco Ethologie   (France)

^c OFFICE NATIONAL DE LA CHASSE ET DE LA FAUNE SAUVAGE   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; COMPOSITION; POPULATION STATISTICS;

ANTELOPE SPECIES; CAPREOLUS CAPREOLUS;

AGRICULTURE;

AGRICULTURAL LAND; ANNUAL CYCLE; COMMUNITY COMPOSITION; CONSPECIFIC; DEER; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; SEX ALLOCATION;

AGRICULTURE; BIODIVERSITY; BIOLOGICAL POPULATIONS;

EURASIA; EUROPE; FRANCE; WESTERN EUROPE;

BOVIDAE; CAPREOLUS; CAPREOLUS CAPREOLUS; CERVIDAE; ODOCOILEINAE;

EID: 33750220175     PISSN: 00084301     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/Z06-052     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Agresti, A. 2002. Categorical data analysis. 2nd ed. Wiley, New York.
2. Bao, W.D., Solt, S., Lehoczk, R., and Csanyi, S. 2005. Grouping behavior of field roe deer Capreolus capreolus population in Hungary. Acta Zool. Sin. 51: 156-160.
3. Barboza, P.S., and Bowyer, R.T. 2000. Sexual segregation in dimorphic deer: a new gastrocentric hypothesis. J. Mammal. 81: 473-489. doi:10.1644/1545-1542(2000)081〈0473:SSIDDA〉2.0.CO;2.
4. Barrette, C. 1987. The comparative behavior and ecology of chevrotains, musk deer, and morphologically conservative deer. In Biology and management of the cervidae. Edited by C.M. Wemmer. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. pp. 200-213.
5. Bideau, E., Vincent, J.P., and Maire, F. 1983a. Evolution saisonnière de la taille des groupes chez le chevreuil en milieu forestier. Rev. Ecol. Terre Vie, 37: 161-169.
6. Bideau, E., Vincent, J.P., Quere, J.P., and Angibault, J.M. 1983b. Occupation de l'espace chez le chevreuil (Capreolus capreolus L., 1789). I. Cas des mâles. Acta Oecol. Oecol. Appl. 4: 163-184.
7. Bon, R. 1992. Social and spatial segregation of males and females in polygamous ungulates: proximate factors. In Ongulés/Ungulates 91. Edited by F. Spitz, G. Janeau, G. Gonzalez, and S. Aulagnier. SFEPM-IRGM, Paris. pp. 195-198.
8. Bon, R., and Campan, R. 1996. Unexplained sexual segregation in polygamous ungulates: a defense of an ontogenetic approach. Behav. Process. 38: 131-154.
9. Bon, R., Rideau, C., Villaret, J.C., and Joachim, J. 2001. Segregation is not only a matter of sex in Alpine ibex, Capra ibex ibex. Anim. Behav. 62: 495-504. doi:10.1006/anbe.2001.1776.
10. Bowyer, R.T. 1984. Sexual segregation in southern mule deer. J. Mammal. 65: 410-417.
11. Brashares, J.S., Garland, T., and Arcese, P. 2000. Phylogenetic analysis of coadaptation in behavior, diet, and body size in the African antelope. Behav. Ecol. 11: 452-463. doi:10.1093/beheco/11.4.452.
12. Bresinski, W. 1982. Grouping tendencies in roe deer under agrocenosis conditions. Acta Theriol. 27: 427-447.
13. Cibien, C., Bideau, E., Boisaubert, B., and Maublanc, M.L. 1989. Influence of habitat characteristics on winter social organisation in field roe deer. Acta Theriol. 34: 219-226.
14. Clutton-Brock, T.H., Guinness, F.E., and Albon, S.D. 1982. Red deer. Behavior and ecology of two sexes. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
15. Conradt, L. 1998a. Measuring the degree of sexual segregation in group-living animals. J. Anim. Ecol. 67: 217-226. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2656.1998. 00183.x.
16. Conradt, L. 1998b. Could asynchrony in activity between the sexes cause intersexual social segregation in ruminants? Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 265: 1359-1363.
17. Diggle, P.J. 1983. Statistical analysis of spatial point patterns. Academic Press, London.
18. Eisenberg, J.F. 1981. The mammalian radiations: an analysis of trends in evolution, adaptation and behavior. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
19. Estes, R.D. 1991. The behavior guide to African mammals. University of California Press, Berkeley.
20. Gaillard, J.M., Delorme, D., Jullien, J.M., and Tatin, D. 1993. Timing and synchrony of births in roe deer. J. Mammal. 74: 738-744.
21. Geist, V. 1998. Deer of the world: their evolution, behavior, and ecology. Stackpole Books, Mechanicsburg, Pa.
22. Gerard, J.F., and Loisel, P. 1995. Spontaneous emergence of a relationship between habitat openness and mean group size and its possible evolutionary consequences in large herbivores. J. Theor. Biol. 176: 511-522. doi:10.1006/jtbi.1995.0217.
23. Gerard, J.F., and Richard-Hansen, C. 1992. Social affinities as the basis of the social organization of a Pyrenean chamois (Rupicapra pyrenaica) population in an open mountain range. Behav. Process. 28: 111-122.
24. Gerard, J.F., Le Pendu, Y., Maublanc, M.L., Vincent, J.P., Poulle, M.L., and Cibien, C. 1995. Large group formation in European roe deer: an adaptive feature? Rev. Ecol. Terre Vie, 50: 391-401.
25. Gerard, J.F., Bideau, E., Dubois, M., Mechkour, F., Angibault, J.M., and Maublanc, M.L. 1997. Settlement dynamics of an introduced roe deer population in a Mediterranean peninsula. Rev. Ecol. Terre Vie, 52: 123-132.
26. Gerard, J.F., Bideau, E., Maublanc, M.L., Loisel, P., and Marchal, C. 2002. Herd size in large herbivores: encoded in the individual or emergent? Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole), 202: 275-282.
27. Hewison, A.J.M., Vincent, J.P., and Reby, D. 1998. Social organisation of European roe deer. In The European roe deer: the biology of success. Edited by R. Andersen, P. Duncan, and J.D.C. Linnell. Scandinavian University Press, Oslo, Norway. pp. 189-219.
28. Hofmann, R.R. 1985. Digestive physiology of the deer - their morphophysiological specialization and adaptation. In Biology of deer production. Edited by P.F. Fenessy and K.R. Drew. Royal Society of New Zealand, Wellington. pp. 393-407.
29. Illius, A.W., and Gordon, I.J. 1987. The allometry of food intake in grazing ruminants. J. Anim. Ecol. 56: 989-999.
30. Jakimchuk, R.D., Ferguson, S.H., and Sopuck, L.G. 1987. Differential habitat use and sexual segregation in the Central Artic caribou herd. Can. J. Zool. 65: 534-541.
31. Jarman, P.J. 1974. The social organisation of antelope in relation to their ecology. Behaviour, 48: 215-267.
32. LaGory, K.E., Bagshaw, C., and Brisbin, I.L. 1991. Niche differences between male and female white-tailed deer on Ossabaw Island, Georgia. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 29: 205-214.
33. Le Pendu, Y., Guilhem, C., Briedermann, L., Maublanc, M.L., and Gerard, J.F. 2000. Interactions and associations between age and sex classes in mouflon sheep (Ovis gmelini) during winter. Behav. Process. 52: 97-107.
34. Leuthold, W. 1977. African ungulates: a comparative review of their ethology and behavioral ecology. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
35. Liberg, O., Johansson, A., Andersen, R., and Linnell, J.D.C. 1998. Mating system, mating tactics and the function of male territoriality in roe deer. In The European roe deer: the biology of success. Edited by R. Andersen, P. Duncan, and J.D.C. Linnell. Scandinavian University Press, Oslo, Norway. pp. 221-256.
36. Linnell, J.D.C., Duncan, P., and Andersen, R. 1998. The European roe deer: a portrait of a successful species. In The European roe deer: the biology of success. Edited by R. Andersen, P. Duncan, and J.D.C. Linnell. Scandinavian University Press, Oslo, Norway. pp. 11-22.
37. Main, M.B., Weckerly, F.W., and Bleich, V.C. 1996. Sexual segregation in ungulates: new directions for research. J. Mammal. 77: 449-461.
38. Marchal, C., Gerard, J.F., Boisaubert, B., and Bideau, E. 1998a. Instability and diurnal variation in size of winter groupings of field roe deer. Rev. Ecol. Terre Vie, 53: 59-68.
39. Marchal, C., Gerard, J.F., Delorme, D., Boisaubert, B., and Bideau, E. 1998b. Space and habitat use by field roe deer (Capreolus caproelus) in mid-winter and mid-growing season. Gibier Faune Sauvage, 15: 737-746.
40. Maublanc, M.L. 1986. Utilisation de l'espace chez le chevreuil (Capreolus capreolus) en milieu ouvert. Gibier Faune Sauvage, 3: 297-311.
41. Maublanc, M.L., Bideau, E., and Vincent, J.P. 1985. Données préliminaires sur la tendance grégaire chez le chevreuil (Capreolus capreolus L.) en milieu ouvert, durant l'automne et l'hiver; comparaison avec le milieu forestier. Mammalia, 49: 3-11.
42. Maublanc, M.L., Bideau, E., and Vincent, J.P. 1987. Flexibilité de l'organisation sociale du chevreuil en fonction des caractéristiques de l'environnement. Rev. Ecol. Terre Vie, 42: 109-133.
43. Maublanc, M.L., Cibien, C., Gaillard, J.M., Maizeret, C., Bideau, E., and Vincent, J.P. 1991. Le chevreuil. Rev. Ecol. Terre Vie, 6(Suppl.): 155-183.
44. McCullough, D.R., Hirth, D.H., and Newhouse, S.J. 1989. Resource partitioning between sexes in white-tailed deer. J. Wildl. Manag. 53: 277-283.
45. Michelena, P., Bouquet, P.M., Dissac, A., Fourcassie, V., Lauga, J., Gerard, J.F., and Bon, R. 2004. An experimental test of hypotheses explaining social segregation in dimorphic ungulates. Anim. Behav. 68: 1371-1380. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.04.008.
46. Miquelle, D.G., Peek, J.M., and Van Ballenberghe, V. 1992. Sexual segregation in Alaskan moose. Wildl. Monogr. 122: 1-57.
47. Netto, N.T., Coutinho-Netto, C.R.M., Paranhos Da Costa, M.J.R., and Bon, R. 2000. Grouping patterns of pampas deer (Ozotoceros bezoarticus) in the Emas national park, Brazil. Rev. Etol. 2: 85-94.
48. Pérez-Barbería, F.J., Robertson, E., and Gordon, I.J. 2005. Are social factors sufficient to explain sexual segregation in ungulates? Anim. Behav. 69: 827-834. doi:doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.06.011.
49. Ruckstuhl, K.E. 1998. Foraging behaviour and sexual segregation in bighorn sheep. Anim. Behav. 56: 99-106. doi:10.1006/anbe.1998.0745.
50. Ruckstuhl, K.E., and Neuhaus, P. 2002. Sexual segregation in ungulates: a comparative test of three hypotheses. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 77: 77-96.
51. Stüwe, M., and Hendrichs, H. 1984. Organization of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) in an open field habitat. Z. Saeugetierkd. 49: 359-367.
52. Vincent, J.P., Bideau, E., Quere, J.P., and Angibault, J.M. 1983. Occupation de l'espace chez le chevreuil (Capreolus capreolus L.). II. Cas des femelles. Acta Oecol. Oecol. Appl. 4: 379-389.
53. Yearsley, J.M., and Pérez-Barbería, J. 2005. Does the activity budget hypothesis explain sexual segregation in ungulates? Anim. Behav. 69: 257-267. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.04.010.
54. Zar, J.H. 1996. Biostatistical analysis. 3rd ed. Prentice-Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River, N.J.
55. Zejda, J. 1978. Field groupings of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) in a lowland region. Folia Zool. 27: 111-122.