Unintended indirect effects limit elk productivity from supplemental feeding in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

IF 2.7 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Ecosphere Pub Date : 2025-07-09 DOI:10.1002/ecs2.70320
Brian S. Dugovich, Emma M. Tomaszewski, Eric K. Cole, Sarah R. Dewey, Daniel R. MacNulty, Brandon M. Scurlock, Daniel R. Stahler, Paul C. Cross
{"title":"Unintended indirect effects limit elk productivity from supplemental feeding in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem","authors":"Brian S. Dugovich,&nbsp;Emma M. Tomaszewski,&nbsp;Eric K. Cole,&nbsp;Sarah R. Dewey,&nbsp;Daniel R. MacNulty,&nbsp;Brandon M. Scurlock,&nbsp;Daniel R. Stahler,&nbsp;Paul C. Cross","doi":"10.1002/ecs2.70320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The widespread practice of supplemental feeding, a bottom-up forcing of resource availability, is intended to improve wildlife population health and survival. However, supplemental feeding could trigger indirect effects by altering predation rates and disease dynamics. We investigated the effects of feeding on three key elk (<i>Cervus canadensis</i>) population productivity metrics (calf:cow ratios, annual change in elk density, and harvestable surplus) across 13 regions in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) over 26 years. Incorporating previous population size, climate, predator, and harvest data in a Bayesian regression framework revealed new insights about elk productivity metrics in the GYE. Supplemental feeding was associated with increased calf:cow ratios (4.9%) but was not substantially related to changes in elk density and harvestable surplus, which are both management targets. Notably, the feeding effect on calf:cow ratios appeared to be offset by increased wolf (<i>Canis lupus</i>) and grizzly bear (<i>Ursus arctos horribilis</i>) predation. We hypothesize that increased elk productivity resulting from supplemental feeding is primarily transferred to predator and pathogen trophic levels in this system with limited observed effects on elk abundance and harvestable surplus. Anthropogenic food resources may have unintended indirect consequences on other trophic levels that potentially limit the direct impacts of feeding.</p>","PeriodicalId":48930,"journal":{"name":"Ecosphere","volume":"16 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ecs2.70320","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosphere","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecs2.70320","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The widespread practice of supplemental feeding, a bottom-up forcing of resource availability, is intended to improve wildlife population health and survival. However, supplemental feeding could trigger indirect effects by altering predation rates and disease dynamics. We investigated the effects of feeding on three key elk (Cervus canadensis) population productivity metrics (calf:cow ratios, annual change in elk density, and harvestable surplus) across 13 regions in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) over 26 years. Incorporating previous population size, climate, predator, and harvest data in a Bayesian regression framework revealed new insights about elk productivity metrics in the GYE. Supplemental feeding was associated with increased calf:cow ratios (4.9%) but was not substantially related to changes in elk density and harvestable surplus, which are both management targets. Notably, the feeding effect on calf:cow ratios appeared to be offset by increased wolf (Canis lupus) and grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) predation. We hypothesize that increased elk productivity resulting from supplemental feeding is primarily transferred to predator and pathogen trophic levels in this system with limited observed effects on elk abundance and harvestable surplus. Anthropogenic food resources may have unintended indirect consequences on other trophic levels that potentially limit the direct impacts of feeding.

Abstract Image

意想不到的间接影响限制了麋鹿在大黄石生态系统中补充喂养的生产力
补充喂养的广泛做法是一种自下而上的资源可用性强迫,旨在改善野生动物种群的健康和生存。然而,补充喂养可能通过改变捕食率和疾病动态而引发间接影响。在大黄石生态系统(GYE)的13个地区,研究了26年来饲养对3个关键麋鹿(Cervus canada)种群生产力指标(小牛:牛比、麋鹿密度年变化和可收获盈余)的影响。将以前的种群规模、气候、捕食者和收获数据纳入贝叶斯回归框架,揭示了GYE中麋鹿生产力指标的新见解。添加饲料与犊牛比增加(4.9%)有关,但与麋鹿密度和可收获盈余的变化没有实质性关系,这两个都是管理目标。值得注意的是,饲养对小牛和母牛比例的影响似乎被狼(Canis lupus)和灰熊(Ursus arctos terribilis)捕食增加所抵消。我们假设,在这个系统中,补充饲料导致的麋鹿生产力的提高主要转移到捕食者和病原体的营养水平上,对麋鹿丰度和可收获盈余的影响有限。人为食物资源可能对其他营养水平产生意想不到的间接后果,从而可能限制摄食的直接影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ecosphere
Ecosphere ECOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
3.70%
发文量
378
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: The scope of Ecosphere is as broad as the science of ecology itself. The journal welcomes submissions from all sub-disciplines of ecological science, as well as interdisciplinary studies relating to ecology. The journal''s goal is to provide a rapid-publication, online-only, open-access alternative to ESA''s other journals, while maintaining the rigorous standards of peer review for which ESA publications are renowned.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信