Guanhua Pu, Bin Feng, Yaohua Huang, Jindong Zhang, Huakang Yin, Shuai Yang, Liqiang Fu, Caiquan Zhou, Wenke Bai
{"title":"人为干扰对大熊猫的协同效应","authors":"Guanhua Pu, Bin Feng, Yaohua Huang, Jindong Zhang, Huakang Yin, Shuai Yang, Liqiang Fu, Caiquan Zhou, Wenke Bai","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Livestock grazing and the collection of bamboo shoots are the main threats to giant panda (<i>Ailuropoda melanoleuca</i>) habitat in the Liangshan Mountains in China. It is important to clarify the effect of these disturbances to the giant panda to formulate targeted management policies. Based on species distribution models and daily activity models, we investigated the effects of livestock grazing and bamboo shoot collection on giant pandas from May 2021 to July 2022. Our results indicated the giant panda's suitable habitat in the reserve covered 51.83 km<sup>2</sup> (15.02% of the reserve area). Grazing and bamboo shoot collection led to losses of 19.08 km<sup>2</sup> and 7.68 km<sup>2</sup> of suitable habitat, respectively. Together, the 2 activities resulted in a loss of 28.35 km<sup>2</sup> of suitable habitat, which was more than half of the area of panda habitat. The areas of suitable habitat for giant pandas significantly overlapped with the areas affected by both disturbances. Giant pandas did not show significant differences in daily activity rhythms under a single disturbance, but the daily activity rhythms of giant pandas differed when we compared the area combining the 2 disturbances with the undisturbed area. Our study reveals that the anthropogenic disturbances in the reserve have varying effects on the suitable habitat range and daily activity rhythm of giant pandas and evidence of a synergistic effect. Therefore, when formulating relevant conservation policies, it is important to fully evaluate the extent and characteristics of anthropogenic disturbances in shaping the population distribution and habitat preferences of the giant panda and other wildlife to enhance the efficacy of conservation management practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":"88 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Synergistic effects of anthropogenic disturbances on giant pandas\",\"authors\":\"Guanhua Pu, Bin Feng, Yaohua Huang, Jindong Zhang, Huakang Yin, Shuai Yang, Liqiang Fu, Caiquan Zhou, Wenke Bai\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jwmg.22555\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Livestock grazing and the collection of bamboo shoots are the main threats to giant panda (<i>Ailuropoda melanoleuca</i>) habitat in the Liangshan Mountains in China. It is important to clarify the effect of these disturbances to the giant panda to formulate targeted management policies. Based on species distribution models and daily activity models, we investigated the effects of livestock grazing and bamboo shoot collection on giant pandas from May 2021 to July 2022. Our results indicated the giant panda's suitable habitat in the reserve covered 51.83 km<sup>2</sup> (15.02% of the reserve area). Grazing and bamboo shoot collection led to losses of 19.08 km<sup>2</sup> and 7.68 km<sup>2</sup> of suitable habitat, respectively. Together, the 2 activities resulted in a loss of 28.35 km<sup>2</sup> of suitable habitat, which was more than half of the area of panda habitat. The areas of suitable habitat for giant pandas significantly overlapped with the areas affected by both disturbances. Giant pandas did not show significant differences in daily activity rhythms under a single disturbance, but the daily activity rhythms of giant pandas differed when we compared the area combining the 2 disturbances with the undisturbed area. Our study reveals that the anthropogenic disturbances in the reserve have varying effects on the suitable habitat range and daily activity rhythm of giant pandas and evidence of a synergistic effect. Therefore, when formulating relevant conservation policies, it is important to fully evaluate the extent and characteristics of anthropogenic disturbances in shaping the population distribution and habitat preferences of the giant panda and other wildlife to enhance the efficacy of conservation management practices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17504,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Wildlife Management\",\"volume\":\"88 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Wildlife Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jwmg.22555\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Wildlife Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jwmg.22555","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Synergistic effects of anthropogenic disturbances on giant pandas
Livestock grazing and the collection of bamboo shoots are the main threats to giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) habitat in the Liangshan Mountains in China. It is important to clarify the effect of these disturbances to the giant panda to formulate targeted management policies. Based on species distribution models and daily activity models, we investigated the effects of livestock grazing and bamboo shoot collection on giant pandas from May 2021 to July 2022. Our results indicated the giant panda's suitable habitat in the reserve covered 51.83 km2 (15.02% of the reserve area). Grazing and bamboo shoot collection led to losses of 19.08 km2 and 7.68 km2 of suitable habitat, respectively. Together, the 2 activities resulted in a loss of 28.35 km2 of suitable habitat, which was more than half of the area of panda habitat. The areas of suitable habitat for giant pandas significantly overlapped with the areas affected by both disturbances. Giant pandas did not show significant differences in daily activity rhythms under a single disturbance, but the daily activity rhythms of giant pandas differed when we compared the area combining the 2 disturbances with the undisturbed area. Our study reveals that the anthropogenic disturbances in the reserve have varying effects on the suitable habitat range and daily activity rhythm of giant pandas and evidence of a synergistic effect. Therefore, when formulating relevant conservation policies, it is important to fully evaluate the extent and characteristics of anthropogenic disturbances in shaping the population distribution and habitat preferences of the giant panda and other wildlife to enhance the efficacy of conservation management practices.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Wildlife Management publishes manuscripts containing information from original research that contributes to basic wildlife science. Suitable topics include investigations into the biology and ecology of wildlife and their habitats that has direct or indirect implications for wildlife management and conservation. This includes basic information on wildlife habitat use, reproduction, genetics, demographics, viability, predator-prey relationships, space-use, movements, behavior, and physiology; but within the context of contemporary management and conservation issues such that the knowledge may ultimately be useful to wildlife practitioners. Also considered are theoretical and conceptual aspects of wildlife science, including development of new approaches to quantitative analyses, modeling of wildlife populations and habitats, and other topics that are germane to advancing wildlife science. Limited reviews or meta analyses will be considered if they provide a meaningful new synthesis or perspective on an appropriate subject. Direct evaluation of management practices or policies should be sent to the Wildlife Society Bulletin, as should papers reporting new tools or techniques. However, papers that report new tools or techniques, or effects of management practices, within the context of a broader study investigating basic wildlife biology and ecology will be considered by The Journal of Wildlife Management. Book reviews of relevant topics in basic wildlife research and biology.