General versus specific surveys: estimating the suitability of different road-crossing structures for small mammals.

D'Amico, M., Clevenger, A.P., Román, J. y Revilla, E. General versus specific surveys: estimating the suitability of different road-crossing structures for small mammals. The Journal of Wildlife Management. [s.l.]: The Wild Life Society. 2015, Vol. 79, Num. 5, pags. 854-860. DOI 10.1002/jwmg.900

The use of wildlife road‐crossing structures (WCS hereafter) is less monitored for small mammals than for more emblematic species. Furthermore, because of the undeniable difficulty of small‐mammal track identification, most biologists usually carry out general surveys without species recognition. We hypothesized that general surveys traditionally used for monitoring WRC by small mammals may be biased because the degraded habitats along roads are mainly used by generalist and not specialist species. For this reason, we compared the results of a general small‐mammal survey with those from a species‐specific one, focusing on 3 study species: 1 habitat generalist (North American deer mouse [Peromyscus maniculatus]), 1 forest specialist (southern red‐backed vole [Myodes gapperi]), and 1 prairie specialist (meadow vole [Microtus pennsylvanicus]). We sampled along 4 types of WCS (overpasses, open‐span underpasses, and both elliptical and box culverts) in Banff National Park (Canada), by placing footprint track tubes along the WCS, and as a reference in front of their entrances (mainly located in roadside grasslands) and in the surrounding woodlands. Using the traditional general survey, we did not detect significant differences in small‐mammal presence among WCS and reference sites. In contrast, species‐specific surveys showed that only the deer mouse (a generalist species) consistently used the WCS. The deer mice did not show preferences for any WCS type, whereas the specialist species (voles) used only overpasses. Therefore, general surveys used without species identification can underestimate the value of WCS for specialist small mammals, with relevant conservation implications. As a consequence, we recommend species‐specific surveys of WCS suitability for small mammals. We also suggest improving the habitat (or at least the cover availability) in the WCS and along the space between them and the surrounding environments to increase WCS suitability for specialist species. Palabras clave: Mammal

Datos y Recursos

Metadatos
Descargar
DCAT-AP/NTI-RISP

Información básica
Tipo de recurso Texto
Fecha de creación 17-09-2024
Fecha de última modificación 17-09-2024
Mostrar histórico de cambios
Identificador de los metadatos a73ada75-de76-5af0-a26f-f47ec206de82
Idioma de los metadatos Español
Temáticas (NTI-RISP)
Categoría del conjunto de alto valor (HVD)
Categoría temática ISO 19115 biota
Identificador alternativo
URI de palabras clave
Codificación UTF-8
Información espacial
Identificador INSPIRE ESPMITECOIEPNBFRAGM368
Temas INSPIRE
Identificador geográfico España
Sistema de Referencia de Coordenadas
Tipo de representación espacial
Extensión espacial
"{\"type\": \"Polygon\", \"coordinates\": [[[-18.16, 27.64], [4.32, 27.64], [4.32, 43.79], [-18.16, 43.79], [-18.16, 27.64]]]}"
Resolución espacial del dataset (m)
Procedencia
Declaración de linaje
Perfil de Metadatos
Conformidad
Conjunto de datos de origen
Frecuencia de actualización
Fuentes
  1. The Journal of Wildlife Management. Vol. 79
  2. Num. 5
  3. pags. 854-860
Propósito
Pasos del proceso
Cobertura temporal (Inicio)
Cobertura temporal (Fin)
Notas sobre la versión
Versión
Vigencia del conjunto de datos
Parte responsable
Nombre del autor D'Amico, M., Clevenger, A.P., Román, J. y Revilla, E.
Nombre del mantenedor
Identificador del autor
Email del autor
Web del autor
Identificador del mantenedor
Email del mantenedor
Web del mantenedor