Dataset Information

Nature vs. Nurture: Evidence for Social Learning of Conflict Behaviour in Grizzly Bears.

ABSTRACT: The propensity for a grizzly bear to develop conflict behaviours might be a result of social learning between mothers and cubs, genetic inheritance, or both learning and inheritance. Using non-invasive genetic sampling, we collected grizzly bear hair samples during 2011-2014 across southwestern Alberta, Canada. We targeted private agricultural lands for hair samples at grizzly bear incident sites, defining an incident as an occurrence in which the grizzly bear caused property damage, obtained anthropogenic food, or killed or attempted to kill livestock or pets. We genotyped 213 unique grizzly bears (118 M, 95 F) at 24 microsatellite loci, plus the amelogenin marker for sex. We used the program COLONY to assign parentage. We evaluated 76 mother-offspring relationships and 119 father-offspring relationships. We compared the frequency of problem and non-problem offspring from problem and non-problem parents, excluding dependent offspring from our analysis. Our results support the social learning hypothesis, but not the genetic inheritance hypothesis. Offspring of problem mothers are more likely to be involved in conflict behaviours, while offspring from non-problem mothers are not likely to be involved in incidents or human-bear conflicts themselves (Barnard's test, p = 0.05, 62.5% of offspring from problem mothers were problem bears). There was no evidence that offspring are more likely to be involved in conflict behaviour if their fathers had been problem bears (Barnard's test, p = 0.92, 29.6% of offspring from problem fathers were problem bears). For the mother-offspring relationships evaluated, 30.3% of offspring were identified as problem bears independent of their mother's conflict status. Similarly, 28.6% of offspring were identified as problem bears independent of their father's conflict status. Proactive mitigation to prevent female bears from becoming problem individuals likely will help prevent the perpetuation of conflicts through social learning.

SUBMITTER: Morehouse AT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5112868 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Nature vs. Nurture: Evidence for Social Learning of Conflict Behaviour in Grizzly Bears.

Morehouse Andrea T AT Graves Tabitha A TA Mikle Nate N Boyce Mark S MS

PloS one 20161116 11

The propensity for a grizzly bear to develop conflict behaviours might be a result of social learning between mothers and cubs, genetic inheritance, or both learning and inheritance. Using non-invasive genetic sampling, we collected grizzly bear hair samples during 2011-2014 across southwestern Alberta, Canada. We targeted private agricultural lands for hair samples at grizzly bear incident sites, defining an incident as an occurrence in which the grizzly bear caused property damage, obtained an ...[more]

PMID: 27851753

Similar Datasets

Project description:Across the boreal forest of Canada, habitat disturbance is the ultimate cause of caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) declines. Habitat restoration is a focus of caribou recovery efforts, with a goal to finding ways to reduce predator use of disturbances, and caribou-predator encounters. One of the most pervasive disturbances within caribou ranges in Alberta, Canada are seismic lines cleared for energy exploration. Seismic lines facilitate predator movement, and although vegetation on some seismic lines is regenerating, it remains unknown whether vegetation regrowth is sufficient to alter predator response. We used Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data, and GPS locations, to understand how vegetation and other attributes of seismic lines influence movements of two predators, wolves (Canis lupus) and grizzly bears (Ursus arctos). During winter, wolves moved towards seismic lines regardless of vegetation height, while during spring wolves moved towards seismic lines with higher vegetation. During summer, wolves moved towards seismic lines with lower vegetation and also moved faster near seismic lines with vegetation <0.7 m. Seismic lines with lower vegetation height were preferred by grizzly bears during spring and summer, but there was no relationship between vegetation height and grizzly bear movement rates. These results suggest that wolves use seismic lines for travel during summer, but during winter wolf movements relative to seismic lines could be influenced by factors additional to movement efficiency; potentially enhanced access to areas frequented by ungulate prey. Grizzly bears may be using seismic lines for movement, but could also be using seismic lines as a source of vegetative food or ungulate prey. To reduce wolf movement rate, restoration could focus on seismic lines with vegetation <1 m in height. However our results revealed that seismic lines continue to influence wolf movement behaviour decades after they were built, and even at later stages of regeneration. Therefore it remains unknown at what stage of natural regeneration, if any, wolves cease to respond to seismic lines. To reduce wolf response to seismic lines, active restoration tactics like blocking seismic lines and tree planting, along with management of alternate prey, could be evaluated.

Project description:Implementation of ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) requires a clear conceptual and quantitative framework for assessing how different harvest options can modify benefits to ecosystem and human beneficiaries. We address this social-ecological need for Pacific salmon fisheries, which are economically valuable but intercept much of the annual pulse of nutrient subsidies that salmon provide to terrestrial and aquatic food webs. We used grizzly bears, vectors of salmon nutrients and animals with densities strongly coupled to salmon abundance, as surrogates for "salmon ecosystem" function. Combining salmon biomass and stock-recruitment data with stable isotope analysis, we assess potential tradeoffs between fishery yields and bear population densities for six sockeye salmon stocks in Bristol Bay, Alaska, and British Columbia (BC), Canada. For the coastal stocks, we find that both bear densities and fishery yields would increase substantially if ecosystem allocations of salmon increase from currently applied lower to upper goals and beyond. This aligning of benefits comes at a potential cost, however, with the possibility of forgoing harvests in low productivity years. In contrast, we detect acute tradeoffs between bear densities and fishery yields in interior stocks within the Fraser River, BC, where biomass from other salmon species is low. There, increasing salmon allocations to ecosystems would benefit threatened bear populations at the cost of reduced long-term yields. To resolve this conflict, we propose an EBFM goal that values fisheries and bears (and by extension, the ecosystem) equally. At such targets, ecosystem benefits are unexpectedly large compared with losses in fishery yields. To explore other management options, we generate tradeoff curves that provide stock-specific accounting of the expected loss to fishers and gain to bears as more salmon escape the fishery. Our approach, modified to suit multiple scenarios, provides a generalizable method to resolve conflicts over shared resources in other systems.

Project description:Large carnivores play critical roles in the maintenance and function of natural ecosystems; however, the populations of many of these species are in decline across the globe. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop novel techniques that can be used as sensitive conservation tools to detect new threats to the health of individual animals well in advance of population-level effects. Our study aimed to determine the expression of proteins related to energetics, reproduction and stress in the skin of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) using a liquid chromatography and multiple reaction monitoring mass spectrometry assay. We hypothesized that a suite of target proteins could be measured using this technique and that the expression of these proteins would be associated with biological (sex, age, sample location on body) and environmental (geographic area, season, sample year) variables. Small skin biopsies were collected from free-ranging grizzly bears in Alberta, Canada, from 2013 to 2019 (n = 136 samples from 111 individuals). Over 700 proteins were detected in the skin of grizzly bears, 19 of which were chosen as targets because of their established roles in physiological function. Generalized linear mixed model analysis was used for each target protein. Results indicate that sample year influenced the majority of proteins, suggesting that physiological changes may be driven in part by responses to changes in the environment. Season influenced the expression of proteins related to energetics, reproduction and stress, all of which were lower during fall compared to early spring. The expression of proteins related to energetics and stress varied by geographic area, while the majority of proteins that were affected by biological attributes (age class, sex and age class by sex interaction) were related to reproduction and stress. This study provides a novel method by which scientists and managers can further assess and monitor physiological function in wildlife.

Project description:When fed ad libitum, ursids can maximize mass gain by selecting mixed diets wherein protein provides 17 ± 4% of digestible energy, relative to carbohydrates or lipids. In the wild, this ability is likely constrained by seasonal food availability, limits of intake rate as body size increases, and competition. By visiting locations of 37 individuals during 274 bear-days, we documented foods consumed by grizzly (Ursus arctos) and black bears (Ursus americanus) in Grand Teton National Park during 2004-2006. Based on published nutritional data, we estimated foods and macronutrients as percentages of daily energy intake. Using principal components and cluster analyses, we identified 14 daily diet types. Only 4 diets, accounting for 21% of days, provided protein levels within the optimal range. Nine diets (75% of days) led to over-consumption of protein, and 1 diet (3% of days) led to under-consumption. Highest protein levels were associated with animal matter (i.e., insects, vertebrates), which accounted for 46-47% of daily energy for both species. As predicted: 1) daily diets dominated by high-energy vertebrates were positively associated with grizzly bears and mean percent protein intake was positively associated with body mass; 2) diets dominated by low-protein fruits were positively associated with smaller-bodied black bears; and 3) mean protein was highest during spring, when high-energy plant foods were scarce, however it was also higher than optimal during summer and fall. Contrary to our prediction: 4) allopatric black bears did not exhibit food selection for high-energy foods similar to grizzly bears. Although optimal gain of body mass was typically constrained, bears usually opted for the energetically superior trade-off of consuming high-energy, high-protein foods. Given protein digestion efficiency similar to obligate carnivores, this choice likely supported mass gain, consistent with studies showing monthly increases in percent body fat among bears in this region.

Dataset Information

Nature vs. Nurture: Evidence for Social Learning of Conflict Behaviour in Grizzly Bears.

Publications

Nature vs. Nurture: Evidence for Social Learning of Conflict Behaviour in Grizzly Bears.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets