Biting flies and activity of caribou in the boreal forest
Abstract
Habitat loss has been implicated in the decline of forest‐dwelling caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), but it is unknown how biting insects, potentially important components of boreal forest habitat for caribou, influence the activity of this threatened species. During summers in 2011 and 2012 in northern Ontario, Canada, we quantified the relative abundance of black flies, mosquitoes, and tabanids in boreal forest stands of different ages and related their abundance to caribou activity. We counted insects in young (25–35 yrs since forest harvesting), intermediate (36–69 yrs), and old (≥70 yrs) stands using sweep nets and counts on human subjects. We related the daily variation in abundance of these insect families, along with daily maximum temperature, to the activity of female caribou, determined by accelerometers in global positioning system collars. We found higher insect abundance in young versus old stands. During the first 5 minutes in a forest stand, the rate of accumulation of mosquitoes and black flies on human subjects increased, but at a decelerating rate, whereas tabanid abundance declined over time. On days when tabanids were more numerous, female caribou were less active, possibly a response to reduce exposure and harassment. To a lesser extent, mosquitoes and black flies also tended to elicit lower activity of caribou. Our study reveals that biting flies can alter the behavior of female caribou in the boreal forest. Loss of old stands may accentuate the potential for insect harassment. © 2018 The Wildlife Society.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The role of insect harassment on caribou ecology is relatively well documented.
“Although the role of insect harassment on caribou ecology is relatively well documented (Raponi et al. 2018)”
From Muskox status, recent variation, and uncertain future (2020) · cites this paper as Raponi et al. 2018
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 54 · Cited by 25
- Authors
- Raponi, M., Beresford, D. V., Schaefer, J. A., Thompson, I. D., Wiebe, P. A., Rodgers, A. R., & Fryxell, J. M.
- Affiliations
- Trent University (CA)
- Canadian Forest Service (CA)
- Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (CA)
- University of Guelph (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Beresford, David V.
- Venue
- The Journal of Wildlife Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-02-09
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 833-839
- ISSN
- 0022-541X (ISSN-L)
- 1937-2817
- OpenAlex
- W2790561890
- Cited by
- 25
- References
- 54
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 2.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Wildlife Management (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Trent University
- Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Ecology and biodiversity studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
- Keywords
- reindeer, Rangifer tarandus caribou, biting flies, Simuliidae, mosquitoes, Tabanidae, insect harassment, animal behavior, boreal forest, forest stand age, habitat loss, accelerometry, Northern Ontario
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review