A continental scale trophic cascade from wolves through coyotes to foxes
Open accessAbstract
Top-down processes, via the direct and indirect effects of interspecific competitive killing (no consumption of the kill) or intraguild predation (consumption of the kill), can potentially influence the spatial distribution of terrestrial predators, but few studies have demonstrated the phenomenon at a continental scale. For example, in North America, grey wolves Canis lupus are known to kill coyotes Canis latrans, and coyotes, in turn, may kill foxes Vulpes spp., but the spatial effects of these competitive interactions at large scales are unknown. Here, we analyse fur return data across eight jurisdictions in North America to test whether the presence or absence of wolves has caused a continent-wide shift in coyote and red fox Vulpes vulpes density. Our results support the existence of a continental scale cascade whereby coyotes outnumber red foxes in areas where wolves have been extirpated by humans, whereas red foxes outnumber coyotes in areas where wolves are present. However, for a distance of up to 200 km on the edge of wolf distribution, there is a transition zone where the effects of top-down control are weakened, possibly due to the rapid dispersal and reinvasion capabilities of coyotes into areas where wolves are sporadically distributed or at low densities. Our results have implications for understanding how the restoration of wolf populations across North America could potentially affect co-occurring predators and prey. We conclude that large carnivores may need to occupy large continuous areas to facilitate among-carnivore cascades and that studies of small areas may not be indicative of the effects of top-down mesopredator control.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
13 of 96 cited sources checked · 9 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
- Premisecitation
As humans eliminated wolves from much of North America, coyotes greatly expanded their historical range.
“At a continental scale, as wolves were eliminated by humans from much of North America, coyotes dramatically expanded their historical range (Peterson 1996;Gompper 2002).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked- cites Peterson 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Gompper 2002 source
- Premisecitation
In north-eastern North America, where wolves are absent, coyotes and red foxes have co-occurred only since the 1980s.
“In north-eastern North America, where wolves are absent, coyotes and red foxes have only co-occurred since the 1980s (Fener et al. 2005).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Fener et al. 2005 source
The introduction (section 1; page unavailable) says coyotes were widespread in the Northeast by the 1980s and describes earlier wolf extirpation. The Results and Discussion (page unavailable) place coyote establishment in northern New York in the early 1940s. The paper does not discuss red foxes or establish when the two species began to co-occur, so it does not support the claim’s central timing. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
- Interpretationcitation
The expansion of wolves may provide positive outcomes for some lineages of montane red foxes that are potentially threatened by coyote predation.
“The expansion of wolves may also provide positive outcomes for some lineages of montane red foxes that are potentially threatened by coyote predation (Sacks et al. 2010).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Sacks et al. 2010 source
In the section on taxonomic implications for the Cascade red fox (page unavailable), the paper says anecdotal evidence links a decline in Sacramento Valley red fox abundance with an increase in coyotes. It does not say coyotes preyed on those foxes or discuss whether expanding wolves could benefit them. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
- Findingown data
By 2000, coyote fur returns outnumbered red fox fur returns in all three northeastern jurisdictions.
“By the year 2000, coyote fur returns outnumber red fox fur returns in all three jurisdictions in the northeast (Fig. 7).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 7
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
In jurisdictions where wolves were present (Northwest Territories, Yukon, and Alaska), red fox fur returns always outnumbered coyote fur returns.
“In the jurisdictions where wolves were present (NW Territories, the Yukon and Alaska; Fig. 1), red fox fur returns always outnumber coyote fur returns (Fig. 7).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 7
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
In both Saskatchewan and Manitoba, red fox fur returns outnumber coyote fur returns at sites north of wolf distribution.
“The spatial distribution of the coyote : fox ratio values shows that red fox fur returns outnumber coyote fur returns at sites to the north of wolf distribution in both Saskatchewan and Manitoba (Fig. 2).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 2
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
In jurisdictions where wolves were absent (Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Maine), plots from 1970 to 2010 showed red fox fur returns generally declining as coyote fur returns increased.
“In contrast, in the jurisdictions where wolves were absent (Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Maine; Fig. 1) the plots from 1970 to 2010 show that red fox fur returns generally decline as coyote fur returns increase (Fig. 7).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 7
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
The apparent shift occurred even though total fur returns for both coyotes and red foxes were greater in the southern agricultural region than in the northern forested region.
“This apparent shift occurred despite greater overall numbers of fur returns for both coyotes and red foxes in the southern agricultural region compared to the northern forested region (Fig. 5).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 5
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
In Manitoba, red fox fur returns begin to outnumber coyote fur returns at about 100 km from the edge of wolf distribution.
“In Manitoba, red fox fur returns start to outnumber coyote fur returns at a distance of approximately 100 km from the edge of the wolf distribution (Fig. 3).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 3
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
In the Duck Mountain and Porcupine habitat islands within 100 km of wolf range in Manitoba, coyote fur returns consistently outnumbered red fox fur returns yearly despite wolves being present.
“Additionally, in the habitat islands of Duck Mountain and Porcupine, which are located within 100 km of wolf range in Manitoba, coyote fur returns consistently outnumber red fox fur returns on a yearly basis, despite the presence of wolves (Fig. 6).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 6
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
The change from predominantly coniferous forest to transitional and tundra forest is more than 500 km from the edge of wolf distribution.
“Indeed, the change from predominantly coniferous forest to a transitional and tundra forest is well over 500 km from the edge of wolf distribution (Appendix S1, Supporting information).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Appendix S1
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
In Saskatchewan, red fox fur returns begin to outnumber coyote fur returns at about 200 km from the edge of wolf distribution.
“In Saskatchewan, the linear and nonlinear fitted lines indicates that red fox fur returns start to outnumber coyote fur returns at a distance of approximately 200 km from the edge of the wolf distribution (Fig. 3).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 3
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
Fur return data suggest that coyotes took only 20-30 years to outnumber red foxes where wolves were absent.
“Despite this short time frame, the fur return data suggest that it only took coyotes 20-30 years to outnumber red foxes in the absence of wolves (Fig. 7).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 7
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
In Saskatchewan, coyote:fox ratios on the log scale had a significant relationship with distance to the edge of wolf distribution (r2 = 0.85, F1,87 = 506.61, P < 0.0001).
“This is supported by the least squares regressions which showed a significant relationship between coyote : fox ratios (on the log scale) and distance to the edge of the wolf distribution in both Saskatchewan (r 2 = 0Á85, F 1,87 = 506Á61, P < 0Á0001) and Manitoba (r 2 = 0Á64, F 1,33 = 59Á04, P < 0Á05) (Fig. 3).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 3
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
There was no change in land use or habitat at the point where red fox fur returns began to outnumber coyote fur returns in Saskatchewan and Manitoba.
“However, our spatial scale analysis predominantly considers forested habitat within wolf range, and there is no change in land use or habitat at the point where red fox fur returns start to outnumber coyote fur returns in Saskatchewan and Manitoba (Appendix S1, Supporting information).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Appendix S1
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
In Manitoba, coyote:fox ratios on the log scale had a significant relationship with distance to the edge of wolf distribution (r2 = 0.64, F1,33 = 59.04, P < 0.05).
“This is supported by the least squares regressions which showed a significant relationship between coyote : fox ratios (on the log scale) and distance to the edge of the wolf distribution in both Saskatchewan (r 2 = 0Á85, F 1,87 = 506Á61, P < 0Á0001) and Manitoba (r 2 = 0Á64, F 1,33 = 59Á04, P < 0Á05) (Fig. 3).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 3
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
At one Manitoba site, fox fur returns exceeded coyote returns by 517 to 1.
“Here we show that red fox fur returns outnumber coyotes at an extreme of 517:1 at one site in Manitoba.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
The authors' data suggest that coyotes can penetrate up to 200 km within wolf range.
“our data suggest that coyotes can penetrate up to 200 km within wolf range.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
In Porcupine and Duck Mountain in Manitoba, red fox fur returns never outnumbered coyotes despite wolves being present.
“despite wolves being present within the small habitat islands of Porcupine and Duck Mountain in Manitoba, red fox fur returns never outnumber coyotes (Fig. 6).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation
Wolves reoccupied only 15% of their historic range in the conterminous United States after 1995.
“Wolves only recently (post 1995) reoccupied 15% of their historic range in the conterminous United States (Bruskotter et al. 2013).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Bruskotter et al. 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
Red foxes have been shown to select habitats that coyotes generally avoid.
“Red foxes Vulpes vulpes have similarly been shown to select habitats which coyotes generally avoid (Sargeant, Allen & Hastings 1987;Gosselink et al. 2003).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Interpretationreasoning
Data outside Saskatchewan and Manitoba also reflect the relative abundance of coyotes versus red foxes.
“Thus, we are confident that our data outside of Saskatchewan and Manitoba also reflect the relative abundance of coyotes versus red foxes.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The analysis supports a continent-wide mesopredator cascade from wolves through coyotes to red foxes.
“Our analysis supports the occurrence of a continent-wide mesopredator cascade from wolves through coyotes to red foxes.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Study design and conductreasoning
The ratio values reflect the relative abundance of coyotes versus red foxes in both Saskatchewan and Manitoba.
“We are therefore confident that our ratio values reflect the relative abundance of coyotes versus red foxes in both provinces.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: There was a consistent bounty on coyotes and red foxes during the study period and no regulatory changes that could have influenced their harvest rates.
- Premisecitation
At a smaller spatial scale than this study, Levi and Wilmers showed that when wolves suppress coyote populations, foxes are released from coyote top-down control.
“For example, at a smaller spatial scale than our analyses, Levi & Wilmers (2012) showed that as wolves suppress coyote populations, foxes are released from top-down control by coyotes.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Levi & Wilmers 2012 source
- Interpretationown data
Restoring wolf populations across North America could potentially affect co-occurring predators and prey.
“Our results have implications for understanding how the restoration of wolf populations across North America could potentially affect co-occurring predators and prey.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
In the absence of wolves, coyote fur returns outnumber red fox fur returns.
“In the absence of wolves, we show that coyote fur returns outnumber red fox fur returns (Fig. 7).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 7
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Study design and conductnone given
Coyote and red fox fur prices have generally been correlated in North America since the early 1900s.
“These trends are also independent of bounty price because coyote and red fox fur prices are generally correlated in North America dating back to the early 1900s”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Appendix S4
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationcitation
The negative relationship between coyote:fox ratio and distance from the southern boundary of wolf range is more consistent with a ramp effect from low wolf densities at the periphery than with other explanations.
“However, the strong negative linear relationship between the coyote : fox ratios and distance to the southern edge of wolf distribution is more suggestive of a 'ramp' effect due to very low densities of wolves on the periphery of their distribution (Caughley et al. 1988).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Caughley et al. 1988 source
- Interpretationreasoning
Studies of small areas may not indicate the effects of top-down mesopredator control.
“We conclude that large carnivores may need to occupy large continuous areas to facilitate among-carnivore cascades and that studies of small areas may not be indicative of the effects of top-down mesopredator control.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Across multiple jurisdictions and spatial scales, where wolves are present, red fox fur returns outnumber coyote fur returns.
“Across multiple jurisdictions and spatial scales, we show that in areas where wolves are present, red fox fur returns outnumber coyote fur returns (Fig. 7).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 7
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
After wolves were nearly eliminated from the lower 48 conterminous United States, coyotes dispersed as far east as Nova Scotia by the 1980s.
“The near-elimination of wolves from the lower 48 conterminous United States was also followed by coyote dispersal as far east as Nova Scotia, which coyotes reached by the 1980s (Parker 1995).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Parker 1995
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationown data
In Saskatchewan and Manitoba, the spatial distribution of coyote and red fox fur returns was likely influenced by wolf distribution.
“In Saskatchewan and Manitoba, the spatial distribution of coyote and red fox fur returns was likely also influenced by the distribution of wolves (Fig. 4).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 4
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Study design and conductcitation
Background population fluctuations and poor trapping weather apply equally to coyotes and red foxes because of their biological similarities.
“However, with respect to the first two factors, these apply equally to coyotes and red foxes because of their biological similarities (McDonald et al. 2008;Levi & Wilmers 2012).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Premisecitation
In Alaska, coyotes became common only in localized areas where wolves were reduced.
“Indeed, in Alaska, coyotes only became common in localized areas where wolves were reduced (Peterson 1996).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Peterson 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
Coyotes and red foxes have similar habitat requirements.
“This reflects the fact that coyotes and red foxes have similar habitat requirements (McDonald et al. 2008;Levi & Wilmers 2012).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Interpretationreasoning
There is insufficient evidence that changes in land use and habitat limit the northward expansion of coyotes.
“Thus, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that the northward expansion of coyotes is limited by changes in land use and habitat.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
In north-western North America, where wolves are present, coyotes and red foxes have co-occurred since the early 1900s.
“In north-western North America, where wolves are present, coyotes and red foxes have co-occurred since the early 1900s (Hersteinsson & Macdonald 1992;Peterson 1996).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Hersteinsson & Macdonald 1992 source
- cites Peterson 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Study design and conductown data
Residual plots gave no indication of south-north spatial correlation in either Saskatchewan or Manitoba.
“There was no indication of south-north spatial correlation based on the plots of the standardized residuals against fitted values or the plots of residuals versus their spatial co-ordinates in either Saskatchewan or Manitoba (Appendix S3, Supporting information).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Appendix S3
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
In the early 1900s, a wolf-free corridor through Canada allowed coyotes to disperse from the central United States as far north as Alaska.
“However, in the early 1900s, a wolf-free corridor through Canada allowed for coyotes to disperse from the central United States to as far north as Alaska (Peterson 1996).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Peterson 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationreasoning
Large carnivores may need to occupy large continuous areas to facilitate among-carnivore cascades.
“We conclude that large carnivores may need to occupy large continuous areas to facilitate among-carnivore cascades and that studies of small areas may not be indicative of the effects of top-down mesopredator control.”
- Also stated in: § Discussion · hedged
“large carnivores may need to occupy large continuous areas to facilitate among-carnivore cascades”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § Discussion · hedged
- Premisecitation
The southern edge of the main wolf distribution generally matches the boundary between forested and open areas in Saskatchewan and Manitoba.
“The southern edge of the main distribution of wolves generally coincides with the boundary of the forested and open areas in both provinces (See Appendix S1 in Supporting information).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Appendix S1
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
Before European settlement, native red foxes were distributed across most boreal and montane parts of North America.
“Prior to European settlement, native red foxes (including the subspecies Vulpes vulpes alascensis, V. v abeitoru, V. v cascadensis, V. v necator, V. v macroura, V. v rigalis, and V. v rubricosa) were distributed throughout most of the boreal and montane portions of North America (Hersteinsson & Macdonald 1992;Kamler & Ballard 2002;Statham et al. 2012).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked - Interpretationcitation
In Manitoba, physical barriers such as lakes produce a steeper ramp or step effect.
“where the presence of physical barriers (lakes) produces a steeper ramp, or 'step' effect (Caughley et al. 1988).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Caughley et al. 1988 source
- Interpretationown data
The large transition zone at the edge of wolf distribution, where coyote fur returns exceed red fox fur returns, suggests that top-down cascading effects on mesopredators may appear only where wolves occur continuously over a large area.
“However, the presence of a large transition zone on the edge of wolf distribution, where coyote fur returns outnumber red fox fur returns (Figs 2 and 3), suggest that the cascading effects of top-down control on mesopredators might only become manifest where wolves occur continuously over a large spatial area.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Figs 2 and 3
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
Levi and Wilmers demonstrated that bottom-up factors, land-use changes, and habitat differences are insufficient to explain spatial relationships among wolves, coyotes, and foxes.
“Our results therefore accord with those of Levi & Wilmers (2012) who demonstrated that bottom-up factors, land-use changes and habitat differences are insufficient to explain the pattern of spatial relationships between wolves, coyotes and foxes.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Levi & Wilmers 2012 source
- Interpretationreasoning
The spatial area that wolves occupy is an important factor when assessing their ability to assert top-down control.
“The spatial area that wolves occupy is therefore an important factor to consider when assessing their ability to assert top-down control.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
In Yellowstone National Park, coyote densities declined in localized areas by up to 39% after wolf reintroduction.
“in Yellowstone National Park (8983 km 2 ), coyote densities declined in localized areas by up to 39% after wolf reintroduction (Berger & Gese 2007)”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Berger & Gese 2007 source
- Interpretationown data
Coyotes are capable of dispersing long distances into areas occupied by wolves.
“here, we show that coyotes could feasibly disperse large distances into wolf range”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The spatial scale of a study can contribute significantly to variation in the results obtained.
“the spatial scale of a study can contribute significantly to variation in the results obtained.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
If management lowers dingo numbers, suppression from above may become weaker.
“This suggests that when control programs reduce dingo abundance, top-down suppression may be weakened (see also Wallach et al. 2010).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Wallach et al. 2010 source
- Premisecitation
In Nova Scotia, white-tailed deer declined coincident with the arrival of coyotes.
“in the province of Nova Scotia, there has been a decline in white-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus, coincident with the arrival of coyotes (unpublished data, Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources 2013).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites unpublished data, Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Study design and conductown data
There is no major indication of south-north spatial correlation in the residuals of the linear regression model for Saskatchewan and Manitoba.
“there is no major indication of south-north spatial correlation because there is no spatial pattern or clustering in that direction”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation
In the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, there was no drastic overall suppression of coyote populations after wolf reintroduction.
“but there was no drastic overall suppression of coyote populations in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (72 519 km 2 ) (Berger & Gese 2007).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Berger & Gese 2007 source
- Interpretationcitation
When an apex predator occurs patchily, as wolves do in parts of the contiguous United States and dingoes do in Australia, competition's spatial effects may be lessened.
“where there is sporadic distribution of a top predator, like the wolf in the parts of the conterminous United States (Fig. 1) and the dingo in Australia (Letnic, Ritchie & Dickman 2012), we suggest that the spatial effects of competition might be reduced.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Letnic, Ritchie & Dickman 2012 source
- Study design and conductown data
Land cover does not change substantially 200 km north of the Saskatchewan wolf range boundary or 100 km north of the Manitoba boundary.
“there is no major change in land cover 200 km north of the wolf (Canis lupus) distribution edge in Saskatchewan or 100 km north of the wolf distribution edge in Manitoba.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The interactions between wolves and coyotes in Riding Mountain and Yellowstone National Parks are unsurprising because both are relatively small habitat islands.
“The interactions between wolves and coyotes within Riding Mountain and Yellowstone National Park are therefore unsurprising given they are both relatively small habitat islands (Fig. 2).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation
The high dispersal capacity of coyotes potentially allows them to penetrate tens of kilometres into wolf ranges.
“The high dispersal capacity of coyotes potentially allows them to penetrate tens of kilometres into wolf ranges (Peterson 1996).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Peterson 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationcitation
If wolf populations expand and suppress coyotes, a release of foxes could result in wolf- and fox-dominant prey being consumed.
“if wolf populations expand and suppress coyotes, it is possible that a release of foxes will result in wolf-and fox-dominant prey being consumed (Levi & Wilmers 2012).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Levi & Wilmers 2012 source
- Premisecitation
Coyote depredation after wolf extirpation has been linked to declines of jackrabbit, cottontail, and pygmy rabbit populations, among others.
“coyote depredation after wolf extirpation has been linked to the decline of jackrabbit Lepus spp., cottontail Sylvilagus spp.and pygmy rabbit Brachylagus idahoensis populations, among others (Ripple et al. 2013).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Ripple et al. 2013 source
- Interpretationreasoning
To suppress mesopredators, it may be necessary to establish apex predator populations across extensive connected areas at densities that are ecologically effective.
“in order to facilitate the suppression of mesopredators, it may require establishment of top predator communities over large continuous areas where they remain at ecologically effective densities.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Top-down effects weaken in systems where human influence spans the extent of wolf range.
“the effects of topdown control are also weakened in systems where there is a gradient of human influence that penetrates the size of wolf ranges.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- May combine two claims. 23
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 14
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationIn Saskatchewan and Manitoba, wolves, coyotes, and red foxes overlap in northern forested areas, while red foxes and coyotes co-occur with very few wolves in the south.
“In those two provinces, there is spatial overlap in the distribution of wolves, coyotes and red foxes in the northern forested areas.To the south, red foxes and coyotes co-occur, but very few wolves exist in the crop and rangeland areas (Musiani & Paquet 2004).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Musiani & Paquet 2004 source
The Abstract and “Foundations for historical and current killing of wolves” state that wolves remain abundant in northern Canada but have been reduced or extirpated across much of southern Canada. Those passages do not establish the claimed north–south pattern specifically in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, or the co-occurrence of wolves, coyotes, and red foxes. Page numbers are unavailable for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationWolves are known to kill coyotes and, to a lesser extent, foxes.
“For example, wolves are known to kill both coyotes (Stenlund 1955;Carbyn 1982;Merkle, Stahler & Smith 2009) and less so foxes (Stenlund 1955;Mech 1966;Peterson 1977).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checkedClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationInterference competition often operates through direct and indirect effects of interspecific killing without consumption or intraguild predation with consumption.
“A key process that results in the direct displacement of a competitively subordinate individual is interference competition (Palomares & Caro 1999;Linnell & Strand 2000), often manifested via the direct and indirect effects of interspecific competitive killing (no consumption of the kill) or intraguild predation (consumption of the kill) (Lourenc ßo et al. 2013).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked- cites Palomares & Caro 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Linnell & Strand 2000 source
- cites Lourenço et al. 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationCoyotes were abundant in the wolf-occupied area of Riding Mountain National Park, which is relatively small and surrounded by agricultural lands where coyotes were common and wolves generally absent.
“Coyotes were also abundant within the wolfoccupied area of the nearby Riding Mountain National Park, but the park is also relatively small in size (2976 km 2 ) and surrounded by agricultural lands where coyotes were common and wolves generally absent (Carbyn 1982;Paquet 1991).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked- cites Carbyn 1982 source
The Methods report coyotes living within wolf-pack territory, and the Study Area describes the park as surrounded by agricultural land. But the paper reports fluctuating coyote numbers rather than consistently abundant coyotes in wolf-occupied areas; it gives the park’s area as 2944 km², not 2976 km², and does not establish that coyotes were common or wolves generally absent in the surrounding farmland. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured - cites Paquet 1991 source
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationCoyotes were historically mostly restricted to central North America but colonized most of the continent in less than two centuries.
“coyotes were historically mostly restricted to central North America, but in less than two centuries they colonized most of the continent (Gompper 2002;Fener et al. 2005).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 2 sources checkedProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationIn Australia, dingoes are regarded as apex predators and possible trophic regulators capable of reducing activity or numbers of introduced red foxes and perhaps feral cats.
“in Australia, the dingo Canis dingo is considered a top predator and potential trophic regulator that can suppress the activity or abundance of the invasive red fox and possibly also the feral cat Felis catus (Johnson, Isaac & Fisher 2007;Glen et al. 2007;Letnic & Koch 2010;Letnic et al. 2011).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 3 sources checkedMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataYearly fur return plots show that coyote fur returns always exceed red fox fur returns where wolves are absent, while the reverse holds north of the transition zones at 200 km in Saskatchewan and 100 km in Manitoba.
“These results are supported by the plots of fur return data on a yearly basis which indicate that coyote fur returns always outnumber red fox fur returns in the absence of wolves, whereas the opposite is true north of the transitional zone distances of 200 km in Saskatchewan and 100 km in Manitoba (Fig. 4).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 4
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe scale of effect was large: coyote fur returns exceeded red fox fur returns in the south by up to 7:1, while red fox fur returns exceeded coyote fur returns in the north by as much as 517:1.
“Indeed, the scale of effect is dramatic with coyote fur returns outnumbering red fox fur returns in the south by up to 7:1 and red fox fur returns outnumbering coyote fur returns at an extreme of 517:1 in the north (Appendix S5, Supporting information).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Appendix S5
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe ramp or transition zone extends about 200 km in Saskatchewan and about 100 km in Manitoba.
“the ramp extends for 200 km in Saskatchewan but only 100 km in Manitoba”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimThe quote only partly states this claim.
FindingcitationWithin wolf range in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, the ratio of coyote to red fox fur returns declines linearly as distance from the southern boundary of wolf range increases.
“However, the strong negative linear relationship between the coyote : fox ratios and distance to the southern edge of wolf distribution is more suggestive of a 'ramp' effect due to very low densities of wolves on the periphery of their distribution (Caughley et al. 1988).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
PremisecitationAmong carnivores, interference competition can be symmetrical or asymmetrical, and dominance is usually size-based.
“Among carnivores, interference competition may be symmetrical (both species kill each other) or asymmetrical (one species kills the other), but dominance is typically based on size (Peterson 1996;Palomares & Caro 1999).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Peterson 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Palomares & Caro 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationThe mesopredator release hypothesis predicts that losing large predators will release smaller predator populations.
“It has also led to widespread predictions that the loss of large predators will release populations of smaller predators, as depicted by the mesopredator release hypothesis (Crooks & Soul e 1999;Ritchie & Johnson 2009).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checkedMay combine two claims.
PremisecitationAt regional scales, inverse density relationships between wolves and coyotes and between coyotes and foxes are supported by accounts of spatial and temporal separation.
“At a broader (regional) scale, inverse relationships between the densities of both wolves and coyotes (Berger & Gese 2007), and coyotes and foxes (Fedriani et al. 2000;Levi & Wilmers 2012) are supported by numerous accounts of spatial and temporal separation.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedMay combine two claims.
PremisereasoningDuring the 20th and 21st centuries, wolves remained present in far northern North America but were largely absent to the south.
“Thus, during the 20th and 21st century, wolves have remained present in the far north of North America, but largely absent to the south (Fig. 1).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 1
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
PremisereasoningSince the early 1900s, coyotes have dispersed into areas occupied by wolves and red foxes in northern and north-western North America, and coyotes have been present for about 30 years in the northeast where wolves are absent but red foxes occur.
“Thus, since the early 1900s, coyotes have been dispersing into areas occupied by wolves and red foxes in the north and north-western portions of North America.There has also been a 30-year presence of coyotes in the northeast where wolves are absent, but where red foxes are present (Fig 1).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig 1
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
Study design and conductown dataCoyote and red fox fur prices were correlated year-to-year in Saskatchewan (r = +0.85, P < 0.001) and Manitoba (r = +0.82, P < 0.05).
“However, fur prices of coyotes and red foxes are correlated on a yearto-year basis in both Saskatchewan (r = +0Á85, P < 0Á001) and Manitoba (r = +0Á82, P < 0Á05) (Appendix S4, Supporting information).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Appendix S4
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationA ramp effect can arise when a density attribute is low at the periphery and increases gradually toward the core of a species' distribution.
“A ramp effect could occur if an attribute such as density is low at the periphery but rises progressively towards the core of distribution (Caughley et al. 1988).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Caughley et al. 1988 source
May combine two claims.
Study design and conductcitationThe analyses exclude ranch-farmed fox records and do not exclude records based on tagged or sealed status.
“Nor does it include fur records from ranch (farmed) foxes, or exclude records based on whether or not they were tagged or 'sealed' (Novak et al. 1987) (but see Appendix S2, Supporting information for further details).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Novak et al. 1987
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Appendix S2
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
PremisereasoningRed fox distribution has largely overlapped wolf distribution in far northern North America during the 20th and 21st centuries, but red foxes also occur south of wolf range.
“Thus, red fox distribution has largely overlapped that of wolves in the far north of North America throughout the 20th and 21st century, but red foxes also occur in areas where wolves are absent to the south (Fig. 1).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fig. 1
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationIf density steps at a range boundary, the factor controlling the boundary's position is likely a substrate or physical barrier.
“should density step at the range boundary, the factor controlling the position of the boundary is likely to be a substrate or physical barrier (Caughley et al. 1988).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Caughley et al. 1988 source
May combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataIf wolf density declines progressively toward the edge of wolf distribution, the strength of top-down control may also decline progressively toward that edge, as indicated by the negative relationship between coyote:fox ratios and distance from the southern boundary of wolf range in this study.
“Thus, if wolf density progressively declines towards the edge of their distribution, the strength of top-down control may also progressively decline towards the edge of wolf distribution, as indicated by the strong negative linear relationship between the coyote : fox ratios and distance to the southern edge of wolf distribution in our study (Fig. 3).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Wolf density progressively declines toward the southern edge of wolf distribution.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationCoexistence between wolves and coyotes may be facilitated where wolves leave carcasses of large prey for coyotes to scavenge.
“coexistence between wolves and coyotes may be facilitated where wolves leave carcases of large prey for coyotes to scavenge (Paquet 1992).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Paquet 1992 source
May combine two claims.
Study design and conductcitationThe analyses exclude pre-20th-century data when all fox species were combined and wolves and coyotes were frequently misidentified.
“Additionally, our analyses does not include data from pre-20th century when all species of foxes were combined into one category, and when wolves and coyotes were also frequently misidentified (Novak et al. 1987) (Appendix S2, Supporting information).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Novak et al. 1987
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Appendix S2
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
InterpretationcitationThe potential for wolves to suppress coyotes may be limited because wolves occupy only 15% of their former range in the United States and much of their current range is surrounded by agricultural lands where coyotes are common.
“given that wolves only occupy 15% of their former range in the United States (Bruskotter et al. 2013) and that much of their current range is surrounded by agricultural lands where coyotes are common, the potential for wolves to suppress coyotes may be limited.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Bruskotter et al. 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Interpretationnone givenThe amount of coyote dispersal into wolf range could reflect local resource conditions, especially if coyotes persist at high densities in human-altered landscapes on the edge of wolf distribution.
“However, the amount of coyote dispersal into wolf range could reflect local resource conditions, especially if coyotes persist at high densities in human-altered landscapes on the edge of wolf distribution.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductown dataCoyote pelt prices track red fox pelt prices consistently.
“Overall, coyote fur prices are consistently correlated with red fox fur prices.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationThe distribution of wolves and coyotes across North America could be related to the distribution, abundance, and diversity of prey species together with wolf prey selection.
“Thus, the distribution of wolves and coyotes throughout North America could be related to the distribution, abundance and diversity of prey species, in conjunction with wolf prey selection (Paquet 1992).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Paquet 1992 source
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationFollowing declines of wolves and lynx in northern Europe, red fox growth accelerated in productive areas but release effects were minimal in unproductive areas.
“after wolves and lynx Lynx lynx populations declined in northern Europe, there was accelerated growth rates of red foxes in productive regions, whilst the release effect was negligible in unproductive regions (Elmhagen & Rushton 2007).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Elmhagen & Rushton 2007 source
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationIn insular settings, lack of dispersal from adjacent areas may allow complete exclusion of competitively subordinate individuals; coyotes were eliminated from Isle Royale a decade after wolves arrived.
“lack of dispersal from adjacent areas may facilitate complete exclusion of competitively subordinate individuals, such as when coyotes were eliminated from Isle Royale a decade after wolves arrived (Peterson 1996).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Peterson 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
InterpretationcitationRed foxes are usually scarce where dingoes are numerous, and top-down suppression of mesopredators weakens where dingoes are scarce.
“when dingoes are abundant, red foxes are consistently rare, whereas the strength of topdown mesopredator control is weakened when dingoes are uncommon.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationCoyote densities may vary spatially and temporally with wolf abundance.
“densities of coyotes may vary spatially and temporally in accordance with wolf abundance (Berger & Gese 2007)”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Berger & Gese 2007 source
May combine two claims.
InterpretationcitationBioclimatic factors and human-caused habitat alteration may affect how strongly dingoes exert top-down control.
“the strength of top-down control by dingoes may be influenced by bioclimatic effects and from anthropogenic habitat change.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationCorrelations between dingo and red fox densities usually show a triangular pattern, with dingo numbers capping red fox numbers.
“assessments of correlations between dingo and red fox densities typically reveal a triangular relationship whereby dingo abundance sets an upper limit on the abundance of red foxes (Johnson & VanDerWal 2009).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Johnson & VanDerWal 2009 source
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).
InterpretationreasoningIn places where human influence cuts across large dingo ranges, outcomes like those reported here might occur.
“where there are gradients of human influence that penetrates the size of dingo ranges over large spatial areas, similar results to those obtained in our study could be present.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataWolves may need to occupy large areas to facilitate an among-carnivore cascade, because top-down suppression of mesopredators weakens near the boundary of wolf range for up to 200 km.
“our results suggest that wolves may need to occupy large areas to facilitate an among-carnivore cascade given that the effects of top-down mesopredator control are weakened on the edge of wolf distribution for up to 200 km.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
Little attention has been given to the broader effects of competitive interactions across large geographic areas such as those now occupied by coyotes.
“However, little attention has been given to the broader effects of competitive interactions across large geographic areas such as those now occupied by the coyote.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
A coyote:fox fur return ratio greater than 1 indicates an area with relatively more coyotes than red foxes.
“Thus, we assumed a ratio >1 reflects an area with relatively more coyotes than red foxes (Thurber et al. 1992;Peterson 1996).”
The paper relies on this without support.
There was a consistent bounty on coyotes and red foxes during the study period and no regulatory changes that could have influenced their harvest rates.
“There has also been a consistent bounty on coyotes and red foxes for the time period of our study and no regulatory changes that could have influenced their harvest rates.”
The paper relies on this without support.
No previous study has quantified the size of the border region or transition zone that influences the effectiveness of top-down mesopredator control.
“No study has previously quantified the size of the 'border region' or 'transition zone' that influences the effectiveness of top-down mesopredator control.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The border region's magnitude had not previously been appreciated.
“Nor has it previously been appreciated that the border region may be of this magnitude.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Fur returns are a reliable index of coyote and red fox abundance.
“The ratio of coyotes Canis latrans to red foxes Vulpes vulpes based on the total number of fur returns collected from 136 wildlife management zones by the Government of Saskatchewan from 1982 to 2011 and from 40 wildlife management zones by the Government of Manitoba from 1996 to 2010.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Wolf density progressively declines toward the southern edge of wolf distribution.
“if wolf density progressively declines towards the edge of their distribution”
The paper relies on this without support.
The coyote:fox ratio reflects the strength of top-down mesopredator control.
“the strong negative linear relationship between the coyote : fox ratios and distance to the southern edge of wolf distribution is more suggestive of a 'ramp' effect due to very low densities of wolves on the periphery of their distribution”
Cites
Trophic Downgrading of Planet Earth
Estes, J. A., Terborgh, J., Brashares, J. S., Power, M. E., Berger, J., Bond, W. J., Carpenter, S. R., Essington, T. E., Holt, R. D., Jackson, J. B. C., et al. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1205106 · Cited by 4,087 · see citing works
Self-citationStatus and Ecological Effects of the World’s Largest Carnivores
Ripple, W. J., Estes, J. A., Beschta, R. L., Wilmers, C. C., Ritchie, E. G., Hebblewhite, M., Berger, J., Elmhagen, B., Letnic, M., Nelson, M. P., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1241484 · Cited by 3,667 · see citing works
Self-citationMesopredator release and avifaunal extinctions in a fragmented system
Crooks, K. R., & Soulé, M. E. (1999) · Nature · doi:10.1038/23028 · Cited by 1,721 · see citing works
Predator interactions, mesopredator release and biodiversity conservation.
Ritchie, E. G., & Johnson, C. N. (2009) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01347.x · Cited by 1,375 · see citing works
Interspecific Killing among Mammalian Carnivores
Palomares, F., & Caro, T. M. (1999) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/303189 · Cited by 1,149 · see citing works
Competition and intraguild predation among three sympatric carnivores
Fedriani, J. M., Fuller, T. K., Sauvajot, R. M., & York, E. C. (2000) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/s004420000448 · Cited by 463 · see citing works
Interference interactions, co‐existence and conservation of mammalian carnivores
Linnell, J. D. C., & Strand, O. (2000) · Diversity and Distributions · doi:10.1046/j.1472-4642.2000.00069.x · Cited by 450 · see citing works
Does interference competition with wolves limit the distribution and abundance of coyotes?
BERGER, K. M., & GESE, E. M. (2007) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2007.01287.x · Cited by 398 · cited 4× · see citing works
“At a broader (regional) scale, inverse relationships between the densities of both wolves and coyotes (Berger & Gese 2007), and coyotes and foxes (Fedriani et al. 2000; Levi & Wilmers 2012) are supported by numerous accounts of spatial and temporal separation.”
BackgroundInfluentialHersteinsson, P., & MacDonald, D. W. (1992) · Oikos · doi:10.2307/3545168 · Cited by 370 · see citing works
Ecosystem restoration with teeth: what role for predators?
Ritchie, E. G., Elmhagen, B., Glen, A. S., Letnic, M., Ludwig, G. X., & McDonald, R. A. (2012) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2012.01.001 · Cited by 366 · see citing works
Wolf Ecology and Prey Relationships on Isle Royale
Peterson, R. O. (2017) · Purdue e-Pubs (Purdue University System) · Cited by 352 · see citing works
Top predators as biodiversity regulators: the dingo <i>Canis lupus dingo</i> as a case study
Letnic, M., Ritchie, E. G., & Dickman, C. R. (2012) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.2011.00203.x · Cited by 331 · see citing works
Mech, L. D. (2002) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 327 · see citing works
Johnson, C. N., Isaac, J. L., & Fisher, D. O. (2007) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2006.3711 · Cited by 325 · see citing works
Trophic control of mesopredators in terrestrial ecosystems: top‐down or bottom‐up?
Elmhagen, B., & Rushton, S. P. (2007) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.01010.x · Cited by 304 · see citing works
Wolves–coyotes–foxes: a cascade among carnivores
Levi, T., & Wilmers, C. C. (2012) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/11-0165.1 · Cited by 293 · see citing works
Caughley, G., Grice, D., Barker, R., & Brown, B. (1988) · The Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.2307/5092 · Cited by 240 · see citing works
GOMPPER, M. E. (2002) · BioScience · doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0185:tcitse]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 239 · see citing works
Temporal Habitat Partitioning and Spatial Use of Coyotes and Red Foxes in East-Central Illinois
Gosselink, T. E., Deelen, T. R. V., Warner, R. E., & Joselyn, M. G. (2003) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3803065 · Cited by 237 · see citing works
Evaluating the role of the dingo as a trophic regulator in Australian ecosystems
GLEN, A. S., DICKMAN, C. R., SOULÉ, M. E., & MACKEY, B. G. (2007) · Austral Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1442-9993.2007.01721.x · Cited by 184 · see citing works
Widespread mesopredator effects after wolf extirpation
Ripple, W. J., Wirsing, A. J., Wilmers, C. C., & Letnic, M. (2013) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2012.12.033 · Cited by 179 · see citing works
Self-citationSpatial Relations between Sympatric Coyotes and Red Foxes in North Dakota
Sargeant, A. B., Allen, S. H., & Hastings, J. O. (1987) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3801004 · Cited by 176 · see citing works
Predator control promotes invasive dominated ecological states
Wallach, A. D., Johnson, C. N., Ritchie, E. G., & O’Neill, A. J. (2010) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01492.x · Cited by 175 · see citing works
Prey Use Strategies of Sympatric Wolves and Coyotes in Riding Mountain National Park, Manitoba
Paquet, P. C. (1992) · Journal of Mammalogy · doi:10.2307/1382067 · Cited by 163 · see citing works
Interspecific Killing Among Mammalian Carnivores
Palomares, & Caro (1999) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.2307/2463664 · Cited by 162 · see citing works
Behavioral responses of coyotes to wolf recolonization in northwestern Montana
Arjo, W. M., & Pletscher, D. H. (1999) · Canadian Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1139/z99-177 · Cited by 140 · see citing works
The Practices of Wolf Persecution, Protection, and Restoration in Canada and the United States
MUSIANI, M., & PAQUET, P. C. (2004) · BioScience · doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[0050:tpowpp]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 131 · cited 1× · see citing works
“To the south, red foxes and coyotes co-occur, but very few wolves exist in the crop and rangeland areas (Musiani & Paquet 2004).”
BackgroundEvidence that dingoes limit abundance of a mesopredator in eastern Australian forests
Johnson, C. N., & VanDerWal, J. (2009) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01650.x · Cited by 126 · see citing works
Survival and Cause‐Specific Mortality of Red Foxes in Agricultural and Urban Areas of Illinois
GOSSELINK, T. E., VAN DEELEN, T. R., WARNER, R. E., & MANKIN, P. C. (2007) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2193/2006-020 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
Interference competition between gray wolves and coyotes in Yellowstone National Park
Merkle, J. A., Stahler, D. R., & Smith, D. W. (2009) · Canadian Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1139/z08-136 · Cited by 116 · cited 1× · see citing works
“For example, wolves are known to kill both coyotes (Stenlund 1955; Carbyn 1982; Merkle, Stahler & Smith 2009) and less so foxes (Stenlund 1955; Mech 1966; Peterson 1977).”
BackgroundDoes a top predator suppress the abundance of an invasive mesopredator at a continental scale?
Letnic, M., Greenville, A. C., Denny, E., Dickman, C. R., Tischler, M., Gordon, C., & Koch, F. (2010) · Global Ecology and Biogeography · doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00600.x · Cited by 110 · see citing works
LETNIC, M., & KOCH, F. (2010) · Austral Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1442-9993.2009.02022.x · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Observed Interactions between Coyotes and Red Foxes
Sargeant, A. B., & Allen, S. H. (1989) · Journal of Mammalogy · doi:10.2307/1381437 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Coyote coexistence with wolves on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska
Thurber, J. M., Peterson, R. O., Woolington, J. D., & Vucetich, J. A. (1992) · Canadian Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1139/z92-335 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Lourenço, R., Penteriani, V., Rabaça, J. E., & Korpimäki, E. (2014) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12054 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
A Field Study of the Timber Wolf (Canis lupus) on the Superior National Forest, Minnesota
de Vos, A., & Stenlund, M. H. (1957) · Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3797704 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Farias, V., Fuller, T. K., Wayne, R. K., & Sauvajot, R. M. (2005) · Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1017/s0952836905006850 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Carbyn, L. N. (1982) · The Canadian field-naturalist · doi:10.5962/p.354810 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Statham, M. J., Sacks, B. N., Aubry, K. B., Perrine, J. D., & Wisely, S. M. (2012) · Journal of Mammalogy · doi:10.1644/11-mamm-a-033.1 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Sacks, B. N., Statham, M. J., Perrine, J. D., Wisely, S. M., & Aubry, K. B. (2010) · Conservation Genetics · doi:10.1007/s10592-010-0053-4 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Trophic cascades linking wolves (Canis lupus), coyotes (Canis latrans), and small mammals
Miller, B. J., Harlow, H. J., Harlow, T. S., Biggins, D. E., & Ripple, W. J. (2012) · Canadian Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1139/z11-115 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Self-citationRemoving Protections for Wolves and the Future of the U.S. Endangered Species Act (1973)
Bruskotter, J. T., Vucetich, J. A., Enzler, S., Treves, A., & Nelson, M. P. (2014) · Conservation Letters · doi:10.1111/conl.12081 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Winter Spatial Relationships of Wolves and Coyotes in Riding Mountain National Park, Manitoba
Paquet, P. C. (1991) · Journal of Mammalogy · doi:10.2307/1382113 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Chronology of Range Expansion of the Coyote, <em>Canis latrans</em>, in New York
Fener, H. M., Ginsberg, J. R., Sanderson, E. W., & Gompper, M. E. (2005) · The Canadian Field-Naturalist · doi:10.22621/cfn.v119i1.74 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
The spatial consequences of interspecific competition
Connor, E. F., & Bowers, M. A. (1987) · Annales Zoologici Fennici · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Modelling habitat overlap among sympatric mesocarnivores in southern Illinois, USA
McDonald, P. T., Nielsen, C. K., Oyana, T. J., & Sun, W. (2008) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.03.021 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Violation of Independence – Part II
Zuur, A. F., Ieno, E. N., Walker, N. J., et al. (2009) · Statistics for biology and health · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-87458-6_7 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Data from: A continental scale trophic cascade from wolves through coyotes to foxes
Newsome, T. M., & Ripple, W. J. (2014) · Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · doi:10.5061/dryad.s0d20 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Self-citationBehavioral responses of coyotes to wolf recolonization in northwestern Montana
Arjo, W. M., & Pletscher, D. H. (1999) · Canadian Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1139/cjz-77-12-1919
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 50 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Kamler J.F., 2002, A review of native and nonnative red foxes in North America, Wildlife Society Bulletin, 30, 370
- Novak M., 1987, Furbearer Harvests in North America, 1600–1984
- Parker G., 1995, Eastern Coyote: The Story of Its Success
- Peterson R.O., 1996, Wolves in a Changing World, 315
- Terborgh J., 2010, Trophic Cascades: Predator, Prey, and the Changing Dynamics of Nature
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fear of large carnivores causes a trophic cascade
Suraci, J. P., Clinchy, M., Dill, L. M., Roberts, D. J., & Zanette, L. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms10698 · Cited by 494 · see citing works
Enemies with benefits: integrating positive and negative interactions among terrestrial carnivores
Prugh, L. R., & Sivy, K. J. (2020) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/ele.13489 · Cited by 269 · see citing works
Top predators constrain mesopredator distributions
Newsome, T. M., Greenville, A. C., Ćirović, D., Dickman, C. R., Johnson, C. N., Krofel, M., Letnic, M., Ripple, W. J., Ritchie, E. G., Stoyanov, S. V., et al. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms15469 · Cited by 173 · see citing works
Self-citationRoos, S., Smart, J., GIBBONS, D. W., & Wilson, J. D. (2018) · Biological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · doi:10.1111/brv.12426 · Cited by 169 · see citing works
“…plantations provide suitable sites for dens, and where there is high primary production and a lack of apex mammalian predators such as Wolf Canis lupus and Lynx lynx lynx (Kurki et al., 1998; Elmhagen & Rushton, 2007; Elmhagen et al., 2010; Pasanen-Mortensen et al., 2013; Newsome & Ripple, 2015).”
BackgroundMarlow, N., Thomas, N., Williams, A. A. E., Macmahon, B., Lawson, J., Hitchen, Y., Angus, J., & Berry, O. (2015) · Australian Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1071/zo14024 · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Elmhagen, B., Berteaux, D., Burgess, R. M., Ehrich, D., Gallant, D., Henttonen, H. A., Ims, R. A., Killengreen, S. T., Niemimaa, J., Norén, K., et al. (2017) · Polar Research · doi:10.1080/17518369.2017.1319109 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Soe, E., Davison, J., Süld, K., Valdmann, H., Laurimaa, L., & Saarma, U. (2017) · Mammal Review · doi:10.1111/mam.12092 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
“They exert strong effects on ecosystems worldwide, affecting prey populations and each other via predation, competition, and mutualism (Elmhagen et al. 2010, Estes et al. 2011, Newsome & Ripple 2015).”
In the absence of a “landscape of fear”: How lions, hyenas, and cheetahs coexist
Swanson, A., Arnold, T. W., Kosmala, M., Forester, J. D., & Packer, C. (2016) · Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1002/ece3.2569 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
“Top predators often suppress or exclude subordinate predators from the larger land - scape (Kamler, Ballard, Gilliland, Lemons, & Mote, 2003; Newsome & Ripple, 2014; Swanson et al., 2014), and the loss of top predators can result in subordinate predator “release” or rapid population expansion…”
BackgroundLarge carnivore impacts are context-dependent
Haswell, P. M., Kusak, J., & Hayward, M. W. (2016) · Food Webs · doi:10.1016/j.fooweb.2016.02.005 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
“North American wolves impact coyote distribution, abundance (33% lower in wolf abundant sites) and dispersal survival rates (Berger and Gese 2007; Newsome and Ripple 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialFatal Attraction? Intraguild Facilitation and Suppression among Predators
Sivy, K. J., Pozzanghera, C. B., Grace, J. B., & Prugh, L. R. (2017) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/693996 · Cited by 103 · see citing works
The Effects of Food Waste on Wildlife and Humans
Newsome, T., & van Eeden, L. V. (2017) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su9071269 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
“The coyote is one species that has thrived in human-modified environments, expanding their distribution and abundance across North America in the absence of the grey wolf [29].”
Self-citationCiucci, P., Mancinelli, S., Boitani, L., Gallo, O., & Grottoli, L. (2019) · Global Ecology and Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00841 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
“…cascades are increasingly recognized as having a major role in regulating ecosystem structure and functioning through direct (density-mediated) and indirect (behaviourally-mediated) impacts on both herbivores and mesopredators (Estes et al., 2011; Ripple et al., 2014; Newsome and Ripple, 2015a).”
BackgroundInfluentialApex predators and the facilitation of resource partitioning among mesopredators
Sivy, K. J., Pozzanghera, C. B., Colson, K. E., Mumma, M. A., & Prugh, L. R. (2017) · Oikos · doi:10.1111/oik.04647 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
“Where wolves are abundant, red foxes Vulpes vulpes may indirectly benefit from the suppression of coyotes (Levi and Wilmers 2012, Newsome and Ripple 2015).”
BackgroundIdentifying mesopredator release in multi‐predator systems: a review of evidence from North America
Jachowski, D. S., Butler, A. R., Eng, R. Y. Y., Gigliotti, L. C., Harris, S. N., & Williams, A. (2020) · Mammal Review · doi:10.1111/mam.12207 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Tsunoda, H., Newman, C., Peeva, S. P., Raichev, E. G., Buesching, C. D., & Kaneko, Y. (2020) · Zoology · doi:10.1016/j.zool.2020.125801 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Fear, foraging and olfaction: how mesopredators avoid costly interactions with apex predators
Haswell, P. M., Jones, K. A., Kusak, J., & Hayward, M. W. (2018) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/s00442-018-4133-3 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Human disturbance compresses the spatiotemporal niche
Gilbert, N. A., Stenglein, J. L., Pauli, J. N., & Zuckerberg, B. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2206339119 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Shrub encroachment is linked to extirpation of an apex predator
Gordon, C. E., Eldridge, D. J., Ripple, W. J., Crowther, M. S., Moore, B. D., & Letnic, M. (2016) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2656.12607 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Self-citationMolsher, R., Newsome, A. E., Newsome, T. M., et al. (2017) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0168460 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
“Top-down processes can strongly influence the abundance, spatial distribution and behaviour of terrestrial predators via both interference competition and intraguild predation [1].”
BackgroundSelf-citationRoles for the Canidae in food webs reviewed: Where do they fit?
Fleming, P. J. S., Nolan, H., Jackson, S., Ballard, G., Bengsen, A. J., Brown, W. Y., Meek, P. D., Mifsud, G., Pal, S., & Sparkes, J. (2017) · Food Webs · doi:10.1016/j.fooweb.2017.03.001 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
“Levi and Wilmers (2012) and Newsome and Ripple (2015) suggest that Coyotes could limit other introduced carnivores in North America, such as the Red Fox by interference competition and/or intraguild predation.”
BackgroundInfluentialFear or food – abundance of red fox in relation to occurrence of lynx and wolf
Wikenros, C., Aronsson, M., Liberg, O., Jarnemo, A., Hansson, J., Wallgren, M., Sand, H., & Bergström, R. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-08927-6 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Reciprocity in restoration ecology: When might large carnivore reintroduction restore ecosystems?
Alston, J. M., Maitland, B. M., Brito, B. T., Esmaeili, S., Ford, A. T., Hays, B. R., Jesmer, B. R., Molina, F. J., & Goheen, J. R. (2019) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2019.03.021 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Lyly, M. S., Villers, A., Koivisto, E., Helle, P., Ollila, T., & Korpimäki, E. (2015) · Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1002/ece3.1370 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
“Moreover, there is a clear interaction extending to the red fox (Vulpes vulpes, L.): when wolves are present, foxes are more numerous than coyotes, whereas when wolves are absent, coyotes dominate in numbers (Newsome and Ripple 2014).”
BackgroundAnderson, A. K., Waller, J. S., & Thornton, D. H. (2023) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-27670-9 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Haswell, P. M., Kusak, J., Jones, K. A., & Hayward, M. W. (2020) · Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology · doi:10.1007/s00265-020-02831-2 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Geary, W. L., Ritchie, E. G., Lawton, J. A., Healey, T. R., & Nimmo, D. G. (2018) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2664.13125 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
“Evidence that apex predators can suppress mesopredators and trigger trophic cascades comes largely from experiments comparing areas where apex predators are abundant with areas in which they have been controlled or exterminated (Letnic & Koch 2010; Newsome & Ripple 2014).”
BackgroundThinley, P., Rajaratnam, R., Lassoie, J. P., Morreale, S. J., Curtis, P. D., Vernes, K., Leki, L., Phuntsho, S., Dorji, T., & Dorji, P. (2018) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2018.01.015 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
“…focused on the impacts of predator loss on ecosystem structure and functions such as trophic cascades (Estes et al., 2011) and mesopredator release (Ripple et al., 2013) which are well documented in natural areas (Pace et al., 1999; Schmitz et al., 2000; Zdilla, 2011; Newsome and Ripple, 2015).”
BackgroundAdvances in population ecology and species interactions in mammals
Kelt, D. A., Heske, E., Lambin, X., Oli, M. K., Orrock, J. L., Özgül, A., Pauli, J. N., Prugh, L. R., Sollmann, R., & Sommer, S. (2019) · Journal of Mammalogy · doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyz017 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Franchini, M., Corazzin, M., Bovolenta, S., & Filacorda, S. (2021) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani11061735 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
“Indeed, the latter perceived the return of such predators as a positive point to re-establish and maintain ecological balance and to prevent the disruption of ecological systems [25,26].”
BackgroundPerkins, A. J., Ratcliffe, N., Suddaby, D., Ribbands, B., Smith, C., Ellis, P., Meek, E., & Bolton, M. (2018) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2656.12890 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Mammal responses to the human footprint vary across species and stressors
Toews, M., Juanes, F., & Burton, A. C. (2018) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.04.009 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Newsome, T. M., Fleming, P. J. S., Dickman, C. R., Doherty, T. S., Ripple, W. J., Ritchie, E. G., & Wirsing, A. J. (2017) · BioScience · doi:10.1093/biosci/bix022 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Self-citationTorretta, E., Riboldi, L., Costa, E., Delfoco, C., Frignani, E., & Meriggi, A. (2021) · BMC Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1186/s12862-021-01860-3 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Can a mesocarnivore fill the functional role of an apex predator?
Avrin, A. C., Pekins, C. E., Wilmers, C. C., Sperry, J. H., & Allen, M. L. (2023) · Ecosphere · doi:10.1002/ecs2.4383 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Mesocarnivore community structuring in the presence of Africa's apex predator
Curveira‐Santos, G., Sutherland, C. S., Tenan, S., Fernández‐Chacón, A., Mann, G. K. H., Pitman, R. T., & Swanepoel, L. H. (2021) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2020.2379 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
“In concert, these patterns are difficult to evaluate as it requires spatially replicated sampling of mesocarnivore communities over large geographical extents which include variation in apex predator populations and environmental contexts [22,32,33].”
BackgroundHeim, N., Fisher, J. T., Volpe, J. P., Clevenger, A. P., & Paczkowski, J. (2019) · Landscape Ecology · doi:10.1007/s10980-019-00882-z · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Impacts of Mesopredator Control on Conservation of Mesopredators and Their Prey
Conner, L. M., & Morris, G. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0137169 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
“In some cases, mesopredator population increases may be the direct result of the loss of large carnivores [56], [57].”
BackgroundApex Predators Decouple Population Dynamics Between Mesopredators and Their Prey
Feit, B., Feit, A., & Letnic, M. (2019) · Ecosystems · doi:10.1007/s10021-019-00360-2 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Food niche segregation between sympatric golden jackals and red foxes in central Bulgaria
Tsunoda, H., Raichev, E. G., Newman, C., Masuda, R., Georgiev, D. M., & Kaneko, Y. (2017) · Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1111/jzo.12464 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Moreno‐Opo, R., Afonso, I., Jímenez, J., Fernández-Olalla, M., Canut, J., García‐Ferré, D., Piqué, J., García, F., Roig, J., Múñoz‐Igualada, J., et al. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0139837 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Environmental correlates of activity and energetics in a wide-ranging social carnivore
Bryce, C. M., Dunford, C. E., Pagano, A. M., Wang, Y., Borg, B. L., Arthur, S. M., & Williams, T. M. (2022) · Animal Biotelemetry · doi:10.1186/s40317-021-00272-w · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Xiao, Z., Zhang, Z., & Krebs, C. J. (2015) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2015.01.019 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Effects of land cover on coyote abundance
Cherry, M. J., Howell, P. E., Seagraves, C. D., Warren, R. J., & Conner, L. M. (2017) · Wildlife Research · doi:10.1071/wr16052 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Carnivore Niche Partitioning in a Human Landscape
Curras, M. R., Donadio, E., Middleton, A., & Pauli, J. (2021) · American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/718472 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
“Ultimately, niche partitioning among carni-vores is structured by body size (Polis et al. 1989; Donadio and Buskirk 2006): apex carnivores limit mesocarnivores, which limit small carnivores (Newsome and Ripple 2014).”
BackgroundBoonstra, R., Boutin, S. A., Jung, T. S., et al. (2017) · Integrative Zoology · doi:10.1111/1749-4877.12288 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
“Newsome and Ripple (2015) show that there was a trophic cascade across North America among wolves, coyotes and foxes such that if wolves were reduced in abundance, coyotes increased and then killed red foxes and kept them at low numbers.”
BackgroundAllen, M. L., Green, A. M., & Moll, R. J. (2022) · Diversity and Distributions · doi:10.1111/ddi.13502 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Effects on white‐tailed deer following eastern coyote colonization
Bragina, E., Kays, R., Hody, A., Moorman, C. E., Deperno, C. S., & Mills, L. S. (2019) · Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.1002/jwmg.21651 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Habitat selection and diurnal refugia of gray foxes in southwestern Georgia, USA
Deuel, N. R., Conner, L. M., Miller, K. V., Chamberlain, M. J., Cherry, M. J., & Tannenbaum, L. V. (2017) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0186402 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Tsunoda, H., Ito, K., Peeva, S., et al. (2018) · Zoology and Ecology · doi:10.1080/21658005.2018.1504406 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Fire and land cover drive predator abundances in a pyric landscape
Jorge, M. H., Garrison, E. P., Conner, L. M., & Cherry, M. J. (2020) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2020.117939 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Systematic definition of threatened fauna communities is critical to their conservation
Fraser, H. S., Simmonds, J. S., Kutt, A. S., & Maron, M. (2018) · Diversity and Distributions · doi:10.1111/ddi.12875 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Oksanen, T., Oksanen, L., Vuorinen, K., Wolf, C., Mäkynen, A., Olofsson, J., Ripple, W., Virtanen, R., & Utsi, T. A. (2020) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/ecog.05076 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Self-citationTanis, B. P., DeSantis, L. R. G., & Terry, R. C. (2018) · Palaeogeography Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology · doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2018.07.028 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Morin, D., Lesmeister, D. B., Nielsen, C., & Schauber, E. (2022) · Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1002/ece3.9074 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Long-term data reveal equivocal evidence for intraguild suppression among sympatric canids
Bauder, J. M., Allen, M. L., Ahlers, A. A., Benson, T. J., Miller, C. A., & Stodola, K. W. (2022) · Biodiversity and Conservation · doi:10.1007/s10531-022-02465-y · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Apex predator suppression is linked to restructuring of ecosystems via multiple ecological pathways
Leo, V., Reading, R. P., Gordon, C. E., & Letnic, M. (2018) · Oikos · doi:10.1111/oik.05546 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Flagel, D. G., Belovsky, G. E., Cramer, M. J., Beyer, D. E., & Robertson, K. E. (2016) · Journal of Mammalogy · doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyw162 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Guerisoli, M. D. L. M., Gallo, O., Martinez, S. P.-F., et al. (2021) · Mammal Research · doi:10.1007/s13364-020-00549-0 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
“However, in human-modified landscapes, carnivore persecution and alteration on prey abundances (du Toit et al. 2017) can drastically affect the potential of apex predators in regulating ecosystem dynamics (Newsome and Ripple 2015; Kuijper et al. 2016).”
BackgroundForsyth, D. M., Caley, P. A., Davis, N. E., Latham, A. D. M., Woolnough, A. P., Woodford, L. P., Stamation, K. A., Moloney, P. D., & Pascoe, C. (2018) · Austral Ecology · doi:10.1111/aec.12575 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
One hundred years of population ecology: Successes, failures and the road ahead
Krebs, C. J. (2015) · Integrative Zoology · doi:10.1111/1749-4877.12130 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Palmer, R., Anderson, H. E., Richards, B. S., et al. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0251304 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
“Relaxed predation pressure has been shown to directly facilitate range expansion in other meso-predators [72, 73] and there is evidence that some species utilise more open habitats when predation pressure is reduced [74, 75].”
BackgroundShould states in the USA value species at the edge of their geographic range?
Steen, D. A., & Barrett, K. (2015) · Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.1002/jwmg.897 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Allen, M. L., Avrin, A. C., Wittmer, H. U., Wang, Y., & Wilmers, C. C. (2024) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/s00442-024-05541-y · Cited by 20 · see citing works
“This benefit or the reduced risk of coyote predation using sites they avoid may be why gray foxes exhibited less avoidance of communication hubs than other mesocarnivores (e.g., Levi and Wilmers 2012; Newsome and Ripple 2015).”
Identifying and Controlling for Variation in Canid Harvest Data
Bauder, J. M., Allen, M. L., Ahlers, A. A., et al. (2020) · Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.1002/jwmg.21919 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Jímenez, J., Cara, D., García‐Dominguez, F., et al. (2023) · Ecosphere · doi:10.1002/ecs2.4604 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Bauder, J. M., Allen, M. L., Benson, T. J., Miller, C. A., & Stodola, K. W. (2021) · Biodiversity and Conservation · doi:10.1007/s10531-021-02259-8 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Twining, J. P., Kramer, D. W., Perkins, K. A., et al. (2024) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2023.110398 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Dhole pack size variation: Assessing the effect of Prey availability and Apex predator
Bhandari, A., Ghaskadbi, P., Nigam, P., & Habib, B. (2021) · Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1002/ece3.7380 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
“However, we suggest such factors can be tested at a fine- scale to infer the effect of anthropogenic disturbances, protection level at reserve level, and connectivity in the landscape (Greenville et al., 2014; Newsome & Ripple, 2015).”
BackgroundConsumption of Carnivores by Wolves: A Worldwide Analysis of Patterns and Drivers
Martins, I. M., Krofel, M., Mota, P. G., & Álvares, F. (2020) · Diversity · doi:10.3390/d12120470 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
“This includes the coyote in North America and the golden jackal in Eurasia—generalist middle-sized canids that also occur in urban areas and can potentially become overabundant near human settlements [85,86].”
BackgroundBauder, J. M., Cervantes, A. M., Avrin, A. C., Whipple, L. S., Farmer, M., Miller, C. A., Benson, T., Stodola, K. W., & Allen, M. (2020) · Ecological Research · doi:10.1111/1440-1703.12173 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Allen, M. L., Roberts, N., & Bauder, J. M. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0233444 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Clare, J. D. J., Linden, D. W., Anderson, E. M., & MacFarland, D. M. (2016) · Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1002/ece3.2170 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Prugh, L. R., & Arthur, S. M. (2015) · Oikos · doi:10.1111/oik.02017 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
“A recent continental-scale analysis reports that wolves do indeed limit coyote abundance throughout Alaska, indicating joint bottom–up and top–down control of coyote density (Newsome and Ripple 2014).”
BackgroundStudy design concepts for inferring functional roles of mammalian top predators
Engeman, R. M., Allen, L. R., & Allen, B. L. (2017) · Food Webs · doi:10.1016/j.fooweb.2017.02.007 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
“…areas across geographic space are appropriately sampled through time and show a negative correlation, say, between wolf and coyote abundances (e.g. Newsome and Ripple, 2015) or dingo and red fox (Vulpes vulpes) abundances (e.g. Letnic et al., 2011), the primary inferential temptation is to…”
BackgroundBarnick, K. A., Green, A. M., Pendergast, M. E., & Sekercioglu, C. H. (2022) · Conservation Science and Practice · doi:10.1111/csp2.12708 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Lewin, A., Erinjery, J. J., de Waroux, Y. L. P., et al. (2021) · Journal of Arid Environments · doi:10.1016/j.jaridenv.2021.104547 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Nest Predators of Ducks in the Boreal Forest
Dyson, M. E., Slattery, S., & Fedy, B. (2020) · Wildlife Society Bulletin · doi:10.1002/wsb.1114 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Berries and bullets: influence of food and mortality risk on grizzly bears in British Columbia
Proctor, M. F., Lamb, C. T., Boulanger, J., et al. (2023) · Wildlife Monographs · doi:10.1002/wmon.1078 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Spatial and temporal partitioning of mustelids in Southeast Alaska
Kupferman, C. A., Crupi, A. P., Waits, L. P., & Gilbert, S. L. (2021) · Ecosphere · doi:10.1002/ecs2.3827 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Thinley, P., Rajaratnam, R., Kamler, J. F., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Conservation Science · doi:10.3389/fcosc.2021.654976 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“As apex predators, large canids can influence prey populations and cause trophic cascades when their populations fluctuate (Newsome and Ripple, 2015; Fleming et al., 2017).”
BackgroundMcKechnie, I., Moss, M. L., & Crockford, S. J. (2020) · Journal of Anthropological Archaeology · doi:10.1016/j.jaa.2020.101209 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Tolerance of wolves shapes desert canid communities in the Middle East
Bonsen, G. T., Wallach, A. D., Ben‐Ami, D., Keynan, O., Khalilieh, A., Shanas, U., Wooster, E. I. F., & Ramp, D. (2022) · Global Ecology and Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2022.e02139 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Tsunoda, H. (2022) · Proceedings of the Zoological Society · doi:10.1007/s12595-022-00431-8 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Colman, N., Crowther, M., & Letnic, M. (2015) · Journal of Biogeography · doi:10.1111/jbi.12563 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“…studies examining the effects of apex predators made possible by gradients of predator control activity, suggest that the effects of apex predators can be exerted and become evident across large spatial scales (Johnson et al., 2007; Letnic et al., 2011; Newsome & Ripple, 2014; Ripple et al., 2014).”
BackgroundRodríguez-Luna, C. R., Servín, J., Valenzuela-Galván, D., & List, R. (2024) · Mammalian Biology · doi:10.1007/s42991-024-00412-8 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“…has also been demonstrated among pairs of other wild canid species in North America: wolves-coyotes (Arjo and Pletscher 1999; Levi and Wilmers 2012; Newsome and Ripple 2014; Shores et al. 2019), wolves-red foxes ( Vulpes vulpes ; Fowler et al. 2021), coyotes-red foxes (Lesmeister et al. 2015;…”
Bužan, E., Potočnik, H., Pokorny, B., Potušek, S., Iacolina, L., Gerič, U., Urzi, F., & Kos, I. (2024) · Frontiers in Zoology · doi:10.1186/s12983-024-00530-6 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“Previous studies in North America and central Europe have shown that wolves rely predominantly on large wild ungulates and some other medium-sized wild mammals [18, 24–28].”
BackgroundIzac, J. R., Camire, A. C., Schuler, E. J. A., et al. (2020) · mSphere · doi:10.1128/msphere.00544-20 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
“Coyotes are aggressive apex predators that displace, attack, and kill smaller predators, including the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) (8).”
Guardian or threat: does golden eagle predation risk have cascading effects on forest grouse?
Lyly, M. S., Villers, A., Koivisto, E., Helle, P., Ollila, T., & Korpimäki, E. (2016) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/s00442-016-3680-8 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Weckel, M., Bogan, D. A., Burke, R. L., Nagy, C. M., Siemer, W. F., Green, T. J., & Mitchell, N. (2015) · Cities and the Environment · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Diggins, C. A. (2023) · Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.3389/fevo.2023.1096244 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“, 2019; Urban, 1988), native species can negatively impact other native species or ecosystems via anthropogenically-induced range expansions into new systems, causing resident species declines or trophic cascades (Newsome and Ripple, 2014; Holm et al., 2016).”
BackgroundMarginal support for a trophic cascade among sympatric canids in peripheral wolf range
Fowler, N. L., Kautz, T. M., Petroelje, T. R., Wilton, C. M., Kellner, K. F., O’Brien, D. J., Parsons, B., Beyer, D. E., & Belant, J. L. (2021) · Ecology · doi:10.1002/ecy.3494 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Chandler, J. L., Deelen, T. V. V., Nibbelink, N., & Orrock, J. L. (2020) · Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1002/ece3.6415 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Limited evidence for mesocarnivore release following wolf recovery in Wisconsin, USA
Crimmins, S. M., & Deelen, T. R. V. (2019) · Wildlife Biology · doi:10.2981/wlb.00511 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“2 (Newsome and Ripple 2015).”
Boyd, D. K., Ausband, D. E., Cluff, H. D., Heffelfinger, J., Hinton, J. W., Patterson, B. R., & Wydeven, A. P. (2023) · doi:10.59438/fyhc8935 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Kutt, A. S., Kern, P. L., Schoenefuss, P., et al. (2020) · Australian Mammalogy · doi:10.1071/am20003 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Kleptoparasitism and complexity in a multi-trophic web
Materassi, M., Innocenti, G., Berzi, D., & Focardi, S. (2017) · Ecological Complexity · doi:10.1016/j.ecocom.2016.12.004 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
The Ecological Impacts of Large-Carnivore Recovery in North America
Wilmers, C. C., Levi, T., Prugh, L. R., Ruprecht, J., & Stahler, D. R. (2025) · Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102722-021139 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Influence of predator suppression and prey availability on carnivore occurrence in western Himalaya
Patel, J. R., Sharma, M., Khanyari, M., et al. (2023) · Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1111/jzo.13120 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Isotope analysis reveals dietary overlap among sympatric canids
Webster, S. C., Chamberlain, M. J., Hinton, J. W., & Beasley, J. C. (2021) · Journal of Mammalogy · doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyab077 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Multispecies Livelihoods: Partnering for Sustainable Development and Biodiversity Conservation
Thomsen, B., & Thomsen, J. (2021) · Encyclopedia of the UN sustainable development goals · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-95963-4_99 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
- Authors
- Newsome, T. M., & Ripple, W. J.
- Affiliations
- Oregon State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Newsome, Thomas M.
- Venue
- Journal of Animal Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-07-09
- Volume
- 84
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 49-59
- ISSN
- 0021-8790 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2656
- OpenAlex
- W2041790372
- Cited by
- 184
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 13
- FWCI
- 11.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Animal Ecology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Deakin Research Online (Deakin University) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Australian-American Fulbright Commisssion
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
- Keywords
- trophic cascades, top-down control, mesopredator release, interspecific competition, intraguild predation, grey wolf, coyote, red fox, wolf, wolf reintroduction, predator-prey interactions, large carnivore conservation, North America
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Canada, Foxes, Population Density, Population Dynamics, Predatory Behavior, United States, Wolves, Food Chain, Coyotes
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.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-09-30.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-09-30.
Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.
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
