Cited by 80Wildlife Ecology and ConservationAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesRangeland and Wildlife Management

Can we use the young : female ratio to infer ungulate population dynamics? An empirical test using red deer Cervus elaphus as a model

BONENFANT, CHRISTOPHE, GAILLARD, JEAN‐MICHEL, KLEIN, FRANÇOIS, HAMANN, JEAN‐LUC·2005·Journal of Applied Ecology

Abstract

Summary Management decisions for exploited species often rely on count ratios, such as the young to adult female ratio as a proxy of birth rate, and the decrease in the ratio between yearling and females in yeart+ 1 and the young : female ratio in yeartto obtain juvenile survival. However, the reliability of such estimates has yet to be demonstrated. We investigated the consistency of the young to female ratio method by using observations on individually marked female red deer. These females were known to have raised their calves to weaning successfully. We compared temporal variation in the proportion of females with a calf at heel from count ratios with the probability of observing a calf with its mother from marked animals. The proportion of females observed with a calf at heel decreased over time (from 0·43 early May to 0·15 early March). This measure was influenced by individual variation and by interactive effects of year and habitat type, although there was no direct relationship with the density of vegetation cover. The proportion of females seen with a calf at heel assessed from counts did not correspond with the probability of observing a female with a calf at heel, given that she successfully weaned a calf in autumn (estimated from direct observation). The probability of observing a female with a calf was highest in September (0·4) prior to the rut and lowest just after the birth season (0·08) and during the rut (0·18). The temporal pattern in the probability of ob…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01008.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 73 · Cited by 80

Authors
BONENFANT, C., GAILLARD, J., KLEIN, F., & HAMANN, J.
Affiliations
  • Lyon 1 Université (FR)
  • Office National de la Chasse et de la Faune Sauvage (FR)
Corresponding author
BONENFANT, CHRISTOPHE
Venue
Journal of Applied Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-03-14
Volume
42
Issue
2
Pages
361-370
ISSN
  • 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2664
OpenAlex
W1519014249
Cited by
80
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Ecology (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
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
red deer, ungulate population dynamics, juvenile survival, pregnancy rate, weaning, density dependence, habitat type effects, population monitoring

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review