The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Population dynamics in wild boar Sus scrofa: ecology, elasticity of growth rate and implications for the management of pulsed resource consumers
Open accessAbstract
Summary: In terrestrial ecosystems many species show large population fluctuations caused by pulsed resources, such as mast seeding. A prime example of a mammal strongly affected by mast seeding of trees is the wild boar Sus scrofa, a species that has become a pest in many parts of the world. We investigated the population dynamics of wild boar to assist the development of effective management strategies for this species and possibly for other pulsed resource consumers. We analysed published vital rates of wild boar using Leslie matrix projection models and elasticity analysis. Models were based on vital rates of animals under poor, intermediate and good environmental conditions, which represent combinations of differences in food availability (particularly mast of beech Fagus sylvatica and/or oak Quercus spp.) and winter climate. Interestingly, we observed a crossover in the ranking of elasticities (e; the relative impact of each vital rate on population growth rate λ) when comparing different conditions. While the elasticity of λ to adult survival was highest in poor environments [e(Padult) = 0·36, e(Pjuvenile) = 0·22], the elasticity of λ to juvenile survival was highest under good conditions [e(Padult) = 0·16, e(Pjuvenile) = 0·28]. Thus juvenile survival becomes increasingly important for population growth as habitat conditions improve. Our analysis of empirical beech mast records gave some indication of an increase of full masts over the last few decades. Modelling different beech mast scenarios showed that an increase in full mast frequency will lead to a rapid increase in λ. The availability of alternative food resources, namely agricultural crops, may also contribute to an expansion of wild boar populations. Synthesis and applications. We suggest that, whenever possible, management strategies should be based on separate elasticity analyses for different environmental conditions, especially for species dependent on pulsed resources. For wild boar we suggest the following principal management strategies to stop further population increases: (i) supplementary feeding should be strictly avoided; (ii) under good environmental conditions, reducing juvenile survival will have the largest effect on λ, whereas strong hunting pressure on adult females will lead to most effective population control in years with poor conditions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Fingerprints of global warming on wild animals and plants
Root, T. L., Price, J. T., Hall, K. R., Schneider, S. H., Rosenzweig, C., & Pounds, J. A. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01333 · Cited by 4,774
Cited by
Wild boar populations up, numbers of hunters down? A review of trends and implications for Europe
Massei, G., Kindberg, J., Licoppe, A., Gačić, D., Šprem, N., Kamler, J., Baubet, E., Hohmann, U., Monaco, A., Ozoliņš, J., et al. (2015) · Pest Management Science · doi:10.1002/ps.3965 · Cited by 786
Metadata
- Authors
- BIEBER, C., & RUF, T.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-11-23
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1203-1213
- ISSN
- 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2664
- OpenAlex
- W2122002252
- Cited by
- 393
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Population dynamics in wild boar Sus scrofa: ecology, elasticity of growth rate and implications for the management of pulsed resource consumers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01094.x
- The paper
- BIEBER, C., & RUF, T. (2005). Population dynamics in wild boar Sus scrofa: ecology, elasticity of growth rate and implications for the management of pulsed resource consumers. Journal of Applied Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01094.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.