The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Biogeographical variation in the population density of wild boar (Sus scrofa) in western Eurasia
Abstract
Aim We reviewed 54 studies reporting population densities of wild boar (Sus scrofa) in western Eurasia in order to investigate the roles of vegetation productivity [fraction of photosynthetically active radiation (FPAR) index], winter harshness (mean January temperature) and presence/absence of wolves (Canis lupus) in shaping the biogeographical variation in population density of wild boar. Location We collected published data on the autumn–winter population density of wild boar (number of individuals km−2) in 54 locations in western Eurasia, from 1966 to 2003. Methods The mean January temperature, obtained from the World Climate data base (http://www.worldclimate.com), was taken as a measure of winter severity. We used monthly 4 × 4 km MODIS FPAR data sets covering January 2000 to June 2004 to calculate the vegetation productivity index. In addition, we collected literature data about the presence or absence of wolves from the study areas. Results In the geographical span of 37–60° N, the population densities of wild boar declined by three orders of magnitude, from 10 to 0.01 individuals km−2. The best multiple regression model (selected with the Akaike information criterion corrected for small samples) showed that mean January temperature and the vegetation productivity index were the most important factors explaining the biogeographical variation in population densities of wild boar. The impact of temperature was stronger than that of productivity. The presence of wolves had a weak limiting effect on population densities of wild boar at the biogeographical scale. Main conclusion We propose that winter harshness imposes density‐independent mortality on wild boar populations at higher latitudes. Competition for food in less productive regions may cause stronger density dependence in birth and death rates of wild boar populations. We expect that wild boar will respond to global warming by both an increase in local population densities and an expansion of their geographical range north and north‐eastwards.
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
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
Spatial patterns in brown bear Ursus arctos diet: the role of geographical and environmental factors
BOJARSKA, K., & SELVA, N. (2012) · Mammal Review · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2907.2011.00192.x · Cited by 279
Winter severity limits red fox populations in Eurasia
Bartoń, K. A., & Zalewski, A. (2007) · Global Ecology and Biogeography · doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00299.x · Cited by 95
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Melis, C., Szafrańska, P. A., Jędrzejewska, B., & Bartoń, K.
- Venue
- Journal of Biogeography
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-04-03
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 803-811
- ISSN
- 0305-0270 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2699
- OpenAlex
- W2162876102
- Cited by
- 200
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Biogeographical variation in the population density of wild boar (Sus scrofa) in western Eurasia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2006.01434.x
- The paper
- Melis, C., Szafrańska, P. A., Jędrzejewska, B., & Bartoń, K. (2006). Biogeographical variation in the population density of wild boar (Sus scrofa) in western Eurasia. Journal of Biogeography. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2006.01434.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.