Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 164

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Food selection by European roe deer (Capreolus capreolus): effects of plant chemistry, and consequences for the nutritional value of their diets

Tixier, H., Duncan, P., Scehovic, J., Yant, A., Gleizes, M., Lila, M.·1997·Journal of Zoology

Abstract

We describe food selection by roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) in relation to the food quality of the plants available (the concentrations of fibres, sugars, crude protein, and of phenolics and terpenes). Seven tame roe deer feeding in an oak‐beech woodland edge used the majority (80‐94%) of the plant species available: they were therefore generalist feeders. However, they preferred only a small number of plant species in the different seasons: ivy (Hedera helix) in winter and autumn, dogwood (Cornus spp.) in summer, hornbeam (Curpinus betulus), hawthom (Crataegus spp.) and bluebells (Hyacinthoides non‐scripta) in spring. No preference or avoidance could be demonstrated for 74‐85% of the available species, but 7‐12 species were avoided according to the season. Though the avoided species were sometimes common, they never comprised an important part of the diet. In contrast, the preferred species made up only 4‐13% of the available green matter but composed a large part of the diet (22‐49%). Although generalists, the roe deer were therefore also highly selective feeders. The use of the different plant species was influenced by their availability, but to a different extent in the different seasons. Use of the plant species correlated negatively with the fibre content, as predicted from the digestive morphology of this concentrate selector. Preference/avoidance was related to the concentrations of soluble sugars, but not the crude protein content. Contrary to expectation, the roe deer preferred plants with a high concentration of protein‐binding phenolics, suggesting that this deer has specific mechanisms for de‐activating these compounds. Among the nutritional consequences of the feeding strategy of roe were a 17‐35% higher soluble sugar content of the diet compared with the available green plant tissues, and an even greater increase in the phenolics. The crude protein contents and the dry matter digestibility of the diets tended to be slightly higher, and the fibre contents were lower, than those of the available green plant tissues.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1997.tb05799.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

See all 164

Metadata

Authors
Tixier, H., Duncan, P., Scehovic, J., Yant, A., Gleizes, M., & Lila, M.
Venue
Journal of Zoology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1997-06
Volume
242
Issue
2
Pages
229-245
ISSN
  • 0952-8369 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7998
OpenAlex
W2120286825
Cited by
164
References
1
FWCI
4.68
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: Food selection by European roe deer (Capreolus capreolus): effects of plant chemistry, and consequences for the nutritional value of their diets. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1997.tb05799.x
The paper
Tixier, H., Duncan, P., Scehovic, J., Yant, A., Gleizes, M., & Lila, M. (1997). Food selection by European roe deer (Capreolus capreolus): effects of plant chemistry, and consequences for the nutritional value of their diets. Journal of Zoology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1997.tb05799.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.