The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Home Range and Landscape Use of Coyotes in a Metropolitan Landscape: Conflict or Coexistence?
Open accessAbstract
Abstract An understanding of how top mammalian carnivores respond to urbanization is important for conservation and management of human–wildlife conflicts. Coyotes (Canis latrans) have recently become more prevalent in many metropolitan areas; however, their apparent success is poorly understood. We estimated home-range size and selection of land-use types for coyotes in a heavily urbanized landscape, with a particular focus on responses of coyotes to those parts of the urban landscape with high levels of human development or activity. Mean (± SE) annual home ranges of transient coyotes (X¯ = 26.80 ± 2.95 km2) were larger than those of resident coyotes (X¯ = 4.95 ± 0.34 km2), and home-range size for resident coyotes did not vary among seasons or between age and sex classes. Although most home ranges were associated with natural patches of habitat, there was considerable variation among coyotes, with some home ranges entirely lacking patches of natural habitat. Within home ranges, coyotes typically avoided land-use types associated with human activity (i.e., Residential, Urban Grass, and Urban Land) regardless of coyote characteristics, seasons, and activity periods. Few coyotes were nuisances, and conflicts occurred when coyotes were sick or exposed to wildlife feeding by humans. We found little evidence that coyotes were attracted to areas associated with human activity, despite at times having home ranges located in heavily developed areas.
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
Mesopredator release and avifaunal extinctions in a fragmented system
Crooks, K. R., & Soulé, M. E. (1999) · Nature · doi:10.1038/23028 · Cited by 1,721
Relative sensitivities of mammalian carnivores to habitat fragmentation
Crooks, K. R. (2002) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00386.x · Cited by 943
Human Population Density and Extinction Risk in the World's Carnivores
Cardillo, M., Purvis, A., Sechrest, W., Gittleman, J. L., Bielby, J., & Mace, G. M. (2004) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0020197 · Cited by 618
Range Contractions of North American Carnivores and Ungulates
LALIBERTE, A. S., & RIPPLE, W. J. (2004) · BioScience · doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[0123:rconac]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 528
Cited by
Big City Life: Carnivores in Urban Environments
Bateman, P. W., & Fleming, P. A. (2012) · Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7998.2011.00887.x · Cited by 832
The cognition of ‘nuisance’ species
Barrett, L. P., Stanton, L. A., & Benson-Amram, S. (2019) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2018.05.005 · Cited by 166
Coexisting with coyotes (Canis latrans) in an urban environment
Elliot, E. E., Vallance, S., & Molles, L. E. (2016) · Urban Ecosystems · doi:10.1007/s11252-016-0544-2 · Cited by 60
Metadata
- Authors
- Gehrt, S. D., Anchor, C., & White, L. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Mammalogy
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2009-10-15
- Volume
- 90
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1045-1057
- ISSN
- 0022-2372 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-1542
- OpenAlex
- W2125326477
- Cited by
- 276
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 6.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Home Range and Landscape Use of Coyotes in a Metropolitan Landscape: Conflict or Coexistence? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1644/08-mamm-a-277.1
- The paper
- Gehrt, S. D., Anchor, C., & White, L. A. (2009). Home Range and Landscape Use of Coyotes in a Metropolitan Landscape: Conflict or Coexistence? Journal of Mammalogy. https://doi.org/10.1644/08-mamm-a-277.1
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.