The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Identification of Cougar and Jaguar Feces through Bile Acid Chromatography
Abstract
The use of feces for population size assessment and diet analysis of carnivore species depends on accurate feces identification. Fecal bile acid composition appears to be species specific among carnivores and therefore a useful method to identify fecal samples. To help identify 194 field-collected feces of cougars (Puma concolor) and jaguars (Felis onca), 2 sympatric carnivore species of the Chaco Region (Paraguay), we developed a method to determine feces origin using thin layer chromatography (TLC) bile acid patterns. Bile acids were extracted from 11 fecal samples from cougars and 10 from jaguars from different zoological gardens. Although cougar and jaguar feces contain the same identifiable bile acids, feces can be distinguished by the presence of a single unknown bile acid present consistently only among jaguar feces. The use of this bile acid as an indicator of feces origin, evaluated by means of 2 blind tests of 10 samples each, reached 80%. We also compared our results with a previous identification of the field collected feces based on physical characteristics. We suggest that TLC analysis of fecal bile acids is the best identification technique of cougar and jaguar feces technique available.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
Carnivores differ from other animals in their bile acid composition and are identifiable from higher levels of cholic and chenodeoxycholic acids in addition to deoxycholic acid.
“Carnivores differ from other animals in their bile acid composition and are identifiable from the higher levels of cholic and chenodeoxycholic acids in addition to deoxycholic acid (39–42).”
From Pre-Clovis occupation of the Americas identified by human fecal biomarkers in coprolites from Paisley Caves, Oregon (2020) · cites this paper as [40]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Shillito, L.-M., Whelton, H. L., Blong, J. C., Jenkins, D. L., Connolly, T. J., & Bull, I. D. (2020) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aba6404 · Cited by 91
Metadata
- Authors
- Fernandez, G. J., Corley, J. C., & Capurro, A. F.
- Venue
- The Journal of Wildlife Management
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1997-04
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 506
- ISSN
- 0022-541X
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 0
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