Cited by 9Wildlife Ecology and ConservationAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesPlant and animal studies

Dieta del zorro andino Lycalopex culpaeus (Molina, 1782) (Mammalia: Carnivora: Canidae) en la Reserva Ecológica Los Ilinizas, Ecuador

Open access
Cadena-Ortíz, Héctor, Ordóñez-Pozo, Carmen, Freire, Efraín, Brito, Jorge·2020·Ecotropicos

Abstract

El zorro andino Lycalopex culpaeus (Molina, 1782) es el cánido andino de mayor tamaño en Ecuador. Para esta especie, el conocimiento de los aspectos asociados a su dieta es muy escaso en el país, con muy pocos estudios para las poblaciones del norte. En este estudio, se analizaron 205 muestras de heces de L. culpaeus colectadas, durante noviembre-diciembre de 2016, en un sendero turístico de la Reserva Ecológica Los Ilinizas, la cual está localizada en la cordillera occidental de los Andes ecuatorianos y es representativa de un ecosistema típico de páramo. Se determinaron en total 657 ítems-presa, agrupados en 35 taxones, predominando en frecuencia los mamíferos (48,1%) y las plantas (37,9%). En menor proporción se observaron ítems asociados a grupos de invertebrados (11,6%), aves (1,5%) y reptiles (0,9%). Adicionalmente, se observó que los mamíferos aportaron la mayoría de la biomasa (98,2%) a la dieta del zorro andino para esta localidad, siendo el conejo Sylvilagus andinus la presa más importante tanto en términos de frecuencia (26,1%) de ítems, como en aporte de biomasa (95,5%). Estos resultados, reportando a los mamíferos como la principal fuente de alimento para L. culpaeus, coinciden con trabajos previos realizados en la región. La alta frecuencia de plantas sin frutos en las heces colectadas puede estar asociada al consumo accidental durante la depredación activa de mamíferos-presa. No obstante, considerando que las plantas pueden ser ingeridas intencionalmente como fuente de fibra por L. culpaeus, se requiere de la continuación de este tipo de estudios para incrementar nuestro entendimiento sobre los patrones ecológicos de la especie.

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 · 10.53157/ecotropicos.32e0011

Cites

Statistics

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

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?

  • The diversity of prey identified in this sample was lower compared to studies from Ecuador, where lizards, birds, fruits, and larger mammals such as carnivores, rabbits, and ungulates have been documented.

    “However, diversity of prey identified in our sample was lower compared to studies from Ecuador, where lizards, birds, fruits, and larger mammals such as carnivores, rabbits, and ungulates have been documented (Beltrán-Ortiz et al. 2017;Guntiñas et al. 2017;Cadena-Ortiz et al. 2020).”

    From The Andean fox Lycalopex culpaeus (Molina, 1782) in southwestern Colombia: diet and anatomical description (2026) · cites this paper as Cadena-Ortiz et al. 2020

    Table 1 (indexed under Abstract; page unavailable) documents a lizard, birds, fruit-bearing plants, and the rabbit Sylvilagus andinus in this Ecuadorian study. It does not document carnivores or ungulates among the identified dietary items. The comparison with the citing authors’ own sample cannot be assessed from this source. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Jaksić FM, Schlatter RP & Yáñez JL. 1980. Feeding ecolo- gy of central Chilean foxes, Dusicyon culpaeus and Dusicyon griseus. Journal of Mammalogy 61: 254-260.
  2. Johnson WE & Franklin WL. 1994. Spatial resource partition- ing by sympatric grey fox (Dusicyon griseus) and culpeo fox (Dusicyon culpaeus) in southern Chile. Canadian Journal of Zoology 72: 1788-1793.
  3. Salvatori V, Vaglio-Laurin G, Meserve PL, Boitani L & Cam- panella A. 1999. Spatial organization, activity, and social interactions of culpeo foxes (Pseudalopex culpaeus) in north- central Chile. Journal of Mammalogy 80: 980-985.
  4. Seber GA & Lee AJ. 2012. Linear regression analysis. John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey, USA.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cadena-Ortíz, H., Ordóñez-Pozo, C., Freire, E., & Brito, J.
Affiliations
  • National Biodiversity Institute (CR)
  • Central University of Ecuador (EC)
Venue
Ecotropicos
Published
2020-05-11
Volume
32
ISSN
  • 1012-1692 (ISSN-L)
  • 2521-9707
OpenAlex
W4407679619
Cited by
9
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 2
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
es
Open access
Locations
Ecotropicos (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Ministerio del Ambiente, Agua y Transición Ecológica (04-16 IC-FAU-FLO-DPAC/MA)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant and animal studies
Keywords
Lycalopex culpaeus, Andean fox, diet, fecal analysis, prey composition, Parma, Andean páramo, Andes, carnivore feeding ecology, plant consumption

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