↓ Skip to main content

Compensatory mortality in a recovering top carnivore: wolves in Wisconsin, USA (1979–2013)

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Compensatory mortality in a recovering top carnivore: wolves in Wisconsin, USA (1979–2013)
Published in
Oecologia, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00442-018-4132-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer L. Stenglein, Adrian P. Wydeven, Timothy R. Van Deelen

Abstract

Populations of large terrestrial carnivores are in various stages of recovery worldwide and the question of whether there is compensation in mortality sources is relevant to conservation. Here, we show variation in Wisconsin wolf survival from 1979 to 2013 by jointly estimating the hazard of wolves' radio-telemetry ending (endpoint) and endpoint cause. In previous analyses, wolves lost to radio-telemetry follow-up (collar loss) were censored from analysis, thereby assuming collar loss was unconfounded with mortality. Our approach allowed us to explicitly estimate hazard due to collar loss and did not require censoring these records from analysis. We found mean annual survival was 76% and mean annual causes of mortality were illegal killing (9.4%), natural and unknown causes (9.5%), and other human-caused mortality such as hunting, vehicle collisions and lethal control (5.1%). Illegal killing and natural mortality were highest during winter, causing wolf survival to decrease relative to summer. Mortality was highest during early recovery and lowest during a period of sustained population growth. Wolves again experienced higher risk of human-caused mortality relative to natural mortality as wolves expanded into areas with more human activity. We detected partial compensation in human- and natural-caused mortality since 2004 as the population saturated more available habitat. Prior to 2004, we detected additivity in mortality sources. Assessments of wolf survival and cause of mortality rates and the finding of partial compensation in mortality sources will inform wolf conservation and management efforts by identifying sources and sinks, finding areas of conservation need, and assessing management zone delineation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 20%
Student > Master 10 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Other 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 13 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 35%
Environmental Science 16 29%
Unspecified 1 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 2%
Unknown 18 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,341,848
of 25,157,832 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#134
of 4,446 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,211
of 334,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#4
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,157,832 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,446 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,845 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.