↓ Skip to main content

Potential Foraging Decisions by a Desert Ungulate to Balance Water and Nutrient Intake in a Water-Stressed Environment

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, February 2016
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 (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Potential Foraging Decisions by a Desert Ungulate to Balance Water and Nutrient Intake in a Water-Stressed Environment
Published in
PLoS ONE, February 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0148795
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jay V. Gedir, James W. Cain, Paul R. Krausman, Jamison D. Allen, Glenn C. Duff, John R. Morgart

Abstract

Arid climates have unpredictable precipitation patterns, and wildlife managers often provide supplemental water to help desert ungulates endure the hottest, driest periods. When surface water is unavailable, the only source of water for ungulates comes from the forage they consume, and they must make resourceful foraging decisions to meet their requirements. We compared two desert bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis nelsoni) populations in Arizona, USA: a treatment population with supplemental water removed during treatment, and a control population. We examined whether sheep altered their seasonal diets without supplemental water. We calculated water and nutrient intake and metabolic water production from dry matter intake and forage moisture and nitrogen content, to determine whether sheep could meet their seasonal daily water and nutrient requirements solely from forage. Diets of sheep were higher in protein (all seasons) and moisture (autumn and winter) during treatment compared to pretreatment. During treatment, sheep diet composition was similar between the treatment and control populations, which suggests, under the climatic conditions of this study, water removal did not influence sheep diets. We estimated that under drought conditions, without any surface water available (although small ephemeral potholes would contain water after rains), female and male sheep would be unable to meet their daily water requirements in all seasons, except winter, when reproductive females had a nitrogen deficit. We determined that sheep could achieve water and nutrient balances in all seasons by shifting their total diet proportions by 8-55% from lower to higher moisture and nitrogen forage species. We elucidate how seasonal forage quality and foraging decisions by desert ungulates allow them to cope with their xeric and uncertain environment, and suggest that, with the forage conditions observed in our study area during this study period, providing supplemental water during water-stressed periods may not be necessary for desert bighorn sheep.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 29%
Student > Bachelor 9 26%
Researcher 6 18%
Other 1 3%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 5 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 47%
Environmental Science 6 18%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 6 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 01 May 2016.
All research outputs
#731,586
of 7,632,130 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#16,469
of 108,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,435
of 286,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#926
of 5,437 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,632,130 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 108,616 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 286,613 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,437 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.