![]() | mobile - desktop |
![]() |
|
News & Events:
|
Posted by David L. Martin on July 14, 2002 at 13:04:55:
In Reply to: Points of discussion posted by Todd Evans on July 13, 2002 at 01:50:31:
To answer your questions:
1) Within species, home range size tends to be
correlated with individual size, food
availability, sex, and in some species, the
availability of specific refugia. Males often
have larger home ranges than females per unit
body mass. There are significant differences
between species, which in some cases are
attributable to differences in foraging
behavior. Active cruisers tend to have larger
home ranges than sit-and-wait predators,
presumably because they consume more energy per
unit body mass. Population biologists often use
the concept of the "core area," in which the
individual spends most of its time, as a more
realistic measure of home range size than the
total range. However, based on telemetry
studies this concept seems to apply poorly to
snakes.
2) Telemetry studies and other observations
indicate that adamanteus does not den communally
as horridus does, even in the northern part of
its range. It is not uncommon to find 2 or 3
individuals sharing an overwintering site, but
I am unaware of large numbers being found at a
single site. Overwintering sites are generally
imbedded within the animal's warm season range,
no significant migration is needed to bring the
snakes to them.
3) It seems reasonable that average home range
size in adamanteus has increased, but there are
no hard data that I know of. If we presume that
the density of prey animals has generally
declined, which as an average is probably
correct, we should expect that home ranges have
increased. However, we may also presume that
adamanteus density has declined, which tends to
bring the per capita food availability up. My
guess is that this has not fully compensated for
the former, and that home range size has
increased modestly.
I think your point about the diminishing effects
of roads as you move away from them is perfectly
valid, although I believe the population many
miles from the road can be significantly
affected. Edge effects can propagate inward to
a much greater extent than one might think.
Many tend to assume that any population declines
will be compensated for by the influx of
individuals from nearby populations. But if
dispersal cannot keep up with edge mortality,
this is exactly what can reduce population
densities miles away from the edge. A ripple
effect can propagate far to the interior as
individuals disperse toward the periphery. To
my knowledge this has never been studied in
rattlesnakes.
Subject:
Comments:
Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
|
|
|
|