Abstract
Predation risk is known to affect the spatial use of prey species, imposing a trade-off between feeding requirements and predation avoidance. As a result, prey species can leave high-quality forage areas to use sub-optimal, but safer, habitat patches, defined as “refuge areas.” In this study, we describe changes in the spatial use of an introduced ungulate species, the Mediterranean mouflon Ovis aries musimon, following the recolonization (in 1996) of wolves Canis lupus into the Albergian Hunting Estate (Italian Western Alps). Since 1988, we monitored the mouflon population by spring counts from vantage points. We georeferenced all observations and recorded the size and structure of the spotted groups. Finally, we identified available refuges by selecting patches characterized by (i) the presence of rocks and (ii) high values of steepness and ruggedness. We found that mouflons significantly reduced the average distance from refuge areas over the years, with the yearly average distance from refuges being 56% lower after wolves recolonized the area (i.e., 93.8 ± 32.1 vs. 213.1 ± 40.9 m). The analysis of orographic parameters showed that mouflons used patches with higher values in elevation, slope, ruggedness, and a significant difference in all three parameters when comparing years pre and post wolf return. Both sexes were significantly affected, but ewes were particularly sensitive and selected patches closer to refuge areas (75.8 ± 30.3 m) than males (131.0 ± 53.6 m). Our results suggest that the presence of new predators can alter the distribution of an introduced species such as the Mediterranean mouflon, triggering the resurgence of anti-predation behavior.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
In ungulates, habitat selection is influenced by factors such as forage availability and quality (Albon and Langvatn 1992; Fryxell et al. 2004), anthropic disturbance (Swenson 1982; Apollonio et al. 2005), interspecific competition (Forsyth and Hickling 1998; Namgail et al. 2007), and predation risk (Festa-Bianchet 1988; Creel et al. 2005). As such, habitats characterized by abundant and highly nutritious plant species, low anthropic disturbance, absence of competition with other ungulate species, and absence of competitors and predators are likely to be particularly favorable. However, different factors may produce changes in ungulate spatial use, forcing them in sub-optimal areas (Festa-Bianchet 1988; Wittmer et al. 2005; Namgail et al. 2007). This is true especially for species inhabiting sources-limited habitats, with many examples reported in wild Caprinae species (e.g., Bighorn sheep Ovis canadensis — Tilton and Willard 1982; Appenine chamois Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata — Lovari and Cosentino 1986; Mediterranean mouflon Ovis aries musimon — Cransac and Hewison 1997; Dall’s sheep Ovis dalli dalli — Corti and Shackleton 2002; Alpine ibex Capra ibex — Grignolio et al. 2007; 2019; and Stone’s sheep Ovis dalli stonei — Walker et al. 2007).
Predation risk may also have a critical influence on prey spatial selection, affecting their distribution (Festa-Bianchet 1988; Ripple and Beschta 2004; Bongi et al. 2008), gregariousness (Lima and Dill 1990), and vigilance levels (Hochman and Kotler 2007). Under pressure by predators, ungulates are likely to modify their feeding behavior and eventually leave high-quality forage areas to settle in predator-safer patches (Festa-Bianchet 1988; Walker et al. 2007): an adaptive response, function of what is commonly defined as a species “landscape of fear” (Ripple and Beschta 2003). Refuge areas are assumed to be of critical importance for the long-term survival of prey populations (Festa-Bianchet 1988; Ripple and Beschta 2004; Grignolio et al. 2007). The characteristics of these areas depend on the ecology of different ungulate species. Close habitats such as forests are selected because they reduce the probability to be spotted by a predator (e.g., Red deer Cervus elaphus — Creel et al. 2005; Roe deer Capreolus capreolus — Bongi et al. 2008), while open environments are often preferred by gregarious species, as they increase the chances of seeing a possible threat from a distance (e.g., O. canadensis — Risenhoover and Bailey 1985; Wakelyn 1987). Some species select rough, hardly reachable areas where attacks by predators are less likely to occur (e.g., rocky slopes, Nubian ibex Capra nubiana — Kotler et al. 1994; C. ibex — Grignolio et al. 2007; 2019; steep slopes and cliffs, O. canadensis — Bleich 1999; O. dalli dalli — Corti and Shackleton 2002) or less likely to be successful (Baruzzi et al. 2017). Other species use habitats close to human activities which are more likely avoided by predators (White-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus — Hebblewhite and Merrill 2009). Moreover, sex-related differences in habitat use are also described, with sexual segregation reported to increase reproductive success, according to two leading hypotheses, reviewed in Ruckstuhl and Neuhaus (2002). The “reproductive strategy-predation risk hypothesis” predicts that males select areas with more abundant forage but higher predation risk while females maximize the survival of their offspring by using safer habitats to the detriment of nutritional quality (Geist 1971; Mooring et al. 2003; Grignolio et al. 2007). In contrast, the “forage selection hypothesis” (Main et al. 1996) postulates that female ungulates tend to select higher-quality sites to forage, segregating from males in order to meet higher nutritional demands of lactation (Fattorini et al. 2019).The Mediterranean mouflon O.aries musimon was initially introduced to the islands of Corsica (France) and Sardinia (Italy) at the beginning of Neolithic (Vigne 1992). Since the late eighteenth century, mouflons were also introduced to continental Europe for hunting purposes (Uloth 1972). These wild sheep prefer hills or low mountain ranges where they favor open habitats interspersed with forest and rocky areas, if available (Pfeffer 1967; Apollonio and Meneguz 2003). In the Alps, where they were introduced in the first half of the twentieth century (Pfeffer 1967), mouflons show a preference for meadows and the shrub/meadow interface (Pfeffer 1967; Apollonio and Meneguz 2003). Stray dogs (Perco 1977; Rossi et al. 1988; Cugnasse 1992; Nasiadka et al. 2021) and wolves (Meriggi and Lovari 1996; Poulle et al. 1998; Ståhlberg et al. 2017; Nasiadka et al. 2021) are the main predators of the Mediterranean mouflon in Europe. Since the last decade of the past century, wolves have been successfully recolonizing the Alps, where they had been eradicated at the beginning of the twentieth century (Fabbri et al. 2007), well before the first European mouflons were introduced. Accordingly, the wolf-mouflon interaction was a totally new event in the area.
The aim of this contribution is to describe the changes in spatial use of mouflon in the Western Alps (Italy), using a 25-year-extended series of count data of mouflons, collected with the same method, under the supervision of one of the authors (PGM). Counts were conducted during the birth season in early spring, when predation risk is likely to be stronger as adult mouflons are weakened by winter nutritional deprivation and lambs are more vulnerable to predation (Main et al. 1996). We expected that, according to the “landscape of fear” hypothesis (Ripple and Beschta 2003), wolves ranging in the study area would (i) negatively influence the mean yearly distance of mouflons from available refuge sites, and (ii) force mouflons to select sites with different characteristics, compared to years preceding wolf return. Finally, we investigated whether, according with the “reproductive strategy-predation risk hypothesis” (Ruckstuhl and Neuhaus 2000), spatial behavior would be more affected by predation risk in females than in males.
Materials and methods
The studied mouflon herd dwells in the Albergian Hunting Estate (7,170 ha, 45°2′0″ N; 7°3′0″ E), on the Italian side of the Western Alps. The area has mean elevation of 1,852 ± 457.2 m a.s.l. (minimum = 980; maximum = 3,049) and mean slope of 28 ± 10.9° (minimum = 0.2; maximum = 70.7). Mixed coniferous forest (Larix decidua and Pinus sylvestris) is present at lower altitudes, whereas shrubs (Rhodondendron ferrugineum, Juniperus spp., and Vaccinium spp.) and extensive meadows are dominating above the timber line, at approximatively 2,000 m a.s.l. Mouflons were introduced in 1962, with 12 founder individuals originating from current Croatia (Rossi et al. 1988). The study area is also home of the Northern chamois R. rupicapra, Alpine ibex C. ibex, roe deer C. capreolus, red deer C. elaphus, and wild boar Sus scrofa (Rossi et al. 1988). Potential predators are present, i.e., the golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos, the red fox Vulpes vulpes, and the wolf Canis lupus, the last one returned in 1996 after being locally extinct for approximately 70 years (Fabbri et al. 2007). Thenceforth, one to three wolf packs have been ranging in the area, with two more packs colonizing the area from 2001 (Marucco and Avanzinelli 2010). The mean number of wolves in each pack, measured at the end of winter, was reported to be 4.2 ± 1.8 (Marucco and Avanzinelli 2010).
Throughout the study, the herd was subject to regulated recreational hunting under a system of annual quotas (Supporting Table 1) defined following count-based annual assessments of the mouflon population. From 1988 to 2012, we recorded the size and structure (sex and age composition) of the mouflon population by spring counts carried out from 9 vantage points, scanning 85 subzones (Cruveille and Tufféry 1981). The herd was at high density from 1988 to 1995 (phase H — mean density value: 12.0 ± 1.0 animals/100 ha; mean absolute abundance: 618.5 ± 49.2 individuals) while a sharp decline occurred between 1996 and 1999, from 641 to 146 individuals (phase D). Then, the herd persisted at relatively lower density from 2000 to 2012 (phase L — mean density value: 1.9 ± 0.4 animals/100 ha; mean absolute abundance: 132 ± 43.5 individuals), without any signs of recovery. During counts, observations were reported by subzone on paper maps (scale 1:10,000), then georeferenced as the centroid of the subzone where each individual or group was spotted (accuracy ± 50 m). A point shapefile was built with an open-source GIS software (Qgis 2.0.1 — Quantum GIS Development Team, 2013).
In order to study the changes in spatial use of mouflons, three orographic rasters, i.e., elevation, slope, and terrain ruggedness index — TRI (Riley et al. 1999), were derived from the digital elevation model of the study area (dem — 50-m resolution — PrjCRS ED50 32 N) supplied by the Regional Cartographic Catalogue (http://www.geoportale.piemonte.it/cms/). TRI provides an objective quantitative measure of topographic heterogeneity. Information regarding land cover were derived from the Local Forestry Plans with a native resolution of 1:10,000 (PrjCRS ED50 32 N) (Piedmont Regional Cartographic Catalogue — http://www.sistemapiemonte.it/montagna/sifor/).
We defined available “refuge areas” as patches characterized by at least one of these characteristics: (i) presence of rocky slopes or rocky meadows, (ii) a slope value above 36° (third quartile of the slope values distribution in the study area), and (iii) a TRI value above 29 (third quartile of the TRI values distribution in the study area). In this way, we derived a raster map of the “refuge areas” which we used to calculate a raster of the distance of mouflons localizations from the nearest refuge site (QGIS 2.0.1 — “Proximity tool”).
We considered the yearly average distance (YAD) from a potential “refuge area” as an index of the herd response to predation pressure (QGIS 2.0.1 — “Point sampling tool”). We obtained YAD values for each spotted group by using the following formula:
where di is the distance of a localization from the closest refuge area, ni is the number of mouflons spotted in the single localization, and nTOT represents the total number of mouflons counted each year. The use of nTOT enabled to normalize the index by the mouflon population size along the years.
We used this index to assess (i) the YAD values from “refuge areas” in H and L phases, (ii) the trend of YAD values from 1988 to 2012, and (iii) the “sexual segregation hypotheses” (Main et al. 1996; Ruckstuhl and Neuhaus 2000), by comparing the YAD trend over the years in (1) ewes ≥ 1 years old and lambs vs. (2) males > 1 years old.
To evaluate the population response to predation risk, we also considered the orographic characteristics (i.e., elevation, slope, and TRI) associated to all localizations to assess: (i) the mean values of each characteristic in phases H and L, and (ii) the trend of these values from 1988 to 2012.
Between 1996 and 2000 (phase D), the study area was affected by two exceptionally severe winter seasons, particularly 1995/1996, which led to mass mortality due to starvation (PGM personal communication). To avoid a confounding effect of unusual weather on the herd spatial use (in particular the snow cover), we excluded this period from our comparative analysis. We checked all data series for normality, performing a Shapiro–Wilk test. According to the test results, we used either a Mann–Whitney nonparametric test or a Student’s t-test to compare these parameters before and after the return of wolves in the study area (H and L phases) and to test for the “sexual segregation hypothesis.” Accordingly, we used either Pearson’s or Spearman’s correlation tests to evaluate these parameters trend from 1988 to 2012. All statistical analyses were run, and figures were created using R version 3.0.2 (R Core Team 2013).
Results
During the period of study, 7,804 mouflons belonging to 235 groups were observed in 54 different subzones. The mean group size was 34.8 ± 42.2 mouflons, being 55.6 ± 56.4 in the high-density phase H (range: 1–232) and 17.9 ± 16.1 in phase L (range: 1–75). Based on the criteria proposed, 1,712 ha (23.9% of the study area) were identified as “refuge areas” (Fig. 1).
YAD significantly differed between phases H and L, i.e., low-density phase (Fig. 2a), shortening from 213.1 ± 40.9 to 93.8 ± 32.1 m (W = 95; p < 0.001). The YAD from the closest “refuge area” showed a significant negative trend over the years (rho = − 0.66; p < 0.01 — Fig. 3).
Orographic parameters of localizations differed between phases H and L (Fig. 2b−d and Table 1), and all values significantly increased over the years: elevation (r = 0.59; p < 0.01), slope (r = 0.65; p < 0.01), and TRI (r = 0.65; p < 0.01).
During phase H, mouflons of both sexes used patches with a similar distance from the closest “refuge area” (ewes and lambs — 207.1 ± 43.7 m; males — 215.8 ± 41.6 m; W = 23; p = n.s. — Fig. 4), whereas in phase L, ewes ranged significantly closer than males to “refuge areas” (75.8 ± 30.3 vs. 131.0 ± 53.6 m; W = 34; p < 0.01 — Fig. 4). A significant negative trend of the YAD was observed both in ewes and lambs (rho = − 0.72; p < 0.001) and males (r = − 0.52; p < 0.05).
Discussion
To our knowledge, this is the first study in Europe investigating the effects of wolf presence on the Mediterranean mouflon spatial use. So far, other studies have dealt with habitat and spatial use of mouflon, but all of them referring to areas free from wolves (Dubois et al. 1994; Bon et al. 1995; Cransac and Hewison 1997; Ciuti et al. 2009; Darmon et al. 2011; Marchand et al. 2015; Bourgoin et al. 2018).
“Refuge areas” are critical for the persistence of mouflons, even in areas where wolves are absent, but predators such as eagles and humans are present (Bon et al. 1995; Ciuti et al. 2009). In wild sheep, “refuge areas” have been characterized as steep slopes of broken, rocky terrain (O. aries — Pfeffer 1967; O. canadensis — Smith et al. 1991, Bleich 1999; O. dalli — Corti and Shackleton 2002). We thus have considered slope as a critical feature of a “refuge area” as well as the topographic ruggedness index (TRI), another important factor in identifying “refuge areas” (Frair et al. 2005; Laporte et al. 2010; Ciuti et al. 2012).
Our data support our working hypotheses. First, we showed that mouflons significantly reduced their average distance from refuge areas over the years, according to Pfeffer (1967) and Bon et al. (1995) who suggested that this species, under predation pressure, moves to broken, steep terrain leaving patches with higher forage quality. The same behavior has been observed for other species (Festa-Bianchet 1988; Berger et al. 2001; Walker et al. 2007; Grignolio et al. 2019) and it is consistent with the “landscape of fear” (Ripple and Beschta 2003). Our hypothesis is also confirmed by the fact that YAD from refuge areas decreased by 56% (from 213 to 94 m) in the low-density phase L, following wolves recolonization in 1996, supporting the idea that the first reaction of the herd was a change in spatial use, through a shift to safer areas (Creel et al. 2005). As a result, mouflons appeared to have modified their distribution in response to the predator settlement, with individuals exploiting patches closer to refuge areas being more likely to avoid predation, during phase L.
Our expectations were supported also by the orographic parameters analysis. The herd changed its spatial use over the years, selecting patches with higher values in elevation, slope, and ruggedness during phase L. Changes in elevation, as a reaction to predators because of lamb protection, have been reported by Festa-Bianchet (1988) referring to O. canadensis ewes during the pre-weaning period.
Remarkably, our results highlight that mouflons of both sexes (and not only ewes with lambs) dwelt closer to refuge areas over the years, although ewes were more affected than males. These findings are consistent with our assumptions and agree with the key predictions of the “reproductive strategy-predation risk hypothesis” (Ruckstuhl and Neuhaus 2000): (i) males select sites of higher quality (forage abundance), even with greater predation risk; (ii) females select sites of reduced predation risk, even with lower forage abundance. However, we were unable to directly test these predictions as we did not measure forage availability across the study period.
Our results are also consistent with studies reporting a development of anti-predatory behavior with increasing predation risk (Berger et al. 2001; Ale and Brown 2009). As mentioned above, the studied mouflons underwent a severe population crash between 1995 and 1998, due to a mass mortality event caused by winter starvation (PGM, personal observation). A recovery was expected in the following years, as observed in other wild sheep populations (Boussès et al. 1994; Moorcroft et al. 1996). However, the herd settled at low numbers. The return of a major predator in 1996 (Marucco et al. 2005) is likely to have affected the viability of the mouflon herd in our study area, preventing a recovery to previous population numbers. Mouflon herds on the French side of the Western Alps decreased in numbers soon after the establishment of wolf packs in their home-range (Poulle et al. 1997; Espuno 2004). In Europe, mouflons are among the favorite prey of the wolf, and they have been reported to be positively selected even when in sympatry with other ungulates (Meriggi and Lovari 1996; Poulle et al. 1998; Ståhlberg et al. 2017; Nasiadka et al. 2021). Possible reasons for this sensitivity to predation, compared with sympatric native ungulates, may be: (i) the limited skills when moving on snow covered terrain (Cruveille and Tufféry 1981); (ii) the apparent weakness of efficient anti-predatory behavior by ewes with lambs (Ferrier M. personal communication); and (iii) the fact that the mouflon is the only ungulate, out of the six species present in the study area, that makes unusually loud and persistent vocalizations from birth to 7 months of age (Apollonio and Meneguz 2003).
However, although our results support our hypothesis that the presence of a major predator had a strong impact on the spatial use of prey, they do not explain if predation has affected the proper recovery of this mouflon herd.
Other variables could also have had a role in driving the described pattern, namely (i) intraspecific competition, (ii) hunting pressure, (iii) density-dependent factors, and (iv) climate changes.
The population size of red deer and chamois significantly increased among the years in the Albergian Hunting Estate (PGM, unpublished data). These species showed a significant dietary overlap with the mouflon herd in this study (Bertolino et al. 2009). However, there is no clear indication in the literature about competition between mouflon and red deer, with available studies suggesting that mouflons appear to outcompete red deer in Hungary (Nahlik and Dremmel 2017) and Ukraine (Smagol et al. 2019). Similarly, competition with the chamois is reported to be favorable to the mouflon in the Alps (Pfeffer and Settimo 1973; Chirichella et al. 2013).
Hunting has always been conducted in the study area, both before and after the wolf returned in the area. Remarkably, the only change in hunting activity was that the number of mouflons harvested decreased together with the population size, with the number of culled mouflons reduced to less than 10 animals/year in the period after the predator return (mean annual harvested = 6.8 individuals; PGM unpublished data). Furthermore, it has often been shown that over-hunted ungulates populations may recover relatively rapidly if hunting is forbidden or substantially reduced (Coulson et al. 2004). Accordingly, an opposite pattern would have been expected in response to hunting reduction, with animals less threatened and thus more likely to expand their range.
Population density could also have influenced the herd spatial use. The population crashed by 77% in only 4 years (decreasing phase D), after two particularly severe winters. Lower densities might have prevented aggregation of individuals and, consequently, reduced the dilution effect provided by large groups (Hamilton 1971). As a result, an increase in perceived predation risk might have pushed the herd to use safer patches (Kotler et al. 1994; Bleich 1999; Corti and Shackleton 2002; Grignolio et al. 2007; 2019). However, other authors have shown the opposite, with ungulate gregariousness increasing with population density (Pépin and Gerard 2008; Vander Wal et al. 2013). In addition, according to the theory on density-dependent habitat selection and the ideal free distribution (Fretwell and Lucas 1970), it is expected that at low density, mouflon would select patches with higher forage abundance, because of lower intraspecific competition, even in the presence of wolves (van Beest et al. 2016). Finally, according to what was observed in an Alpine ibex population, where modifications in ibex behavioral patterns (including changes in spatial use) following wolf recolonization of the area could not be explained by density changes only (Grignolio et al. 2019), density alone does not explain the lack of recover after phase D.
Finally, there is increasing evidence that climate change-driven warming temperatures are resulting in wild mountain ungulates to move at higher elevation, where more nutritious pastures are present (Büntgen et al. 2017; Lovari et al. 2020). According to the forage selection hypothesis (Main et al. 1996), ungulate females are expected to select patches with higher nutritive forage to meet the energetic demands of lactation (Fattorini et al. 2019). If this was true, the stronger decrease in YAD for females might have been the result of the joint action of predation risk and global warming, resulting in an increase in elevation in the ewe’s chase for more nutritious grounds. To disentangle the effects of these two factors (Main 2008), future studies should assess pasture productivity changes in respect to climatic factors (e.g., mean temperature) over the period of study.
In conclusion, our study provides insights on the role played by wolf predation on the Albergian mouflon population. Rather than a mere direct predation impact, we suggest a mixed direct and indirect effect, the latter implying the change in habitat use through a shift to safer patches. This result has been often reported for other ungulates (Kotler et al. 1994; Bleich 1999; Corti and Shackleton 2002; Grignolio et al. 2007; 2019), but to the best of our knowledge, not clearly showed so far for the Mediterranean mouflon (but see: Pfeffer 1967; Bon et al. 1995; Ciuti et al. 2009).
To obtain a broader view of the determinants impacting on the dynamics and the viability of free-ranging ungulate populations, we recommend that indirect effects, such as those described in this study, be considered for the effective management and conservation of both alien and native ungulate populations. As wild ungulate populations increase across Europe, they also expand their distribution range generating large-scale human-wildlife conflicts in terms of e.g., crop damage and collisions (Apollonio et al. 2010; Carpio et al. 2020). The results of our study suggest that predator recovery at European scale may help limiting and regulating wild ungulate population growth. In this way, it could be considered a sustainable management tool particularly on natural or protected areas (Pascual-Rico et al. 2020).
References
Albon SD, Langvatn R (1992) Plant phenology and the benefits of migration in a temperate ungulate. Oikos 65:502–513
Ale BA, Brown JS (2009) Prey behavior leads to predator: a case study of the Himalayan tahr and the snow leopard in Sagarmathaa (Mt. Everest) National Park. Nepal Israel Journal of Ecology & Evolution 55:315–327
Apollonio M, Meneguz PG (2003) Il Muflone. In Boitani, L., Lovari, S., Vigna Taglianti A. (Ed.) Fauna d’Italia, Vol.: Mammalia III - Carnivora-Artiodactyla. Edizioni Calderini Bologna, 434 pp
Apollonio M, Ciuti S, Luccarini S (2005) Long-term influence of human presence on spatial sexual segregation in fallow deer (Dama dama). J Mammal 86:937–946
Apollonio M, Andersen R, Putman R (2010). European ungulates and their management in the 21st century: Cambridge University Press.
Carpio AJ, Apollonio M, Acevedo P (2020) Wild ungulate overabundance in Europe: contexts, causes, monitoring and management recommendations. Mammal Rev 51(1):95–108
Baruzzi C, Lovari S, Fattorini N (2017) Catch me if you can: antipredatory behaviour of chamois to the wolf. Ethol Ecol Evol 29:589–598
Berger J, Swenson JE, Persson IL (2001) Recolonizing carnivores and naïve prey: conservation lessons from Pleistocene extinctions. Science 291:1036–1039
Bertolino S, Di Montezemolo N, Bassano B (2009) Food–niche relationships within a guild of alpine ungulates including an introduced species. J Zool 277(1):63–69
Bleich VC (1999) Mountain sheep and coyotes: patterns of predator evasion in a mountain ungulate. J Mammal 80:283–289
Bon R, Joachim J, Maublanc ML (1995) Do lambs affect feeding habitat use by lactating female mouflons in spring in areas free of predators? J Zool 235:43–51
Bongi P, Ciuti S, Grignolio S, Del Frate M, Simi S, Gandelli D, Apollonio M (2008) Anti-predator behaviour, space use and habitat selection in female roe deer during the fawning season in a wolf area. J Zool 276:242–251
Bourgoin G, Marchand P, Hewison AM, Ruckstuhl KE, Garel M (2018) Social behaviour as a predominant driver of sexual, age-dependent and reproductive segregation in Mediterranean mouflon. Anim Behav 136:87–100
Boussès P, Réale D, Chapuis JL (1994) Mortalité hivernale massive dans la population de mouflons de Corse Ovis musimon de l’archipel subantarctique de Kerguelen. Mammalia 58:211–224
Büntgen U, Greuter L, Bollmann K, Jenny H, Liebhold A, Galván JD, Stenseth NC, Andrew C, Mysterud A (2017) Elevational range shifts in four mountain ungulate species from the Swiss Alps. Ecosphere 8(4):e01761
Chirichella R, Ciuti S, Apollonio M (2013) Effects of livestock and non-native mouflon on use of high-elevation pastures by Alpine chamois. Mamm Biol 78(5):344–350
Ciuti S, Pipia A, Grignolio S, Ghiandai F, Apollonio M (2009) Space use, habitat selection and activity patterns of female Sardinian mouflon Ovis orientalis musimon during the lambing season. Eur J Wildl Res 55:589–595
Ciuti S, Northrup JM, Muhly TB, Simi S, Musiani M, Pitt JA, Boyce MS (2012) Effects of humans on behaviour of wildlife exceed those of natural predators in a landscape of fear. PLoS ONE 7:e50611
Corti P, Shackleton DM (2002) Relationship between predation-risk factors and sexual segregation in Dall’s sheep Ovis dalli dalli. Can J Zool 80:108–2117
Coulson T, Guinness F, Pemberton J, Clutton-Brock (2004) The demographic consequences of releasing a population of red deer from culling. Ecology, 85(2), 411–422.)
Cransac N, Hewison AJM (1997) Seasonal use and selection of habitat by mouflon Ovis gmelini: comparison of the sexes. Behav Proc 41:57–67
Creel S, Winnie J Jr, Maxwell B, Hamlin K, Creel M (2005) Elk alter habitat selection as an antipredator response to wolves. Ecology 86:3387–3397
Cruveille MH, Tufféry M (1981) Potentialités des Alpes Françaises pour le Mouflon de Corse. Rapport de stage de 2e année de l’Ecole Nationale du Génie Rural, des Eaux et des Forets, Option Aménagement et Environnement, Paris, 114 pp
Cugnasse JM (1992) Mortalitè hors plan de chasse chez les mouflons de Corse Ovis ammon musimon des monts du Caroux et de l’Espinouse (Herault). Bull Mens ONC 166:35–39
Darmon G, Calenge C, Loison A, Jullien JM, Maillard D, Lopez JF (2011) Spatial distribution and habitat selection in coexisting species of mountain ungulates. Ecography 35:44–53
Dubois M, Gerard JF, Vincent JP (1994) Areas of concentrated use within seasonal ranges of Corsican mouflons: importance of psychophysiological and ecological contexts in their modulation. Behav Proc 32:163–172
Espuno N (2004) Impact du loup (Canis lupus) sur les ongules sauvages et domestiques dans le massif du Mercantour. Thesis: 1–214. Université Montpellier II, France
Fabbri E, Miquel C, Lucchini V, Santini A, Caniglia R, Duchamp C, Weber JM, Lequette B, Marucco F, Boitani L, Fumagalli L, Taberlet P, Randi E (2007) From the Apennines to the Alps: colonization genetics of the naturally expanding Italian wolf Canis lupus population. Mol Ecol 16:1661–1671
Fattorini N, Brunetti C, Baruzzi C, Chiatante G, Lovari S, Ferretti F (2019) Temporal variation in foraging activity and grouping patterns in a mountain-dwelling herbivore: environmental and endogenous drivers. Behav Proc 167:103909
Festa-Bianchet M (1988) Seasonal range selection in bighorn sheep: conflicts between forage quality, forage quantity, and predator avoidance. Oecologia 75:580–586
Forsyth DM, Hickling GJ (1998) Increasing Himalayan tahr and decreasing chamois densities in the eastern Southern Alps, New Zealand: evidence for interspecific competition. Oecologia 113:377–382
Frair JL, Merrill EH, Visscher DR, Fortin D, Beyer HL, Morales JM (2005) Scales of movement by elk Cervus elaphus in response to heterogeneity in forage resources and predation risk. Landscape Ecol 20:273–287
Fretwell SD, Lucas HR (1970) On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. I Theoretical Development Acta Biotheorica 19:16–36
Fryxell JM, Wilmshurst JF, Sinclair AR (2004) Predictive models of movement by Serengeti grazers. Ecology 85:2429–2435
Geist V (1971) The relation of social evolution and dispersal in ungulates during the Pleistocene, with emphasis on the old world deer and the genus Bison. Quatern Res 1:285–315
Grignolio S, Rossi I, Bassano B, Apollonio M (2007) Predation risk as a factor affecting sexual segregation in Alpine ibex. J Mammal 88:1488–1497
Grignolio S, Brivio F, Sica N, Apollonio M (2019) Sexual differences in the behavioural response to a variation in predation risk. Ethology 125(9):603–612
Hamilton WD (1971) Geometry for the selfish herd. J Theor Biol 31:295–311
Hebblewhite M, Merrill EH (2009) Trade-offs between predation risk and forage differ between migrant strategies in a migratory ungulate. Ecology 90:3445–3454
Hochman V, Kotler BP (2007) Patch use, apprehension, and vigilance behavior of Nubian Ibex under perceived risk of predation. Behav Ecol 18(2):368–374
Kotler BP, Gross JE, Mitchell WA (1994) Applying patch use to assess aspects of foraging behavior in Nubian ibex. J Wildl Manag 58:299–307
Laporte I, Muhly TB, Pitt JA, Alexander M, Musiani M (2010) Effects of wolves on elk and cattle behaviors: implications for livestock production and wolf conservation. PLoS ONE 5:e11954
Lima SL, Dill LM (1990) Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68:619–640
Lovari S, Cosentino R (1986) Seasonal habitat selection and group size of the Abruzzo chamois Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata. Ital J Zool 53:73–78
Lovari S, Franceschi S, Chiatante G, Fattorini L, Fattorini N, Ferretti F (2020) Climatic changes and the fate of mountain herbivores. Clim Change 162(4):2319–2337
Main MB, Weckerly FW, Bleich VC (1996) Sexual segregation in ungulates: new directions for research. J Mammal 77:449–461
Main MB (2008) Reconciling competing ecological explanations for sexual segregation in ungulates. Ecology 89:693–704
Marchand P, Garel M, Bourgoin G, Dubray D, Maillard D, Loison A (2015) Sex-specific adjustments in habitat selection contribute to buffer mouflon against summer conditions. Behav Ecol 26(2):472–482
Marucco F, Avanzinelli E (2010) Stato, distribuzione e dimensione della popolazione di lupo in Regione Piemonte. Rapporto Progetto Lupo Regione Piemonte 1999–2010. Regione Piemonte., 138 pp
Marucco F, Avanzinelli E, Gazzola A (2005) Rapporto annuale 2005 – Progetto Lupo Piemonte. Regione Piemonte, Torino, pp 1–58
Meriggi A, Lovari S (1996) A review of wolf predation in Southern Europe: does the wolf prefer wild prey to livestock? J Appl Ecol 33:1561–1571
Moorcroft IR, Albom SD, Penberton JM, Stevenson IR, Clutton-Brock TH (1996) Density-dependent selection in a fluctuating ungulate population. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series d: Biological Sciences 263:31–38
Mooring MS, Fitzpatrick TA, Benjamin JE, Fraser IC, Nishihira TT, Reisig DD, Rominger EM (2003) Sexual segregation in desert bighorn sheep Ovis canadensis mexicana. Behaviour 140:183–207
Nahlik A, Dremmel L (2017) Competition between a native and a non-native ungulate — is mouflon an invasive species within Hungarian fauna? In abstract book of the 33rd International Union of Game Biologists Congress. 22–25 August 2017, Montpellier – France
Namgail T, Fox JL, Bhatnagar YV (2007) Habitat shift and time budget of the Tibetan argali: the influence of livestock grazing. Ecol Res 22:25–31
Nasiadka P, Wajdzik M, Skubis J (2021) A comprehensive over 100 years history of mouflon (Ovis musimon) in Poland: from the promising beginning in 1902 to questionable future in 2014—a case study of wildlife management history. Appl Ecol Environ Res 19(2):993–1017
Pascual-Rico R, Martín-López B, Sánchez-Zapata JA, Morales-Reyes Z (2020) Scientific priorities and shepherds’ perceptions of ungulate’s contributions to people in rewilding landscapes. Sci Total Environ 705:135876
Pépin D, Gerard JF (2008) Group dynamics and local population density dependence of group size in the Pyrenean chamois, Rupicapra pyrenaica. Anim Behav 75:361–369
Perco F (1977) Il muflone. Edagricole, Bologna, p 93
Pfeffer P (1967) Le mouflon de Corse Ovis ammon musimon (Schreber, 1782); position systematique, ecologie et ethologie comparees. Muséum national d’histoire naturelle, Laboratoire de zoologie des mammiféres. 262 pag
Pfeffer P, Settimo R (1973) Déplacement saisonniers et compétition vitale entre mouflons, chamois et bouquetins dans la Rèserve du Mercantour (Alpes maritimes) Mammalia 37:203–219
Poulle ML, Carles L, Lequette B (1997) Significance of ungulates in the diet of recently settled wolves in the Mercantour mountains (southeastern France). Revue D’écologie 52:357–368
Poulle ML, Houard T, Lequette B (1998) Predation exercée par le loup Canis lupus sur le mouflon Ovis gmelini et le chamois Rupricapra rupricapra dans le massif du Mercantour (Sud-est de la France). Gibier Faune Sauvage 15:1149–1159
QGIS Development Team (2013) QGIS Geographic Information System. Open Source Geospatial Foundation Project. http://qgis.osgeo.org
R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/
Riley SJ, DeGloria SD, Elliot R (1999) A terrain ruggedness index that quantifies topographic heterogeneity. Intermountain Journal of Sciences 5:23–27
Ripple WJ, Beschta RL (2003) Wolf reintroduction, predation risk, and cottonwood recovery in Yellowstone National Park. For Ecol Manage 184:299–313
Ripple WJ, Beschta RL (2004) Wolves and the ecology of fear: can predation risk structure ecosystems? Bioscience 54:755–766
Risenhoover KL, Bailey JA (1985) Foraging ecology of mountain sheep: implications for habitat management. J Wildl Manag 49:797–804
Rossi L, Meneguz PG, De Meneghi D (1988) Pages 102–110 in Piano territoriale faunistico della Provincia di Torino, Zona Alpi. Assessorato Caccia e Pesca, 180 pp
Ruckstuhl KE, Neuhaus P (2000) Sexual segregation in ungulates: a new approach. Behaviour 137:361–377
Ruckstuhl KE, Neuhaus P (2002) Sexual segregation in ungulates: a comparative test of three hypotheses. Biol Rev 77(1):77–96
Smagol V, Babich O, Kaminetskyi V, Yarysh V, Smagol V (2019) Formation of inter-species links in ungulates in the Azov-Sivash National Nature Park. Vestnik Zoologii 53(3):255–262
Smith TS, Flinders JT, Winn DS (1991) Habitat evaluation procedure for Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep in the Intermountain West. Western North American Naturalist 51:205–225
Ståhlberg S, Bassi E, Viviani V, Apollonio M (2017) Quantifying prey selection of Northern and Southern European wolves (Canis lupus). Mamm Biol 83(1):34–43
Swenson JE (1982) Effects of hunting on habitat use by mule deer on mixed-grass prairie in Montana. Wildl Soc Bull 10:115–120
Tilton ME, Willard EE (1982) Winter habitat selection by mountain sheep. J Wildl Manag 46:359–366
Uloth W (1972) To the history of the distribution, introduction and cross-breeding of the Thyrrenic mouflon in Europe and oversea. Acta Theriol 17:412–413
van Beest FM, McLoughlin PD, Mysterud A, Brook RK (2016) Functional responses in habitat selection are density dependent in a large herbivore. Ecography 39(6):515–523
Vander Wal E, Van Beest FM, Brook RK (2013) Density-dependent effects on group size are sex-specific in a gregarious ungulate. PLoS ONE 8(1):e53777
Vigne JD (1992) Zooarchaeology and the biogeographical history of the mammals of Corsica and Sardinia since the last ice age. Mammal Rev 22:87–96
Wakelyn LA (1987) Changing habitat conditions on bighorn sheep ranges in Colorado. J Wildl Manag 51:904–912
Walker AB, Parker KL, Gillingham MP, Gustine DD, Lay RJ (2007) Habitat selection by female Stone’s sheep in relation to vegetation, topography, and risk of predation. Ecoscience 14:55–70
Wittmer HU, Sinclair AR, McLellan BN (2005) The role of predation in the decline and extirpation of woodland caribou. Oecologia 144:257–267
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Azienda Faunistico Venatoria Albergian, Fenestrelle (TO) and especially to the directors A. Cega and E. Volontè and the game keepers B. Pé, T. Agù, E. Clapier, B. Colombo, M. Ferrier, A. Vignetta, and E. Audibusso for the help in field work. S. Lovari provided advice on a previous draft.
Funding
Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi di Torino within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Tizzani, P., Bessone, M., Rossi, L. et al. Does predation risk affect spatial use in an introduced ungulate species? The case of a Mediterranean mouflon alpine colony. Eur J Wildl Res 68, 66 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-022-01611-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-022-01611-9