Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Wildlife and the city. Modelling wild boar use of urban nature: Empirical contribution, methodological proposal

Bordeaux (France) as an example

  • Published:
Urban Ecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Implementation of nature into urban areas provides resting, breeding, watering, feeding and movement opportunities for urban wildlife, whose knowledge of spatial ecology is still incomplete. This article focuses on space use by urban wild boar Sus scrofa in the central part of the Bordeaux Metropolis (France). We used species distribution modelling to assess urban ecological niche of wild boars and to identify landscape features that they select or avoid. We created a database based on field surveys carried out on a sample of grid cells where evidence of boar presence was recorded. We used logistic regression models to predict wild boar presence in the study area. Our results showed that the probability of boar presence was driven by access to resources and modulated by avoidance of densely built-up areas. In contrast, urban boars appeared to be indifferent to habitat fragmentation and secondary roads. Finally, a large part of the urbanistic urban green frame of Bordeaux was likely to support wild boar. These results provide a first picture of the situation, but must be considered as a first stage of investigations on the spatial ecology of urban boars. They also need to be placed in a broader socio-ecological context. From a life science perspective, urban wild boars provide an excellent example of urban wildlife adaptation. However, human-wildlife coexistence also raises planning, management, socio-cultural and ethical issues. We argue that objectifying wildlife use of urban space is a prerequisite to implement meaningful management measures. With this in mind, we proposed and discussed a simple protocol that could be adapted to other species whose urban ranges are poorly known.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Map 1
Photo plate 1
Map 2
Fig. 1
Photo plate 2
Map 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data will be available upon request to the corresponding author

References

  • Abaigar T, Del Barrio G, Vericad JR (1994) Habitat preference of wild boar (Sus scrofa L., 1758) in a Mediterranean environment. Indirect Evaluation by Signs Mammalia 58:201–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Acevedo P, Quiros-Fernandez F, Casal J, Vicente J (2014) Spatial distribution of wild boar population abundance: Basic information for spatial epidemiology and wildlife management. Ecol Indic 36:594–600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allain R (2004) Morphologie urbaine. Géographie, aménagement et architecture de la ville. Armand Colin, Malakoff

    Google Scholar 

  • Amelot X, Couderchet L, Noucher M (2017) Données institutionnelles et données contributives sur la biodiversité, quelle légitimité ? M@ppemonde 120:1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Amici A, Serrani F, Rossi CM, Primi R (2012) Increase in crop damage caused by wild boar (Sus scrofa L.): the “refuge effect.” Agron Sustainable Dev 32:683–692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrèn H (1994) Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review. Oikos 71(3):355–366

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Aronson MF, Lepczych CA, Evans KL, Goddard MA et al (2017) Biodiversity in the city: Key challenges for urban green space management. Front Ecol Environ 15:189–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arregui AG (2023) Reversible pigs: An infraspecies ethnography of wild boars in Barcelona. Am Ethnologist 50:115–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballari SA, Barrios-García MN (2014) A review of wild boar Sus scrofa diet and factors affecting food selection in native and introduced ranges. Mammal Rev 44:124–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banzo M, Couderchet L (2013) Intégration de l’agriculture aux politiques et projets territoriaux urbains. Le Cas Bordelais Sud-Ouest Européen 35:5–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banzo M, Prost D (2009) Aménagements paysagers et renouvellement urbain dans la périphérie bordelaise. M@ppemonde 93:1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Basak SM, Hossain MdS, Okarma ODT et al (2022) Public perceptions and attitudes toward urban wildlife encounters. A decade of change. Sci Total Environ 834:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155603

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Beninde J, Veith M, Hochkirch A (2015) Biodiversity in cities needs space: a meta-analysis of factors determining intra-urban biodiversity variation. Ecol Lett 18:581–592

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bobek B, Furtek J, Bobek J, Merta D et al (2017) Spatio-temporal characteristics of crop damage caused by wild boar in north-eastern Poland. Crop Prot 93:106–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosch J, Peris S, Fonseca C, Martinez M et al (2012) Distribution, abundance and density of the wild boar on the Iberian Peninsula, based on the CORINE program and hunting statistics. Folia Zool 61(2):138–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brigant F, Giunta L, Labèque S (2018) Le SCoT de l’aire métropolitaine bordelaise : de la métropole au projet intégré de territoire. Scienze Del Territorio 6:242–257

    Google Scholar 

  • Brivio F, Grignolio S, Brogi R, Benazzi M et al (2017) An analysis of intrinsic and extrinsic factors affecting the activity of a nocturnal species: The wild boar. Mamm Biol 84:73–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brogi R, Apollonio M, Brivio F, Merli E, Grignolio S (2022) Behavioural syndromes going wild: individual risk-taking behaviours of free-ranging wild boar. Anim Behav 194:79–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broz L, Garcia Arregui A, O’Mahony K (2021) Wild Boar Events and the Veterinarization of Multispecies Coexistence. Front Conserv Sci 2:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt VH (1943) Territoriality and home range as applied to mammals. J Mammal 24:346–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cahill S, Limona F, Cabañeros L, Calomardo F (2012) Characteristics of wild boar (Sus scrofa) habituation to urban areas in the Collserola Natural Park (Barcelona) and comparison with other locations. Anim Biodivers Conserv 35:221–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cahill S, Limona F, Gràcia J (2003) Spacing and nocturnal activity of wild boar Sus scrofa in a Mediterranean metropolitan park. Wildl Biol 9:3–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castillo-Contreras R, Carvalho J, Serrano E, Mentaberre G et al (2018) Urban wild boars prefer fragmented areas with food resources near natural corridors. Sci Total Environ 615:282–288

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Castillo-Contreras R, Mentaberre G, Fernandez Aguilar X, Conejero C et al (2021) Wild boar in the city: Phenotypic responses to urbanisation. Sci Total Environ 773:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145593

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ciach M, Tetkowski P, Fedyń I (2023) Local-scale habitat configuration makes a niche for wildlife encroaching into an urban landscape: grubbing sites of wild boar Sus scrofa in a city matrix. Urban Ecosyst 26:629–639

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins MK, Magle SB, Gallo T (2021) Global trends in urban wildlife ecology and conservation. Biol Conserv 261:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coman IA, Cooper-Norris CE, Longing S, Perry G (2022) It Is a Wild World in the City: Urban Wildlife Conservation and Communication in the Age of COVID-19. Diversity 14:1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/d14070539

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Conejero C, López-Olvera JR, González-Crespo C, Ráez-Bravo A et al (2022) Assessing mammal trapping standards in wild boar drop-net capture. Sci Rep 12:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croft S, Franzetti B, Gill R, Massei G (2020) Too many wild boar? Modelling fertility control and culling to reduce wild boar numbers in isolated populations. PLoS ONE 15(9):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0238429

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Csokas A, Schally G, Szabo L, Csanyi S et al (2020) Space use of wild boar (Sus Scrofa) in Budapest: are they resident or transient city dwellers? Biologia Futura 71:39–51

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ditchkoff SS, Saalfeld ST, Gibson CJ (2006) Animal behavior in urban ecosystems: Modifications due to human-induced stress. Urban Ecosyst 9:5–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elith J, Leathwick JR (2009) Species Distribution Models: Ecological Explanation and Prediction Across Space and Time. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 40(1):677–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emond P, Bréda C, Denayer D (2021) Doing the “dirty work”: how hunters were enlisted in sanitary rituals and wild boars destruction to fight Belgium’s ASF (African Swine Fever) outbreak. Anthropozoologica 56(6):87–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engeman RM, Massei G, Sage M, Gentle MN (2013) Monitoring wild pig populations: a review of methods. Environ Sci Pollut Res 20:8077–8091

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fattebert J, Baubet E, Slotow R, Fischer C (2017) Landscape effects on wild boar home range size under contrasting harvest regimes in a human-dominated agro-ecosystem. Eur J Wildl Res 63(2):1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FDC33 - Fédération départementale des chasseurs de la Gironde (2021) Plan de gestion Faune sauvage de la Métropole de Bordeaux, 172 pp

  • Fidino M, Gallo T, Lehrer EW, Murray MH et al (2021) Landscape-scale differences among cities alter common species’ responses to urbanization. Ecol Appl 31(2):e02253. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fonseca C (2008) Winter habitat selection by wild boar Sus scrofa in southeastern Poland. Eur J Wildl Res 54(2):361–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagnol L, Mounet C, Arpin I (2018) De la piste animale aux lignes de désir urbaines. Une Approche Géoichnologique De La Trace, L’information Géographique 82(2):11–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaillard JM, Hebblewhite M, Loison A, Fuller M et al (2010) Habitat–performance relationships: finding the right metric at a given spatial scale. Philos Trans R Soc Lond, B 365:2255–2265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaynor KM, Hojnowski CE, Carter NH, Brashares JS (2018) The influence of human disturbance on wildlife nocturnality. Science 360:1232–1235

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gérard JF, Cargnelutti B, Spitz F, Valet G, Sardin T (1991) Habitat use of wild boar in a French agroecosystem from late winter to early summer. Acta Theriol 36:119–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gimenez-Anaya A, Herrero J, Rosell C, Couto S, Garcia-Serrano A (2008) Food habits of wild boars (Sus scrofa) in a Mediterranean coastal wetland. Wetlands 28:197–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González-Crespo C, Serrano E, Cahill S, Castillo-Contreras R et al (2018) Stochastic assessment of management strategies for a Mediterranean peri-urban wild boar population. PLoS ONE 13:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202289

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Grasland C (2008) La Notion de discontinuité en géographie. In: Frederic A, Génin A (eds) Continu et discontinu dans l’espace géographique. Presses universitaires François-Rabelais, Tours, pp 117–144

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Guisan A, Thuiller W (2005) Predicting species distribution: offering more than simple habitat models. Ecol Lett 8:993–1009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guisan A, Zimmermann NE (2000) Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol Model 135(2–3):147–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagemann J, Conejero C, Stillfried M, Mentaberre G et al (2022) Genetic population structure defines wild boar as an urban exploiter species in Barcelona, Spain. Sci Total Environ 833:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155126

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen R, Pauleit S (2014) From Multifunctionality to Multiple Ecosystem Services? A Conceptual Framework for Multifunctionality in Green Infrastructure Planning for Urban Areas. Ambio 43(4):516–529

    Article  ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hearn R, Watkins C, Balzaretti R (2014) The cultural and land use implications of the reappearance of the wild boar in North West Italy: a case study of the Val di Vara. J Rural Stud 36:52–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgetts T, Lorimer J (2015) Methodologies for animals’ geographies: cultures, communication and genomics. Cult Geogr 22(2):285–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honda T (2009) Environmental factors affecting the distribution of the wild boar, sika deer, Asiatic black bear and Japanese macaque in Central Japan, with implications for human-wildlife conflict. Mammal Study 34:107–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honda T, Kawauchi N (2011) Methods for constructing a wild boar relative-density map to resolve human-wild boar conflicts. Mammal Study 36:79–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson GE (1957) Concluding Remarks (Population studies—animal ecology and demography). Cold Spring Harbor Symp Quant Biol 22:415–427. https://doi.org/10.1101/SQB.1957.022.01.039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ikeda T, Kuninaga N, Suzuki T, Ikushima S, Suzuki M (2019) Tourist-wild boar (Sus scrofa) interactions in urban wildlife management. Glob Ecol Conserv 18:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • INSEE - Institut National de la statistique et des études économiques (2023) Statistiques et études, démographie, département de la Gironde - Données harmonisées des recensements de la population à partir de 1968. https://www.insee.fr/fr/statistiques?taille=100&debut=0&theme=0&geo=DEP-33&collection=4. Accessed 20 Oct 2023

  • Jaeger JAG (2000) Landscape division, splitting index, and effective mesh size: new measures of landscape fragmentation. Landscape Ecol 15:115–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakubas D, Rys M, Lazarus M (2018) Factors affecting wildlife-vehicle collision on the expressway in a suburban area in northern Poland. North-West J Zool 14(1):107–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Janoska F, Farkas A, Marosan M, Fodor JT (2018) Wild Boar (Sus scrofa) Home Range and Habitat Use in Two Romanian Habitats. Acta Silv Et Lignaria Hungarica 14(1):51–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Valverde A, Lobo JM, Hortal J (2008) Not as good as they seem: the importance of concepts in species distribution modelling. Divers Distrib 14:885–890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johann F, Handschuh M, Linderoth P, Dormann CF, Arnold J (2020) Adaptation of wild boar (Sus scrofa) activity in a human-dominated landscape. BMC Ecol 20:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12898-019-0271-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson DH (1980) The comparison of usage and availability measurements for evaluating resource preference. Ecology 61:65–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordt AM, Lange M, Kramer-Schadt S, Nielsend LH et al (2016) Spatio-temporal modelling of the invasive potential of wild boar—a conflict-prone species—using multi-source citizen science data. Prev Vet Med 124:36–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keuling O, Massei G (2021) Does hunting affect the behavior of wild pigs? Hum-Wild Interact 15:44–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Keuling O, Strauß E, Siebert U (2016) Regulating wild boar populations is “somebody else’s problem”! Human dimension in wild boar management. Sci Total Environ 554–555:311–319

    Article  ADS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Keuling O, Lauterbach K, Stier N, Roth M (2010) Hunter feedback of individually marked wild boar Sus scrofa L.: dispersal and efficiency of hunting in northeastern Germany. Eur J Wildl Res 56:159–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konopiński MK, Baś G, Bojarska K (2022) Can attitude toward humans cause isolation? Marked genetic distinction of urban wild boar population. Hystrix, Italian J Mammal 33(1):34–40. https://doi.org/10.4404/hystrix-00459-2021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotulski Y, König A (2008) Conflicts, crises and challenges: Wild boar in the Berlin City – A social empirical and statistical survey. Nat Croat 17:233–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowarik I, Fischer LK, Kendal D (2020) Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Urban Development. Sustainability 12:1–8. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12124964

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lecis R, Dondina O, Orioli V, Biosa D et al (2022) Main roads and land cover shaped the genetic structure of a Mediterranean island wild boar population. Ecol Evol 12:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemel J, Truve J, Söderberg B (2003) Variation in ranging and activity behaviour of European wild boar (Sus scrofa) in Sweden. Wildl Biol 9:29–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Licoppe A, Prévot C, Cahill S, Bovy C et al (2014) Enquête internationale sur le sanglier en zone péri-urbaine. Forêt Wallonne 131:3–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombardini M, Meriggi A, Fozzi A (2017) Factors influencing wild boar damage to agricultural crops in Sardinia (Italy). Curr Zool 63(5):507–514

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lowry H, Lill A, Wong BBM (2013) Behavioural responses of wildlife to urban environments. Biol Rev 88:537–549

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luniak M (2004) Synurbization - adaptation of animal wildlife to urban development. In: Shaw W et al (eds) Proceedings 4th Intl Urban Wildl Symp. University of Arizona, Tucson, pp 50–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Marin C, Couderchet L, Lemoigne L (2023) Le sanglier urbain, impossible cohabitation ? GéoRegards Accepted for publication, Les disservices et le désarroi bordelais

    Google Scholar 

  • Marin C (2023) Sauvage en ville: le sanglier bordelais. Bordeaux Montaigne University, France

    Google Scholar 

  • Marini F, Franzetti B, Calabrese A, Cappellini S (2009) Response to human presence during nocturnal line transect surveys in fallow deer (Dama dama) and wild boar (Sus scrofa). Eur J Wildl Res 55(2):107–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marmion M, Parviainen M, Luoto M, Heikkinen RK, Thuiller W (2009) Evaluation of consensus methods in predictive species distribution modelling. Divers Distrib 15:59–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massei G, Cowan D (2014) Fertility control to mitigate human–wildlife conflicts: A review. Wildl Res 41(1):1–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massei G, Kindberg J, Licoppe A, Gacić D, Šprem N, Kamler J et al (2015) Wild boar populations up, numbers of hunters down? A review of trends and implications for Europe. Pest Manag Sci 71:492–500

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mata C, Hervás I, Herranz J, Suárez F, Malo JE (2008) Are motorway wildlife passages worth building? Vertebrate use of road-crossing structures on a Spanish motorway. J Environ Manage 88(3):407–415

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam G (1984) Connectivity: a fundamental ecological characteristic of landscape pattern. In: Brandt J, Agger P (eds) Proceedings of first international seminar on methodology in landscape ecology research and planning, vol I. Universitessforlag GeoRue, Roskilde, pp 5–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Morelle K, Fattebert J, Mengal C, Lejeune P (2016) Invading or recolonizing? Patterns and drivers of wild boar population expansion into Belgian agroecosystems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 222:267–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munshi-South J (2012) Urban landscape genetics: canopy cover predicts gene flow between white-footed mouse (Peromyscus leucopus) populations in New York City. Mol Ecol 21:1360–1378

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oelke J, Müller FI, Miggelbrink J (2022) The Urban Hunter in Times of African Swine Fever. Etnofoor 34(2):67–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohashi H, Saito M, Horie R, Tsunoda H et al (2013) Differences in the activity pattern of the wild boar Sus scrofa related to human disturbance. Eur J Wildl Res 59:167–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ollivier FJ, Samuelson DA, Brooks DE, Kallberg LPA, ME, Komaromy AM, (2004) Comparative morphology of the tapetum lucidum (among selected species). Vet Ophthalmol 7(1):11–22

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Podgórski T, Baś G, Jędrzejewska B, Sönnichsen L, Śnieżko S, Jędrzejewski W, Okarma H (2013) Spatiotemporal behavioral plasticity of wild boar (Sus scrofa) under contrasting conditions of human pressure: primeval forest and metropolitan area. J Mammal 94:109–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prévot C, Licoppe A (2013) Comparing red deer (Cervus elaphus L.) and wild boar (Sus scrofa L.) dispersal patterns in southern Belgium. Eur J Wildl Res 59(6):1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rega-Brodsky CC, Aronson MFJ, Piana MR, Carpenter ES et al (2022) Urban biodiversity: State of the science and future directions. Urban Ecosyst 25:1083–1096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritzel K, Gallo T (2020) Behavior Change in Urban Mammals: A Systematic Review. Front Ecol Evol 8:1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2020.576665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosell C, Colomer J, Torrellas M, Cama A et al (2022) Human and wild boar co-use of crossing structures in a High-Speed Railway. Abstracts of the 13th International Symposium on Wild Boar and other Suids, Seva, Barcelona

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosol M, Béal V, Mössner S (2017) Greenest cities? The (post-)politics of new urban environmental regimes. Environ Plann A 49(8):1710–1718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos P, Mexia de Almeida L, Petrucci Fonseca F (2004) Habitat selection by wild boar Sus Scrofa L. in Alentejo, Portugal. Portugal. Galemys 16(n° especial):167–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Schley L, Dufrêne M, Krier A, Frantz AC (2008) Patterns of crop damage by wild boar (Sus scrofa) in Luxembourg over a 10-year period. Eur J Wildl Res 54:589–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schley L, Roper TJ (2003) Diet of wild boar Sus scrofa in Western Europe, with particular reference to consumption of agricultural crops. Mammal Rev 33:43–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Servanty S, Gaillard JM, Allainé D, Brandt S, Baubet E (2007) Litter size and fetal sex ratio adjustment in a highly polytocous species: the wild boar. Behav Ecol 18:427–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stillfried M, Gras P, Börner K, Göritz F et al (2017a) Secrets of Success in a Landscape of Fear: Urban Wild Boar Adjust Risk Perception and Tolerate Disturbance. Front Ecol Evol 5:1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2017.00157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stillfried M, Fickel J, Börner K, Wittstatt U et al (2017b) Do cities represent sources, sinks or isolated islands for urban wild boar population structure? J Appl Ecol 54:272–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stillfried M, Gras P, Busch M, Börner K et al (2017c) Wild inside: Urban wild boar select natural, not anthropogenic food resources. PLoS ONE 12:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175127

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sütő D, Heltai M, Katona K (2020) Quality and use of habitat patches by wild boar (Sus scrofa) along an urban gradient. Biologia Futura 71:69–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tack J (2018) Wild Boar (Sus scrofa) populations in Europe: a scientific review of population trends and implications for management. European Landowners’ Organization, Brussels, p 56

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson J (2008) Des fragments de nature : éléments d’une hétérogénéité paysagère façonnée par l’homme. In: Garnier L (ed) Entre l’Homme et la nature, une démarche pour des relations durables. UNESCO Réserves de Biosphère, Paris, pp 50–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Thurfell H, Ball JP, Åhlén PA, Kornacher P, Dettki H, Sjöberg K (2009) Habitat use and spatial patterns of wild boar Sus scrofa (L.): agricultural felds and edges. Eur J Wildl Res 55:517–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thurfell H, Spong G, Olsson M, Ericsson G (2015) Avoidance of high traffic levels results in lower risk of wild boar-vehicle accidents. Landsc Urban Plan 133:98–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toger M, Benenson I, Wang Y, Czamanski D, Malkinson D (2018) Pigs in space: An agent-based model of wild boar (Sus scrofa) movement into cities. Landsc Urban Plan 173:70–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torres RT, Fernandes J, Carvalho J, Cunha MV et al (2020) Wild boar as a reservoir of antimicrobial resistance. Sci Total Environ 717:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135001

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Von Essen E, Redmalm D (2023) Social licence to cull: Examining scepticism toward lethal wildlife removal in cities. People Nat 5:1353–1363. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ważna A, Kaźmierczak A, Cichocki J, Bojarski J, Gabryś G (2020) Use of underpasses by animals on a fenced expressway in a suburban area in western Poland. Nat Conserv 39:1–18. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.39.33967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wevers J, Fattebert J, Casaer J, Artois T, Beenaerts N (2020) Trading fear for food in the Anthropocene: How ungulates cope with human disturbance in a multi-use, suburban ecosystem. Sci Total Environ 741:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140369

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson JW, Sexton JO, Jobe RT, Haddad NM (2013) The relative contribution of terrain, land cover, and vegetation structure indices to species distribution models. Biol Conserv 164:170–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zsolnai A, Csókás A, Szabó L, Csányi S et al (2022) Genetic adaptation to urban living: molecular DNA analyses of wild boar populations in Budapest and surrounding area. Mamm Biol 102:221–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuberogoitia I, Del Real J, Torres JJ, Rodríguez L, Alonso M, Zabala J (2014) Ungulate vehicle collisions in a peri-urban environment: consequences of transportation infrastructures planned assuming the absence of ungulates. PLoS ONE 9:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0107713

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Antoine Bertrand, civic service technician at the Gironde Hunting Federation, for his fieldwork. We extend our sincere thanks to Valerie Marin and Amelie Soubie for their suggestions during the translation process.

Funding

This study was carried out as part of a PhD research fully funded by the French Ministry of Research. No funds, grants or other support were received for the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Laboratoire Passages CNRS 5319, Pessac, France

    Carole Marin & Grégoire Le Campion

  2. Michel de Montaigne University Bordeaux 3, Geography Department, Laboratoire Passages CNRS 5319, Pessac, France

    Laurent Couderchet

  3. Ministère de la Transition ecologique et Solidaire, Gironde Hunting Federation, Ludon-Médoc, France

    Jérôme Werno

Authors
  1. Carole Marin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laurent Couderchet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Grégoire Le Campion
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jérôme Werno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

C.M.: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing - Review and editing, Project administration, Funding acquisition; L.C.: Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing-Review and editing; G.LC.: Validation, Formal analysis, Writing-Review and editing; J.W.: Investigation, Resources, Writing-Review and editing, Project administration.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carole Marin.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

The research was performed in accordance with French law.

Consent for publication

All authors gave consent to submit for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 15 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Marin, C., Couderchet, L., Le Campion, G. et al. Wildlife and the city. Modelling wild boar use of urban nature: Empirical contribution, methodological proposal. Urban Ecosyst (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-024-01510-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-024-01510-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation