, Volume 189, Issue 4, pp 931–937 | Cite as

The effect of sex, age, and location on carnivory in Utah black bears (Ursus americanus)

  • Kent A. Hatch
  • Kimberly A. KesterEmail author
  • Janene Auger
  • Beverly L. Roeder
  • Kevin Bunnell
  • Hal L. Black
Behavioral ecology – original research


Ungulates are important to the diet of bears because they are high in protein, and the level of dietary protein strongly influences bear size. The size a bear obtains as an adult influences important life history characteristics, such as age of reproduction and reproductive success; therefore, it is important to know what foods are available to bears and how they are utilizing them. We tested hypotheses concerning the effect of age, sex, and location on black bear carnivory. We collected hair and vestigial premolar teeth from 49 Utah black bears, Ursus americanus according to the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources hunt unit. Hunt units differed in habitat quality and local ungulate density. We analyzed a vestigial premolar for the age of the bears and used analysis of the δ13C and δ15N values of the hairs of each bear to infer the degree of carnivory. δ15N of black bear hairs was positively correlated with increased availability of ungulates. There was a positive relationship between the δ15N of bear hairs and age in hunt units with the highest ungulate densities only. The δ15N and δ13C of black bear hairs were positively correlated, suggesting that bears are more carnivorous at higher altitudes. This study demonstrates the value of stable isotope analysis in understanding the feeding ecology of bears over broad geographic ranges. It demonstrates that ungulate availability is important to the feeding ecology of black bears in the Intermountain West.


Stable isotopes Trophic level Carbon Nitrogen Ungulates 



We would like to acknowledge the help of all the hunters who submitted hair and vestigial tooth samples to the Utah DWR and the assistance of the Utah DWR in collecting those samples and the associated data. We thank Craig McLaughlin, now at the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife, for locating ungulate counts for hunt units. Finally, we would like to thank Amanda Loveless, Hailey Billings, Eric Olson, Joycelyn, and Vanessa Dewey for their help in prepping samples.

Author contribution statement

KAH was primarily responsible for originating the idea behind the paper, the experimental design, stable isotope analysis of hair samples, data analysis, wrote substantial portions of the paper, and closely supervised and mentored KAK. KAK revised and rewrote significant portions of the paper and did significant library research to expand and update the citations in the manuscript. BLR, HB, and JA contributed significantly to the process of designing the experiment with BLR helping with stable isotope analysis of hair samples and revisions of the manuscript HB and JA helped extensively with arranging contacts with individuals at the Utah Department of Wildlife Resources (UDWR), obtaining data and maps from the UDWR and arranging the data for analysis, and revising the manuscript. KB arranged for the collection of hair and teeth samples from Utah bear hunters, the analysis of the teeth for aging, obtaining hunt unit maps of Utah, obtaining hunt unit data on bears killed within hunt units, ungulate numbers within hunt units, and hunt unit areas.


  1. Apps CD, McLellan BN, Woods JG (2006) Landscape partitioning and spatial inferences of competition between black and grizzly bears. Ecography 29(4):561–572. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baldwin RA, Bender LC (2009) Foods and nutritional components of diets of black bear in rocky mountain national park, Colorado. Can J Zool 87(11):1000–1008. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bird MI, Haberle SG, Chivas AR (1994) Effect of altitude on the carbon-isotope composition of forest and grassland soils from Papua New Guinea. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 8(1):13–22. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bunnell ST (2000) Spring and summer diet and feeding behavior of black bears on the East Tavaputs Plateau, Utah. M.S. Thesis, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. Bunnell F, Tait D (1981) Population dynamics of bears—implications. Dynamics of large mammal populations. Wiley, New York, pp 7–98Google Scholar
  6. Chen L, Flynn DFB, Zhang X, Gao X, Lin L, Luo J, Zhao C (2014) Divergent patterns of foliar δ13C and δ15N in Quercus aquifolioides with an altitudinal transect on the Tibetan Plateau: an integrated study based on multiple key leaf functional traits. J Plant Ecol 8(3):303–312. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Craig H (1957) Isotopic standards for carbon and oxygen and correction factors for mass-spectrometric analysis of carbon dioxide. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 12(1–2):133–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deniro MJ, Epstein S (1981) Influence of diet on the distribution of nitrogen isotopes in animals. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 45(3):341–351. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. D’Eon RG, Serrouya R (2005) Mule deer seasonal movements and multiscale resource selection using global positioning system radiotelemetry. J Mammal 86(4):736–744.;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dykstra EA (2015) Using stable isotope analysis to estimate black bear (Ursus americanus) diet in Vermont. University of Vermont, Graduate College Dissertations and Theses. Paper 388Google Scholar
  11. Felicetti LA, Schwartz CC, Rye RO, Haroldson MA, Gunther KA, Phillips DL, Robbins CT (2003) Use of sulfur and nitrogen stable isotopes to determine the importance of whitebark pine nuts to Yellowstone grizzly bears. Can J Zool 81(5):763–770. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Feng QH, Cheng RM, Shi ZM, Liu SR, Liu XL, He F, Cao HM (2011) Effects of altitudinal gradient on Salix atopantha foliar δ13C. Chin J Appl Ecol 22(11):2841–2848Google Scholar
  13. Fortin JK, Schwartz CC, Gunther KA, Teisberg JE, Haroldson MA, Evans MA, Robbins CT (2013) Dietary adjustability of grizzly bears and American black bears in Yellowstone National Park. J Wildl Manag 77(2):270–281. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Graber DM, White M (1983) Black bear food habits in Yosemite National Park. In: A selection of papers from the fifth international conference on bear research and management, 5(1):1–10Google Scholar
  15. Hewitt DG, Robbins CT (1996) Estimating grizzly bear food habits from fecal analysis. Wildl Soc Bull 24(3):547–550Google Scholar
  16. Hilderbrand GV, Farley SD, Robbins CT, Hanley TA, Titus K, Servheen C (1996) Use of stable isotopes to determine diets of living and extinct bears. Can J Zool 74(11):2080–2088. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hilderbrand GV, Jenkins SG, Schwartz CC, Hanley TA, Robbins CT (1999a) Effect of seasonal differences in dietary meat intake on changes in body mass and composition in wild and captive brown bears. Can J Zool 77(10):1623–1630. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hilderbrand GV, Schwartz CC, Robbins CT, Jacoby ME, Hanley TA, Arthur SM, Servheen C (1999b) The importance of meat, particularly salmon, to body size, population productivity, and conservation of North American brown bears. Can J Zool 77(1):132–138. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hobson KA, McLellan BN, Woods JG (2000) Using stable carbon (δ13C) and nitrogen (δ15N) isotopes to infer trophic relationships among black and grizzly bears in the upper Columbia River basin, British Columbia. Can J of Zool 78(8):1332–1339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hobson KA, Wassenaar LI, Milá B, Lovette I, Dingle C, Smith TB (2003) Stable isotopes as indicators of altitudinal distributions and movements in an Ecuadorean hummingbird community. Oecologia 136(2):302–308. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hultine KR, Marshall JD (2000) Altitude trends in conifer leaf morphology and stable carbon isotope composition. Oecologia 123(1):32–40. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jacoby ME, Hilderbrand GV, Servheen C, Schwartz CC, Arthur SM, Hanley TA, Robbins CT, Michener R (1999) Trophic relations of brown and black bears in several western North American Ecosystems. J Wildl Manag 63(3):921–929. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Körner Ch, Farquhar GD, Roksandic Z (1988) A global survey of carbon isotope discrimination in plants from high altitude. Oecologia 74(4):623–632. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Körner Ch, Farquhar GD, Wong SC (1991) Carbon isotope discrimination by plants follows latitudinal and altitudinal trends. Oecologia 88(1):30–40. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Li J, Wang G, Liu X, Han J, Liu M (2009) Variations in carbon isotope ratios of C3 plants and distribution of C4 plants along an altitudinal transect on the eastern slope of Mount Gongga. Sci China Ser D Earth Sci 52(11):1714–1723. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mariotti A (1983) Atmospheric nitrogen is a reliable standard for natural 15 N abundance measurements. Nature 303(5919):685–687. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McDonald JE Jr, Fuller TK (1999) Black bear food habits: beyond the same old scats. NCASI Tech Bull 781(I):335Google Scholar
  28. McLellan BN (2011) Implications of a high-energy and low-protein diet on the body composition, fitness, and competitive abilities of black (Ursus americanus) and grizzly (Ursus arctos) bears. Can J Zool 89(6):546–558. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mosnier A, Ouellet JP, Courtois R (2008) Black bear adaptation to low productivity in the boreal forest. Ecoscience 15(4):485–497. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mowat G, Heard DC (2006) Major components of grizzly bear diet across North America. Can J Zool 84(3):473–489. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pederson JC, Bunnell KD, Conner MM, McLaughlin CR (2012) A robust-design analysis to estimate American black bear population parameters in Utah. Ursus 23(1):104–116. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Raine R, Kansas J (1990) Black Bear Seasonal Food Habits and Distribution by Elevation in Banff National Park, Alberta. Bears Biol Manag Int Conf Bear Res Manag 8:297–304. Google Scholar
  33. Rogers LL (1987) Effects of food supply and kinship on social behavior, movements, and population growth of black bears in northeastern Minnesota. Wildl Monogr 97:3–72Google Scholar
  34. Schwartz CC, Fortin JK, Teisberg JE, Haroldson MA, Servheen C, Robbins CT, Van Manen FT (2014) Body and diet composition of sympatric black and grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. J Wildl Manag 78(1):68–78. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Servheen C, Herrero S, Peyton B (1999) Bears: status survey and conservation action plan: IUCN/SSC Bear Specialist GroupGoogle Scholar
  36. Stringham S (1990) Grizzly bear reproductive rate relative to body size. Bears Biol Manag 8:433–443. Google Scholar
  37. Welch CA, Keay J, Kendall KC, Robbins CT (1997) Constraints on frugivory by bears. Ecology 78(4):1105–1119.[1105:COFBB]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biological and Environmental SciencesLong Island University PostBrookvilleUSA
  2. 2.Monte L. Bean MuseumBrigham Young UniversityProvoUSA
  3. 3.Department of BiologyBrigham Young UniversityProvoUSA
  4. 4.Utah Division Wildlife ResourcesSalt Lake CityUSA
  5. 5.Department of Plant and Animal SciencesBrigham Young UniversityProvoUSA

Personalised recommendations