Advertisement

Biological Invasions

, Volume 21, Issue 12, pp 3561–3574 | Cite as

Is the wild pig the real “big bad wolf”? Negative effects of wild pig on Atlantic Forest mammals

  • C. G. Z. HegelEmail author
  • L. R. Santos
  • J. R. Marinho
  • M. Â. Marini
Original Paper

Abstract

The wild pig (Sus scrofa) is an invasive species that negatively impacts new areas into which it is introduced. In this study, we evaluated the effects of wild pig presence on the estimated occupancy and detection probabilities of native mammals in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. We used camera traps at 100 different points for 8 days (800 trap-days) to collect data and two-species conditional occupancy models to estimate the probability of occupancy (ψ) and the probability of detection (p) of mammal species. We detected a total of 23 native mammal species and two non-native mammal species [wild pig and European hare (Lepus europaeus)] and generated 21 models to evaluate the effects of wild pig occupancy on the European hare and the following 13 native mammals: Cerdocyon thous, Pseudalopex gymnocercus, Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris, Mazama americana, Mazama gouazoubira, Mazama nana, Dasyprocta aguti, Dasypus novemcinctus, Leopardus wiedii, Puma yagouaroundi, Didelphis albiventris, Conepatus chinga, and Procyon cancrivorus. Overall, the presence of wild pig had a range of negative effects on the occupancy and detection of the other mammals, which were less likely to occupy areas that were occupied by wild pig. In addition, we observed lower occurrence and richness of native mammal species in sampling points where wild pig were present compared with locations where wild pig were not present. These results highlight the importance of wild pig management and control for the conservation of native mammals in the Atlantic Forest, a region that is already threatened by a high degree of fragmentation.

Keywords

Wild boar Feral pig Interspecific interaction Invasive species Modelling occupancy 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank CAPES, CNPq, and FAP-DF for fellowships to the authors, and URI and UnB for logistical and financial support. MÂM was supported by a researcher fellowship from CNPq. ICMBio provided a license to conduct research at the ESEC Aracuri-Esmeralda reserve. We are also grateful to A. Gedoz, A, Faraon, and D.C. Rith for the support in the field, to J.R.S. Vitule, L.U. Hepp, R. Fornel, J.A.B. Monsalvo, and S.M.S. Róseo for their useful critiques of earlier manuscript drafts, and to the landowners who provided access to their properties.

Supplementary material

10530_2019_2068_MOESM1_ESM.doc (548 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 547 kb)

References

  1. 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 44:124–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barrios-García MN, Ballari SA (2012) Impact of wild boar (Sus scrofa) in its introduced and native range: a review. Biol Invasions 14:2283–2300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barrios-García MN, Classen AT, Simberloff D (2014) Disparate responses of above-and belowground properties to soil disturbance by an invasive mammal. Ecosphere 5(4):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bellard C, Genovesi P, Jeschke JM (2016) Global patterns in threats to vertebrates by biological invasions. Proc R Soc 283(1823):20152454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bianchi RDC, Rosa AF, Gatti A, Mendes SL (2011) Diet of margay, Leopardus wiedii, and jaguarundi, Puma yagouaroundi (Carnivora: Felidae) in Atlantic rainforest, Brazil. Zoologia 28(1):127–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Branch LC (1995) Observations of predation by pumas and Geoffroy’s cats on the plains vizcacha in semi-arid scrub of central Argentina. Mammalia 59:152–156Google Scholar
  7. Branch LC, Pessino M, Villarreal D (1996) Response of pumas to a population decline of the plains vizcacha. J Mammal 77:1132–1140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brasil (2008) Plano de manejo da Estação Ecológica Aracuri-Esmeralda. Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade, Brasília, BrazilGoogle Scholar
  9. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multi-model inference. A practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Caruso N, Valenzuela AE, Burdett CL, Vidal EML, Birochio D, Casanave EB (2018) Summer habitat use and activity patterns of wild boar Sus scrofa in rangelands of central Argentina. PLoS ONE 13(10):e0206513CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Cervo IB (2017) Dieta de Sus scrofa e suas implicações na agropecuária e na biodiversidade no Brasil. M.S.c, dissertation, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto AlegreGoogle Scholar
  12. Chimera C, Coleman MC, Parkes JP (1995) Diet of feral goats and feral pigs on Auckland Island, New Zealand. N Z J Ecol 19:203–207Google Scholar
  13. Choquenot D, McIlroy J, Korn T (1996) Managing vertebrate pests: feral pigs. Australian Government Publishing Service, Bureau of Resource Sciences, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  14. Deberdt AJ, Scherer SB (2007) O javali asselvajado: ocorrência e manejo da espécie no Brasil. Nat Conserv 5:31–44Google Scholar
  15. Desbiez ALJ, Santos SA, Keuroghlian A, Bodmer RE (2009) Niche partitioning among white-lipped peccaries (Tayassu pecari), collared peccaries (Pecari tajacu), and feral pigs (Sus scrofa). J Mammal 90:119–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Focardi S, Capizzi D, Monetti D (2000) Competition for acorns among wild boar (Sus scrofa) and small mammals in a Mediterranean woodland. J Zool (Lond) 250:329–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fonseca GA (1994) Livro vermelho dos mamíferos brasileiros ameaçados de extinção. Fundação Biodiversitas, Belo HorizonteGoogle Scholar
  18. Forsyth DM, Allen RB, Allen RK, Affeld K, MacKenzie DI (2016) Soil phosphorus predicts feral pig (Sus scrofa) occupancy, detection probability and feeding activity in a temperate montane rainforest. Wildl Res 43(4):277–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Frehse FA, Braga RR, Nocera GA, Vitule JRS (2016) Non-native species and invasion biology in a megadiverse country: scientometric analysis and ecological interactions in Brazil. Biol Invasions 18:3713–3725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Galetti M, Camargo H, Siqueira T, Keuroghlian A, Donatti CI, Jorge MLSP, Pedrosa F, Kanda CZ, Ribeiro MC (2015) Diet overlap and foraging activity between feral pigs and native peccaries in the Pantanal. PLoS ONE 10(11):e0141459CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Gantchoff MG, Belant JL (2015) Anthropogenic and environmental effects on invasive mammal distribution in northern Patagonia, Argentina. Mammal Biol Zeitschr Säuget 80(1):54–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Giménez-Anaya A, Herrero J, Rosell C, Couto S, García-Serrano A (2008) Food habits of wild boar (Sus scrofa) in a Mediterranean coastal wetland. Wetlands 28:197–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Graitson E, Barbraud C, Bonnet X (2018) Catastrophic impact of wild boars: insufficient hunting pressure pushes snakes to the brink. Anim Conserv.  https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12447 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Graves H (1984) Behavior and ecology of wild and feral swine (Sus scrofa). J Anim Sci 58:482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grossi SF, Lui JF, Garcia JE, Meirelles VF (2006) Genetic diversity in wild pig (Sus scrofa scrofa) and domestic pig (Sus scrofa domestica) and their hybrids based on polymorphism of a fragment of the D loop region in the mitochondrial DNA. Genet Mol Res 5(4):564–568PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Hegel CGZ, Marini MÂ (2013) Impact of the wild boar, Sus scrofa, on a fragment of Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Neotrop Biol Conserv 8:17–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hegel CGZ, Marini MÂ (2018) Large felids as predators of wild boar in the Atlantic Forest: reconciling Verdade, and Rosa et al. Anim Conserv 21:363–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hegel CGZ, Santos LR, Pichorim M, Marini MÂ (2019) Wild pig (Sus scrofa L.) occupancy patterns in the Brazilian Atlantic forest. Biota Neotrop 19(4):e20180719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Heise-Pavlov PM, Heise-Pavlov SR, Nelson JE (2009) Sus scrofa: population structure, reproduction and condition in tropical north-eastern Australia. Acta Silv Lign Hung 5:179–188Google Scholar
  30. Herrero J, García-Serrano A, Couto S, Ortuño VM, García-González R (2006) Diet of wild boar Sus scrofa L. and crop damage in an intensive agroecosystem. Eur J Wildl Res 52:245–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. IBAMA (2013) Instrução Normativa Ibama Nº 03 de 31 de janeiro de 2013 do Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Renováveis (IBAMA). Brasília: Ministério do Meio Ambiente (MMA)Google Scholar
  32. IBAMA (2019) Instrução Normativa Ibama Nº 12 de 25 de março de 2019 do Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Renováveis (IBAMA). Brasília: Ministério do Meio Ambiente (MMA)Google Scholar
  33. Ilse LM, Hellgren EC (1995) Resource partitioning in sympatric populations of collared peccaries and feral hogs in Southern Texas. J Mammal 76(3):784–799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Irizar I, Laskurain NA, Herrero J (2004) Wild boar frugivory in the Atlantic Basque Country. Galemys 16:125–133Google Scholar
  35. IUCN - International Union for Conservation of Nature (2017) The IUCN red list of threatened species. http://www.iucnredlist.org/search/details. Accessed date: 09 Nov 2017
  36. Jaksic FM, Agustín Iriarte J, Jiménez JE, Martínez DR (2002) Invaders without frontiers: cross-border invasions of exotic mammals. Biol Invasions 4:157–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jedrzejewski W, Jedrzejewska B, Okarma H, Ruprecht AL (1992) Wolf predation and snow cover as mortality factors in the ungulate community of the Białowieza National Park, Poland. Oecologia 90:27–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Keiter DA, Mayer JJ, Beasley JC (2016) What is in a “common” name? A call for consistent terminology for nonnative Sus scrofa. Wildl Soc Bull 40(2):384–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lavers C (2011) Why elephants have big ears: understanding patterns of life on earth. Macmillan. ISBN:9781429976695Google Scholar
  40. Lazenby BT, Dickman CR (2013) Patterns of detection and capture are associated with cohabiting predators and prey. PLoS ONE 8:e59846CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. Leger EA, Espeland EK (2010) Coevolution between native and invasive plant competitors: implications for invasive species management. Evol Appl 3:169–178CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Long JL (2003) Introduced mammals of the world: their history distribution and influence. CSIRO, CollingwoodCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. MacKenzie DI, Royle JA (2005) Designing occupancy studies: general advice and allocating survey effort. J Appl Ecol 42:1105–1114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. MacKenzie DI, Bailey LL, Nichols J (2004) Investigating species co-occurrence patterns when species are detected imperfectly. J Anim Ecol 73:546–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Royle JA, Pollock KH, Bailey LL, Hines JE (2006) Occupancy estimation and modeling: inferring patterns and dynamics of species occurrence. Academic Press, BurlingtonGoogle Scholar
  46. Marques AAB, Fontana CS, Vélez E, Bencke GA, Schneider M, Reis RE (2002) Lista de referência da fauna ameaçada de extinção no Rio Grande do Sul. Decreto no 41.672, de 11 junho de 2002. Porto Alegre: FZB/MCT–PUCRS/PANGEA, 52pGoogle Scholar
  47. Marsan A, Mattioli S (2013) Il Cinghiale (in Italian). Il Piviere (collana Fauna selvatica. Biologia e gestione). ISBN 978-88-96348-178Google Scholar
  48. Massei G, Genov PV (2004) The environmental impact of wild boar. Galemys 16(Special edition):135–145Google Scholar
  49. Mattioli L, Apollonio M, Lovari C, Siemoni N, Crudele G (1995) Wild boar as the main prey of wolf in an area of Northern Apennines (Italy), Ibex. J Mt Ecol 3:212Google Scholar
  50. Means DB, Travis J (2007) Declines in ravine-inhabiting dusky salamanders of the southeastern US Coastal Plain. Southeast Nat 6(1):83–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Melletti M, Meijaard E (2017) Ecology, conservation and management of wild pigs and peccaries. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mendina Filho LH, Wallau MO, Dos Reis TX (2015) O Javali no Pampa: contexto, biologia e manejo. Pallotti, Santana do Livramento. 87pGoogle Scholar
  53. Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, Fonseca GAB, Jennifer K (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nagy-Reis MB, Nichols JD, Chiarello AG, Ribeiro MC, Setz EZ (2017) Landscape use and co-occurrence patterns of Neotropical spotted cats. PLoS ONE 12(1):e0168441CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. Nores C, Llaneza L, Álvarez MA (2008) Wild boar Sus scrofa mortality by hunting and wolf Canis lupus predation: an example in northern Spain. Wildl Biol 14:44–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Novack AJ, Main MB, Sunquist ME, Labisky RF (2005) Foraging ecology of jaguar (Panthera onca) and puma (Puma concolor) in hunted and non-hunted sites within the Maya Biosphere Reserve, Guatemala. J Zool 267:167–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Novaro AJ, Funes MC, Walker RS (2000) Ecological extinction of native prey of a carnivore assemblage in Argentine Patagonia. Biol Conserv 92:25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. O’Brien PP, Vander Wal E, Koen EL, Brown C, Guy J, van Beest FM, Brook RK (2019) Understanding habitat co-occurrence and the potential for competition between native mammals and invasive wild pigs at the northern edge of their range. Can J Zool 1:21.  https://doi.org/10.1139/cjz-2018-0156 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. O’Connell AF Jr, Talancy NW, Bailey LL, Sauer JR, Cook R, Gilbert AT (2006) Estimating site occupancy and detection probability parameters for meso-and large mammals in a coastal ecosystem. J Wildl Manag 70:1625–1633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Oliveira-Santos LGR, Dorazio RM, Tomas WM, Mourão G (2011) No evidence of interference competition among the invasive feral pig and two native peccary species in a Neotropical wetland. J Trop Ecol 27:557–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Osugi S, Trentin BE, Koike S (2019) Impact of wild boars on the feeding behaviors of smaller frugivorous mammals. Mamm Biol.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2019.03.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Pedrosa F, Salerno R, Padilha FVB, Galetti M (2015) Current distribution of invasive feral pigs in Brazil: economic impacts and ecological uncertainty. Nat Conserv 13:84–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Pérez Carusi LC, Beade MS, Miñarro F, Vila AR, Giménez-Dixon M, Bilenca DN (2009) Relaciones espaciales y numéricas entre venados de las pampas (Ozotoceros bezoarticus celer) y chanchos cimarrones (Sus scrofa) en el Refugio de Vida Silvestre Bahía Samborombón, Argentina. Ecol Austral 19:63–71Google Scholar
  64. Pessino MEM, Sarasola JH, Wander C, Besoky N (2001) Respuesta a largo plazo del puma (Puma concolor) a una declinación poblacional de la vizcacha (Lagostomus maximus) en el desierto del Monte, Argentina. Ecol Austral 11:61–67Google Scholar
  65. Peters FB, Roth PRDO, Christoff AU (2011) Feeding habits of Molina’s hog-nosed skunk, Conepatus chinga (Carnivora: Mephitidae) in the extreme south of Brazil. Zoologia (Curitiba) 28(2):193–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Quintela FM, Santos MB, Oliveira SV, Costa RC, Christoff AU (2010) Wild boars and feral pigs (Suidae, Sus scrofa) in the Restinga of Rio Grande, RS, Brazil: ecosystems of occurrence and preliminary data on environmental impacts. Neotrop Biol Conserv 5:172–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. R Core Team (2015) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/
  68. Reis NR, Peracchi AL, Pedro WA, Lima IP (2006) Mamíferos do Brasil. Nélio R. dos Reis, Londrina, Brazil. 437pGoogle Scholar
  69. Richmond OM, Hines JE, Beissinger SR (2010) Two-species occupancy models: a new parameterization applied to co-occurrence of secretive rails. Ecol Appl 20:2036–2046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Rocha VJ, Aguiar LM, Silva-Pereira JE, Moro-Rios RF, Passos FC (2008) Feeding habits of the crab-eating fox, Cerdocyon thous (Carnivora: Canidae), in a mosaic area with native and exotic vegetation in Southern Brazil. Rev Bras Zool 25(4):594–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Rosa CA, Puertas F, Galetti M (2016) The feral pig as prey for jaguars: a reply to the ‘letter from the conservation front line’ by Verdade et al. Anim Conserv 20:111–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Rosell C, Fernández-Llario P, Herrero J (2001) El jabalí (Sus scrofa Linnaeus, 1758). Galemys 13:1–25Google Scholar
  73. Sales LP, Ribeiro BR, Hayward MW, Paglia A, Passamani M, Loyola R (2017) Niche conservatism and the invasive potential of the wild boar. J Anim Ecol 86(5):1214–1223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Salvador CH, Tortatto MA, Miozzo R, Copini AC (2013) Análise de diferentes tipos de cevas no monitoramento de populações selvagens de javali (Sus scrofa) e prejuízos ocasionados em plantação de milho no interior do município de Caçador. Ignis 2(1):71–83Google Scholar
  75. Sicuro FL, Oliveira LFB (2002) Coexistence of peccaries and feral hogs in the Brazilian Pantanal wetland: an ecomorphological view. J Mammal 83:207–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Silva F (1994) Mamíferos silvestres do Rio Grande do Sul. Fundação Zoobotânica do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto AlegreGoogle Scholar
  77. Simberloff D, Martin J-L, Genovesi P, Maris V, Wardle DA, Aronson J, Courchamp F, Galil B, García-Berthou E, Pascal M, Pyšek P, Sousa R, Tabacchi E, Vilà M (2013) Impacts of biological invasions: what’s what and the way forward. Trends Ecol Evol 28:58–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Singer FJ, Swank WT, Clebsch EEC (1984) Effects of wild pig rooting in a deciduous forest. J Wildl Manag 48:464–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Skewes O, Moraga CA, Arriagada P, Rau JR (2012) El jabalí europeo (Sus scrofa): Un invasor biológico como presa reciente del puma (Puma concolor) en el sur de Chile. Rev Chil Hist Nat 85:227–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Sweitzer RA, Van Vuren DH (2002) Rooting and foraging effects of wild pigs on tree regeneration and acorn survival in California’s oak woodland ecosystems. USDA Forest Service General Technical Reports 184, pp 219–231Google Scholar
  81. Vanak AT, Gompper ME (2010) Interference competition at the landscape level: the effect of free-ranging dogs on a native mesocarnivore. J Appl Ecol 47:1225–1232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Verdade LM, Palomares F, Couto HTZ, Polizel JL (2015) Recent land-use changes and the expansion of an exotic potential prey: a possible redemption for Atlantic forest jaguars? Anim Conserv 19:209–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Verdade LM, Palomares F, Couto HTZ, Polizel JL (2017) Land-use change and an exotic potential prey for the jaguar: a reply to da Rosa et al. Anim Conserv 21(2):89–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Weckel M, Giuliano W, Silver S (2006) Jaguar (Panthera onca) feeding ecology: distribution of predator and prey through time and space. J Zool 270:25–30Google Scholar
  85. West BC, Cooper AL, Armstrong JB (2009) Managing wild pigs: a technical guide. Hum Wildl Interact Monogr 1:1–55Google Scholar
  86. White GC, Burnham KP (1999) Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Study 46(Supplement):120–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Wilcox JT, Van Vuren DH (2009) Wild pigs as predators in oak woodlands of California. J Mammal 90:114–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Zapata-Ríos G, Branch LC (2016) Altered activity patterns and reduced abundance of native mammals in sites with feral dogs in the high Andes. Biol Conserv 193:9–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de Ciências Biológicas da Universidade Regional Integrada do Alto Uruguai e das Missões (URI)ErechimBrazil
  2. 2.Programa de Pós-graduação em Ecologia, IBUniversidade de BrasíliaBrasíliaBrazil
  3. 3.Departamento de Zoologia, IBUniversidade de BrasíliaBrasíliaBrazil

Personalised recommendations