Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating the predictive power of field variables for species and individual molecular identification on wolf noninvasive samples

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Wildlife Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Live-trapping elusive animals is often challenging, hampering the achievement of reasonable sample sizes for molecular studies. In such cases, the use of noninvasive samples (NIS) is critical in many research fields, mostly related to ecology, management and conservation of wild species. We analysed the influence of several variables potentially associated with the quality of wolf NIS—season, weather conditions, and in situ collected site and sample characteristics—on the success rates of species and individual identification performed using mtDNA and 13 microsatellites, respectively. NIS included scats, urine and saliva collected from two areas in Portugal. Scat samples exhibited the highest success rate for both species (81%) and individual identification (59%), compared with urine (63 and 30%, respectively) or saliva samples (48 and 36%, respectively). The success rate of species identification of scats was better explained by season of collection, the presence of mucous, moisture and odour. For samples with successful species identification analysis, individual identification success was best predicted by the presence of odour. Performing a preliminary selection of scat samples with the best characteristics can increase up to 13% the success rates of molecular analysis. Urine collected on snow had a higher success rate of species identification than that collected on vegetation. To our knowledge, this was the first time that wolf urine on vegetation near ground-scratching marks is used as DNA source. Saliva samples collected with different substrate types can also be used for species identification. These results contribute to optimising noninvasive sampling procedures, maximising the success of molecular ecology studies, and ultimately minimising sampling efforts and costs.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abraham JE, Maranian MJ, Spiteri I et al (2012) Saliva samples are a viable alternative to blood samples as a source of DNA for high throughput genotyping. BMC Med Genet. doi:10.1186/1755-8794-5-19

    Google Scholar 

  • APA-Agência Portuguesa do Ambiente (2015) Sistema Nacional de Informação de Recursos Hídricos

  • Asa CS, Mech LD, Seal US (1985) The use of urine, faeces, and anal-gland secretions in scent-marking by a captive wolf (Canis lupus) pack. Anim Behav 33:1034–1036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asa CS, Mech LD, Seal US, Plotka ED (1990) The influence of social and endocrine factors on urine-marking by captive wolves (Canis lupus). Horm Behav 24:497–509

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barja I, DE Miguel FJ, Barcena F et al (2005) Faecal marking behaviour of Iberian wolf in different zones of their territory. Folia Zool 54:21–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Barja I, Silván G, Illera JC (2008) Relationships between sex and stress hormone levels in feces and marking behavior in a wild population of Iberian wolves (Canis lupus signatus). J Chem Ecol 34:697–701

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bartoń K (2009) MuMIn: multi-model inference; R package version 0.12.2/r18

  • Beja-Pereira A, Oliveira R, Alves PC et al (2009) Advancing ecological understandings through technological transformations in noninvasive genetics. Mol Ecol Resour 9:1279–1301. doi:10.1111/j.1755-0998.2009.02699.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blacket MJ, Robin C, Good RT et al (2012) Universal primers for fluorescent labelling of PCR fragments—an efficient and cost-effective approach to genotyping by fluorescence. Mol Ecol Resour 12:456–463. doi:10.1111/j.1755-0998.2011.03104.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blanco JC, Cortés Y (2012) Surveying wolves without snow: a critical review of the methods used in Spain. Hystrix 23:35–48. doi:10.4404/hystrix-23.1-4670

    Google Scholar 

  • Blejwas K, Williams KJ, Shin GT et al (2006) Salivary DNA evidence convicts breeding male coyotes of killing sheep. J Wildl Manag 70:1087–1093

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohling JH, Waits LP (2011) Assessing the prevalence of hybridization between sympatric Canis species surrounding the red wolf (Canis rufus) recovery area in North Carolina. Mol Ecol 20:2142–2156. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05084.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boom R, Sol CJ, Salimans MM et al (1990) Rapid and simple method for purification of nucleic acids. J Clin Microbiol 28:495–503

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretical approach, 2nd edn. Springer, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Caniglia R, Fabbri E, Cubaynes S et al (2012) An improved procedure to estimate wolf abundance using non-invasive genetic sampling and capture–recapture mixture models. Conserv Genet 13:53–64. doi:10.1007/s10592-011-0266-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caniglia R, Fabbri E, Mastrogiuseppe L, Randi E (2013) Who is who? Identification of livestock predators using forensic genetic approaches. Forensic Sci Int Genet 7:397–404. doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2012.11.001

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cramer H (1946) Mathematical methods of statistics. Princeton University Press, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawley MJ (2002) Statistical computing—an introduction to data analysis using S-plus. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Creel S, Fox JE, Hardy A et al (2002) Snowmobile activity and glucocorticoid stress responses in wolves and elk. Conserv Biol 16:809–814. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00554.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Czarnomska SD, Jędrzejewska B, Borowik T et al (2013) Concordant mitochondrial and microsatellite DNA structuring between polish lowland and Carpathian Mountain wolves. Conserv Genet. doi:10.1007/s10592-013-0446-2

    Google Scholar 

  • Darimont CT, Reimchen TE, Bryan HM, Paquet PC (2008) Faecal-centric approaches to wildlife ecology and conservation; methods, data and ethics. Wildl Biol Pract 4:73–87. doi:10.2461/wbp.2008.4.7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davison A, Birks JDS, Brookes RC et al (2002) On the origin of faeces: morphological versus molecular methods for surveying rare carnivores from their scats. J Zool 257:141–143. doi:10.1017/S0952836902000730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Barba M, Waits LP, Garton EO et al (2010) The power of genetic monitoring for studying demography, ecology and genetics of a reintroduced brown bear population. Mol Ecol 19:3938–3951. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04791.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dormann CF, Elith J, Bacher S et al (2013) Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance. Ecography (Cop) 36:27–46. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2012.07348.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EEA (2008) Impacts of Europe’s changing Climate—2008 indicator-based assessment Report No 4/2008. Copenhagen, Denmark

  • Fisher RA (1954) Statistical methods for research workers. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Frantz AC, Pope LC, Carpenter PJ et al (2003) Reliable microsatellite genotyping of the Eurasian badger (Meles meles) using faecal DNA. Mol Ecol 12:1649–1661. doi:10.1046/j.1365-294X.2003.01848.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frosch C, Dutsov A, Georgiev G, Nowak C (2011) Case report of a fatal bear attack documented by forensic wildlife genetics. Forensic Sci Int Genet 5:342–344. doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2011.01.009

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Godinho R, Llaneza L, Blanco JC et al (2011) Genetic evidence for multiple events of hybridization between wolves and domestic dogs in the Iberian peninsula. Mol Ecol 20:5154–5166. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05345.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Godinho R, Abáigar T, Lopes S et al (2012) Conservation genetics of the endangered Dorcas gazelle (Gazella dorcas spp.) in northwestern Africa. Conserv Genet 13:1003–1015. doi:10.1007/s10592-012-0348-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godinho R, López-Bao JV, Castro D et al (2015) Real-time assessment of hybridization between wolves and dogs: combining noninvasive samples with ancestry informative markers. Mol Ecol Resour 15:317–328. doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12313

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harms V, Nowak C, Carl S et al (2015) Experimental evaluation of genetic predator identification from saliva traces on wildlife kills. J Mammal 96:138–143. doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyu014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris RB, Winnie J, Amish SJ et al (2010) Argali abundance in the Afghan Pamir using capture–recapture modeling from fecal DNA. J Wildl Manag 74:668–677. doi:10.2193/2009-292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hausknecht R, Gula R, Pirga B, Kuehn R (2006) Urine—a source for noninvasive genetic monitoring in wildlife. Mol Ecol Notes 7:208–212. doi:10.1111/j.1471-8286.2006.01622.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedmark E, Flagstad Ø, Segerstro P et al (2004) DNA-based individual and sex identification from wolverine (Gulo gulo) faeces and urine. Conserv Genet 5:405–410

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • INE (2013) Instituto Nacional de Estatística-Statistics Portugal—http://www.ine.pt

  • INE (2011) Instituto Nacional de Estatística-Statistics Portugal—http://www.ine.pt

  • IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  • IPMA (2012) Normais climatológicas 1981–2010. Instituto Português do Mar e da Atmosfera http://www.ipma.pt/pt/oclima/normais.clima/

  • Johnson PCD, Haydon DT (2007) Maximum-likelihood estimation of allelic dropout and false allele error rates from microsatellite genotypes in the absence of reference data. Genetics 175:827–842. doi:10.1534/genetics.106.064618

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly MJ, Betsch J, Wultsch C et al (2012) Noninvasive sampling for carnivores. In: Boitani L, Powell RA (eds) Carniv. Ecol. Conserv. A Handb. Tech. Oxford University Press, London, pp 47–69

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Llaneza L, García EJ, López-Bao JV (2014) Intensity of territorial marking predicts wolf reproduction: implications for wolf monitoring. PLoS One 9:e93015. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0093015

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lobo D, Godinho R, Álvares F et al (2015) A new method for noninvasive genetic sampling of saliva in ecological research. PLoS One 10:e0139765. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0139765

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lonsinger RC, Gese EM, Dempsey SJ et al (2014) Balancing sample accumulation and DNA degradation rates to optimize noninvasive genetic sampling of sympatric carnivores. Mol Ecol Resour 15:831–842. doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12356

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lucchini V, Fabbri E, Marucco F et al (2002) Noninvasive molecular tracking of colonizing wolf (Canis lupus) packs in the western Italian alps. Mol Ecol 11:857–868

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marucco F, Pletscher DH, Boitani L et al (2009) Wolf survival and population trend using non-invasive capture-recapture techniques in the western alps. J Appl Ecol 46:1003–1010. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01696.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mech LD, Almberg ES, Smith D et al (2012) Use of real-time PCR to detect canine parvovirus in feces of free-ranging wolves. J Wildl Dis 48:473–476. doi:10.7589/0090-3558-48.2.473

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Monterroso P, Castro D, Silva TL et al (2012) Factors affecting the (in)accuracy of mammalian mesocarnivore scat identification in South-western Europe. J Zool 289:243–250. doi:10.1111/jzo.12000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mumma MA, Soulliere CE, Mahoney SP, Waits LP (2014) Enhanced understanding of predator-prey relationships using molecular methods to identify predator species, individual and sex. Mol Ecol Resour 14:100–108. doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12153

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy MA, Kendall KC, Robinson A, Waits LP (2007) The impact of time and field conditions on brown bear (Ursus arctos) faecal DNA amplification. Conserv Genet 8:1219–1224. doi:10.1007/s10592-006-9264-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly C, Statham M, Mullins J et al (2008) Efficient species identification of pine marten (Martes martes) and red fox (Vulpes vulpes) scats using a 5′ nuclease real-time PCR assay. Conserv Genet 9:735–738

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onorato D, White C, Zager P, Waits LP (2004) Detection of predator presence at elk mortality sites using mtDNA analysis of hair and scat samples. Wildl Soc Bull 34:815–820

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palomares F, Godoy JA, Piriz A, O’Brien SJ (2002) Faecal genetic analysis to determine the presence and distribution of elusive carnivores: design and feasibility for the Iberian lynx. Mol Ecol 11:2171–2182

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Panasci M, Ballard WB, Breck S et al (2011) Evaluation of fecal DNA preservation techniques and effects of sample age and diet on genotyping success. J Wildl Manag 75:1616–1624. doi:10.1002/jwmg.221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters RP, Mech LD (1975) Scent-marking in wolves. Am Sci 63:628–637

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Piggott MP (2004) Effect of sample age and season of collection on the reliability of microsatellite genotyping of faecal DNA. Wildl Res 31:485–493. doi:10.1071/WR03096

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pimenta V, Barroso I, Álvares F, et al (2005) Situação do lobo em Portugal: resultados do censo nacional 2002/2003. Relatório Técnico. Instituto da Conservação da Natureza/Grupo Lobo, Lisboa

  • R Core Team (2014) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. 2:1–3479

  • RStudio Team (2015) RStudio: integrated development for R

  • Santini A, Lucchini V, Fabbri E, Randi E (2007) Ageing and environmental factors affect PCR success in wolf (Canis lupus) excremental DNA samples. Mol Ecol Notes 7:955–961. doi:10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01829.x

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Scandura M, Capitani C, Iacolina L, Marco A (2006) An empirical approach for reliable microsatellite genotyping of wolf DNA from multiple noninvasive sources. Conserv Genet 7:813–823. doi:10.1007/s10592-005-9106-5

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schrader C, Schielke A, Ellerbroek L, Johne R (2012) PCR inhibitors—occurrence, properties and removal. J Appl Microbiol 113:1014–1026. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.2012.05384.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz MK, Cushman SA, Mckelvey KS et al (2006) Detecting genotyping errors and describing American black bear movement in northern Idaho. Ursus 17:138–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidorovich VE, Tikhomirova LL, Jędrzejewska B (2003) Wolf Canis lupus numbers, diet and damage to livestock in relation to hunting and ungulate abundance in northeastern Belarus during 1990–2000. Wildlife Biol 9:103–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Stenglein JL, Waits LP, Ausband DE et al (2011) Estimating gray wolf pack size and family relationships using noninvasive genetic sampling at rendezvous sites. J Mammal 92:784–795. doi:10.1644/10-MAMM-A-200.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson N, Clifford D, Worth SJ et al (2013) Development and validation of a fecal PCR assay for Notoedres cati and application to notoedric mange cases in bobcats (Lynx rufus) in northern California, USA. J Wildl Dis 49:303–311. doi:10.7589/2012-05-136

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sundqvist A-K, Ellegren H, Vilà C (2008) Wolf or dog? Genetic identification of predators from saliva collected around bite wounds on prey. Conserv Genet 9:1275–1279. doi:10.1007/s10592-007-9454-4

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Taberlet P, Waits LP, Luikart G (1999) Nonnvasive genetic sampling look before you leap. Trends Ecol Evol 14:323–327

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Templ M, Alfons A, Kowarik A, Prantner B (2011) VIM: visualization and imputation of missing values; R package version 2.3

  • Troyanskaya O, Cantor M, Sherlock G et al (2001) Missing value estimation methods for DNA microarrays. Bioinformatics 17:520–525. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/17.6.520

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Valière N (2002) GIMLET: a computer program for analysing genetic individual identification data. Mol Ecol Notes 2:377–379. doi:10.1046/j.1471-8278

    Google Scholar 

  • Valière N, Taberlet P (2000) Urine collected in the field as a source of DNA for species and individual identification. Mol Ecol 9:2149–2154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valière N, Berthier P, Mouchiroud D, Pontier D (2002) GEMINI: software for testing the effects of genotyping errors and multitubes approach for individual identification. Mol Ecol Notes 2:83–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valière N, Fumagalli L, Gielly L et al (2003) Long-distance wolf recolonization of France and Switzerland inferred from non-invasive genetic sampling over a period of 10 years. Anim Conserv 6:83–92. doi:10.1017/S1367943003003111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vilà C, Urios V, Castroviejo J (1994) Use of faeces for scent marking in Iberian wolves (Canis lupus). Can J Zool 72:374–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vilà C, Amorim I, Leonard J et al (1999) Mitochondrial DNA phylogeography and population history of the grey wolf Canis lupus. Mol Ecol 8:2089–2103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vynne C, Baker MR, Breuer ZK, Wasser SK (2012) Factors influencing degradation of DNA and hormones in maned wolf scat. Anim Conserv 15:184–194. doi:10.1111/j.1469-1795.2011.00503.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waits LP, Paetkau D (2005) Noninvasive genetic sampling tools for wildlife biologists: a review of application and recommendations for accurate data collection. J Wildl Manag 69:1419–1433. doi:10.2193/0022-541X(2005)69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waits LP, Luikart G, Taberlet P (2001) Estimating the probability of identity among genotypes in natural populations: cautions and guidelines. Mol Ecol 10:249–256

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wasser SK, Davenport B, Ramage ER et al (2004) Scat detection dogs in wildlife research and management: application to grizzly and black bears in the Yellowhead ecosystem, Alberta, Canada. Can J Zool 82:475–492. doi:10.1139/Z04-020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wengert GM, Gabriel MW, Foley JE et al (2013) Molecular techniques for identifying intraguild predators of fishers and other North American small carnivores. Wildl Soc Bull 37:659–663. doi:10.1002/wsb.287

    Google Scholar 

  • Wengert GM, Gabriel MW, Matthews SM et al (2014) Using DNA to describe and quantify interspecific killing of fishers in California. J Wildl Manag 78:603–611. doi:10.1002/jwmg.698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams CL, Blejwas K, Johnston JJ, Jaeger MM (2003) A coyote in sheep’s clothing: predator identification from saliva. Carniv Res Manag 31:926–932

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson E (1927) Probable inference, the law of succession, and statistical inference. J Am Stat Assoc 22:209–212. doi:10.2307/2276774

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zub K, Theuerkauf J, Jędrzejewski W et al (2003) Wolf pack territory marking in the Bialowieza primeval Forest (Poland). Behaviour 140:635–648

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all field assistants, particularly AS Pedro, D Cadete, J Pereira, J Santos, S Pinto and V Ramiro. We thank CONGEN members (CIBIO/InBIO), JV López-Bao, S Czarnomska, N Santos and B Rodrigues for revising earlier versions of the manuscript. We also thank all anonymous reviewers for constructive comments on previous versions of the manuscript. This is contribution no. 16 from the Iberian Wolf Research Team (IWRT).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CIBIO/InBIO, Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos, Universidade do Porto, Campus Agrário de Vairão, 4485-661, Vairão, Portugal

    Mónia Nakamura, Raquel Godinho, H. Rio-Maior, A. Kaliontzopoulou, D. Castro, S. Lopes & F. Álvares

  2. Departamento de Biologia, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade do Porto, Rua do Campo Alegre s⁄n, 4169-007, Porto, Portugal

    Raquel Godinho

  3. Grupo Lobo, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    S. Roque, J. Bernardo & F. Petrucci-Fonseca

  4. CE3C, Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Change, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, 1749-016, Lisbon, Portugal

    S. Roque & F. Petrucci-Fonseca

Authors
  1. Mónia Nakamura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Raquel Godinho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. H. Rio-Maior
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. Roque
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. A. Kaliontzopoulou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. J. Bernardo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. D. Castro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. S. Lopes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. F. Petrucci-Fonseca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. F. Álvares
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Mónia Nakamura or Raquel Godinho.

Ethics declarations

Funding

R.G. and S.R. worked respectively under a Research contract (IF/564/2012) and a PhD grant (SFRH/BD/12291/2003) from Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia. This work was supported by ACHLI (Associação de Conservação do Habitat do Lobo Ibérico), VentoMinho Energias Renováveis S.A and Project ‘Genomics applied to genetic resources’ cofinanced by North Portugal Regional Operational Programme 2007/2013 (ON.2—O Novo Norte), under the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF), through the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Online Resource 1

(PDF 138 kb)

Online Resource 2

(PDF 248 kb)

Online Resource 3

(PDF 141 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nakamura, M., Godinho, R., Rio-Maior, H. et al. Evaluating the predictive power of field variables for species and individual molecular identification on wolf noninvasive samples. Eur J Wildl Res 63, 53 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-017-1112-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-017-1112-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation