Are owl pellets good estimators of prey abundance?

Autores
Andrade, Analia; Menezes, Jorge Fernando Saraiva de; Monjeau, Jorge Adrian
Año de publicación
2016
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Some ecologists have been skeptics about the use of owl pellets to estimate small mammal's fauna. This is due to the assumptions required by this method: (a) that owls hunt at random, and (b) that pellets represent a random sample from the environment. We performed statistical analysis to test these assumptions and to assess the effectiveness of Barn owl pellets as a useful estimator of field abundances of its preys. We used samples collected in the arid Extra-Andean Patagonia along an altitudinal environmental gradient from lower Monte ecoregion to upper Patagonian steppe ecoregion, with a mid-elevation ecotone. To test if owls hunt at random, we estimated expected pellet frequency by creating a distribution of random pellets, which we compared with data using a simulated chi-square. To test if pellets represent a random sample from the environment, differences between ecoregions were evaluated by PERMANOVAs with Bray–Curtis dissimilarities. We did not find evidence that owls foraged non-randomly. Therefore, we can assume that the proportions of the small mammal's species in the diet are representative of the proportions of the species in their communities. Only Monte is different from other ecoregions. The ecotone samples are grouped with those of Patagonian steppes. There are no real differences between localities in the small mammal's abundances in each of these ecoregions and/or Barn owl pellets cannot detect patterns at a smaller spatial scale. Therefore, we have no evidence to invalidate the use of owl pellets at an ecoregional scale.
Fil: Andrade, Analia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Centro Nacional Patagónico; Argentina
Fil: Menezes, Jorge Fernando Saraiva de. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; Brasil
Fil: Monjeau, Jorge Adrian. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; Brasil. Fundación Bariloche; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Materia
Northern Patagonia
Pellet Contents
Prey Abundance
Random Hunt
Tyto Alba
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/81136

id CONICETDig_f553f790482cdeb278dd57658ececd76
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/81136
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Are owl pellets good estimators of prey abundance?Andrade, AnaliaMenezes, Jorge Fernando Saraiva deMonjeau, Jorge AdrianNorthern PatagoniaPellet ContentsPrey AbundanceRandom HuntTyto Albahttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.6https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1Some ecologists have been skeptics about the use of owl pellets to estimate small mammal's fauna. This is due to the assumptions required by this method: (a) that owls hunt at random, and (b) that pellets represent a random sample from the environment. We performed statistical analysis to test these assumptions and to assess the effectiveness of Barn owl pellets as a useful estimator of field abundances of its preys. We used samples collected in the arid Extra-Andean Patagonia along an altitudinal environmental gradient from lower Monte ecoregion to upper Patagonian steppe ecoregion, with a mid-elevation ecotone. To test if owls hunt at random, we estimated expected pellet frequency by creating a distribution of random pellets, which we compared with data using a simulated chi-square. To test if pellets represent a random sample from the environment, differences between ecoregions were evaluated by PERMANOVAs with Bray–Curtis dissimilarities. We did not find evidence that owls foraged non-randomly. Therefore, we can assume that the proportions of the small mammal's species in the diet are representative of the proportions of the species in their communities. Only Monte is different from other ecoregions. The ecotone samples are grouped with those of Patagonian steppes. There are no real differences between localities in the small mammal's abundances in each of these ecoregions and/or Barn owl pellets cannot detect patterns at a smaller spatial scale. Therefore, we have no evidence to invalidate the use of owl pellets at an ecoregional scale.Fil: Andrade, Analia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Centro Nacional Patagónico; ArgentinaFil: Menezes, Jorge Fernando Saraiva de. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Monjeau, Jorge Adrian. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; Brasil. Fundación Bariloche; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaElsevier B.V.2016-07info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/81136Andrade, Analia; Menezes, Jorge Fernando Saraiva de; Monjeau, Jorge Adrian; Are owl pellets good estimators of prey abundance?; Elsevier B.V.; Journal of King Saud University - Science; 28; 3; 7-2016; 239-2441018-3647CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.jksus.2015.10.007info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1018364715000993info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T09:50:55Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/81136instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 09:50:56.102CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Are owl pellets good estimators of prey abundance?
title Are owl pellets good estimators of prey abundance?
spellingShingle Are owl pellets good estimators of prey abundance?
Andrade, Analia
Northern Patagonia
Pellet Contents
Prey Abundance
Random Hunt
Tyto Alba
title_short Are owl pellets good estimators of prey abundance?
title_full Are owl pellets good estimators of prey abundance?
title_fullStr Are owl pellets good estimators of prey abundance?
title_full_unstemmed Are owl pellets good estimators of prey abundance?
title_sort Are owl pellets good estimators of prey abundance?
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Andrade, Analia
Menezes, Jorge Fernando Saraiva de
Monjeau, Jorge Adrian
author Andrade, Analia
author_facet Andrade, Analia
Menezes, Jorge Fernando Saraiva de
Monjeau, Jorge Adrian
author_role author
author2 Menezes, Jorge Fernando Saraiva de
Monjeau, Jorge Adrian
author2_role author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Northern Patagonia
Pellet Contents
Prey Abundance
Random Hunt
Tyto Alba
topic Northern Patagonia
Pellet Contents
Prey Abundance
Random Hunt
Tyto Alba
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.6
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Some ecologists have been skeptics about the use of owl pellets to estimate small mammal's fauna. This is due to the assumptions required by this method: (a) that owls hunt at random, and (b) that pellets represent a random sample from the environment. We performed statistical analysis to test these assumptions and to assess the effectiveness of Barn owl pellets as a useful estimator of field abundances of its preys. We used samples collected in the arid Extra-Andean Patagonia along an altitudinal environmental gradient from lower Monte ecoregion to upper Patagonian steppe ecoregion, with a mid-elevation ecotone. To test if owls hunt at random, we estimated expected pellet frequency by creating a distribution of random pellets, which we compared with data using a simulated chi-square. To test if pellets represent a random sample from the environment, differences between ecoregions were evaluated by PERMANOVAs with Bray–Curtis dissimilarities. We did not find evidence that owls foraged non-randomly. Therefore, we can assume that the proportions of the small mammal's species in the diet are representative of the proportions of the species in their communities. Only Monte is different from other ecoregions. The ecotone samples are grouped with those of Patagonian steppes. There are no real differences between localities in the small mammal's abundances in each of these ecoregions and/or Barn owl pellets cannot detect patterns at a smaller spatial scale. Therefore, we have no evidence to invalidate the use of owl pellets at an ecoregional scale.
Fil: Andrade, Analia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Centro Nacional Patagónico; Argentina
Fil: Menezes, Jorge Fernando Saraiva de. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; Brasil
Fil: Monjeau, Jorge Adrian. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; Brasil. Fundación Bariloche; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
description Some ecologists have been skeptics about the use of owl pellets to estimate small mammal's fauna. This is due to the assumptions required by this method: (a) that owls hunt at random, and (b) that pellets represent a random sample from the environment. We performed statistical analysis to test these assumptions and to assess the effectiveness of Barn owl pellets as a useful estimator of field abundances of its preys. We used samples collected in the arid Extra-Andean Patagonia along an altitudinal environmental gradient from lower Monte ecoregion to upper Patagonian steppe ecoregion, with a mid-elevation ecotone. To test if owls hunt at random, we estimated expected pellet frequency by creating a distribution of random pellets, which we compared with data using a simulated chi-square. To test if pellets represent a random sample from the environment, differences between ecoregions were evaluated by PERMANOVAs with Bray–Curtis dissimilarities. We did not find evidence that owls foraged non-randomly. Therefore, we can assume that the proportions of the small mammal's species in the diet are representative of the proportions of the species in their communities. Only Monte is different from other ecoregions. The ecotone samples are grouped with those of Patagonian steppes. There are no real differences between localities in the small mammal's abundances in each of these ecoregions and/or Barn owl pellets cannot detect patterns at a smaller spatial scale. Therefore, we have no evidence to invalidate the use of owl pellets at an ecoregional scale.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2016-07
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/81136
Andrade, Analia; Menezes, Jorge Fernando Saraiva de; Monjeau, Jorge Adrian; Are owl pellets good estimators of prey abundance?; Elsevier B.V.; Journal of King Saud University - Science; 28; 3; 7-2016; 239-244
1018-3647
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/81136
identifier_str_mv Andrade, Analia; Menezes, Jorge Fernando Saraiva de; Monjeau, Jorge Adrian; Are owl pellets good estimators of prey abundance?; Elsevier B.V.; Journal of King Saud University - Science; 28; 3; 7-2016; 239-244
1018-3647
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.jksus.2015.10.007
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1018364715000993
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier B.V.
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier B.V.
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1844613568791576576
score 13.070432