Show simple item record

Woody plant foraging preferences of the beaver (Castor canadensis).

dc.contributor.authorSmith, Justinen_US
dc.coverage.spatialCanada Goose Ponden_US
dc.coverage.spatialUMBS Stationen_US
dc.coverage.spatialGrapevine Trailen_US
dc.coverage.spatialWilderness State Parken_US
dc.date.accessioned2007-06-14T22:51:03Z
dc.date.available2007-06-14T22:51:03Z
dc.date.issued1997en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/54748
dc.description.abstractBeaver can have a tremendous impact on their surroundings, altering the entire physical and chemical regime of the landscapes they inhabit. In this study we examined the effects tree size, tree distance from the waterway, and tree species have on beaver foraging habits. Because of past studies modeling optimum foraging patterns in central-place foragers (i.e. beaver), we chose null hypotheses that 1)beaver would show no preference in their tree species choice, that 2) beaver would harvest an equal number of trees both near to and far from the waterway, and that 3) the size of the trees harvested would be independent of their distance from the waterway. Transects were set up at Grapevine Point and Wilderness State Park near active beaver colonies. After data collection, analysis with a Chi square showed beaver to prefer sugar maple (Acer saccharum) and red oak (Quercus rubra) at Grapevine Point and trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides) and black ash (Fraxinus nigra) at Wilderness Park. Analysis with Mann-Whitney U tests showed that Grapevine point beaver harvested more trees closer to shore, but harvested equally large trees regardless of distance from shore. Wilderness park beaver harvested an equal number of trees near to and far from shore, but harvested larger trees farther from shore. These results seem to contradict an optimal foraging pattern, but may be due to biotic and abiotic factors such as beaver energetic constraints, predation risks, plant secondary chemical production, differential use of plant tissues, landscape topography and the thermal regime. Knowledge of these factors as they apply to an optimal foraging pattern can lead to the improved maintenance of our beaver populations and our waterways.en_US
dc.format.extent343971 bytes
dc.format.extent3144 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.relation.haspartTable of Numbersen_US
dc.subjectGeneral Ecologyen_US
dc.subject.otherVERTEBRATESen_US
dc.subject.otherMAMMALSen_US
dc.subject.otherCASTORen_US
dc.subject.otherBEAVERen_US
dc.subject.otherFORAGINGen_US
dc.subject.otherBEHAVIORen_US
dc.subject.otherTREEen_US
dc.subject.otherSIZEen_US
dc.subject.otherSPECIESen_US
dc.subject.otherFORESTen_US
dc.subject.otherCOMPOSITIONen_US
dc.subject.otherACERen_US
dc.subject.otherQUERCUSen_US
dc.subject.otherPOPULUSen_US
dc.subject.otherFRAXINUSen_US
dc.subject.otherCHI-SQUAREen_US
dc.subject.otherPREFERENCEen_US
dc.titleWoody plant foraging preferences of the beaver (Castor canadensis).en_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelNatural Resource and Environmenten_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScienceen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumBiological Station, University of Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampusAnn Arboren_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/54748/1/3189.pdfen_US
dc.description.filedescriptionDescription of 3189.pdf : Access restricted to on-site users at the U-M Biological Station.en_US
dc.owningcollnameBiological Station, University of Michigan (UMBS)


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Accessibility: If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.