Functional stomach chamber strategy of red deer in relation to sex and mating season

• Autorzy: Siuta A
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Stomach chambers of hinds (H), winter (WB) and rutting bulls (RB) of red deer (Cervus elaphus L.) were examined during the fall hunting season and wintertime. The stomach content of bulls was the highest (P>0.01) in winter (WB, 19.0 kg) and the lowest (RB, 3.7 kg) during rutting season. But the relative food content for total stomach (IR index) as well as for rumen (180.2), abomasum (4.1) and omasum (7.4) was the greatest in hinds (H). However, the total stomach tissue (SCT) weight increased together with the enhancement of carcass weight (Cw), the percentage of participation relative SCT to Cw, thus by contrast the IW index was the lowest P>0.01 in the heaviest RB (2.23). For WB it equaled 4.03 and for H - 3.99. Moreover, the total stomach volume, Iᵥ index was the highest in hinds (82.90) and differed P>0.01 from that of RB which was the lowest (36.70). Similar trends occurred in the individual stomach chamber areas. The greatest IT index-expressing ratio of stomach tissue weight to its area was markedly (P>00.5) higher in RB (0.20) in comparison to the remaining groups (WB 0.11, H 0.09), indicating a thicker and shrunken stomach wall. The study demonstrates that variability in the stomach chambers (its characteristics and indexes) of female and male deer depend upon seasonal physiological changes, including the most important season, which is the mating season. Stomach size and its individual chamber indexes are consequences of diet segregation and different feeding behavior between sexes, including foraging activity of males in the rutting season.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

red deer; Cervus elaphus; mating season; sex; stomach; stomach chamber strategy; stomach content; food content; carcass weight; female; male; variability; diet segregation; feeding behaviour

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Medycyna Weterynaryjna
• Rocznik: 2006
• Tom: 62
• Numer: 07
• Opis fizyczny: p.773-777,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Siuta A

• Agricultural University, Al.Mickiewicza 24/28, 30-059 Krakow, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1.Barboza P. S., Bowyer R. T.: Sexual segregation in dimorphic deer: a new gastrocentric hypothesis. J. Mammalogy 2000, 81, 473-489.
• 2.Bowyer R. T.: Sexual segregation in ruminants: definitions, hypothesis, and implications for conservation and management. J. Mammalogy 2004, 85, 1039-1052.
• 3.Bowyer R. T., Kie J. K.: Effects of foraging activity on sexual segregation in mule deer. Mammalogy 2004, 85, 498-504.
• 4.Bobek B., Perzanowski K., Weiner J.: Energy expenditure for reproduction in male red deer. J. Mammalogy 1990, 71, 239-245.
• 5.Clauss M., Lechner-Doll M.: Differences in selective particle retention as a key factor in the diversification of ruminants. Oecologia 2001, 129, 321-327.
• 6.Clauss M., Lechner-Doll M., Streich W. J.: Ruminant Diversification as an adaptation to the physicomechanical characteristics of forage. A reevaluation of an old debate and a new hypothesis. Oikos 2003, 102, 253-262.
• 7.Clauss M.: The potential interplay of posture, digestive anatomy, density of ingesta and gravity in mammalian herbivores: why sloths do not rest upside down. Mammal Rev. 2004, 34, 241-245.
• 8.Conradt L., Gordon J., Clutton-Brock T. H., Thomson D., Guinness F.: Zoology competition hypothesis explain inter-sexual site segregation in red deer (Cervus elaphus L.)? J. Zoology 2001, 254, 185-193.
• 9.Clutton-Brock Th. H., Guinnes F. E., Albon S. D.: Red deer: behavior and ecology of two sexes. Univ. Chicago Press. Chicago 1982, 121-123, 239-241.
• 10.Gordon I. J.: Browsing and grazing ruminants: are they different beasts? Forest Ecol. Managem. 2003, 181, 13-21.
• 11.Hofmann R. R.: Evolutionary steps of ecophysiological adaptation and diversification of ruminant: a comparative view of their digestive system. Oecologia 1989, 78, 443-457.
• 12.Hofmann R. R.: Functional and comparative digestive system anatomy of Arctic ungulates. Rangifer 1999, 20, 71-81.
• 13.Illius A. W., Gordon I. J.: The physiological ecology of mammalian herbiviory, [in:] Jung H. J., Fahey G. C. (eds.): Nutritional Ecology of Herbivore. Am. Soc. Anim. Sci. Savoy, Illinois 1999, 71-96.
• 14.Kie J. G., Bowyer R. T.: Sexual segregation in white-tailed deer: densitydependent changes in use of space, habitat selection, and dietary niche. J. Mammalogy 1999, 80, 1004-1020.
• 15.Mysterud A.: The relationship between ecological segregation and sexual body size dimorphism in large herbivores. Oecologia 2000, 124, 40-54.
• 16.Mysterud A., Perez-Barberia F. J., Gordon I. J.: The effect of season, sex and feeding style on home range area versus body mass scaling in temperate ruminants. Oecologia 2001, 127, 30-39.
• 17.Mysterud A., Langvatn R., Yoccoz N. G., Stenseth N. C.: Plant phenology, migration and geographic variation in body weight of a large herbivore: the effect of a variable topography. J. Anim. Ecol. 2001, 70, 915-923.
• 18.Palmer S. C. F., Truscott A. M.: Seasonal habitat use and browsing be deer in Caledonian pinewood. Forest Ecol. Managem. 2003, 174, 149-166.
• 19.Parcz A.: Zasobność bazy pokarmowej jeleniowatych w siedliskach lasu górskiego, Przedgórze Bieszczadzkie. Zakł. Bad. Łowieckich. Inst. Biol. Środow. UJ, Master's thesis. Kraków 1990, 1-30.
• 20.Pelliza A., Willems P., Manacorda M.: Dietary structural types of polygastric herbivore at different environments and seasons. J. Range Managem. 2001, 54, 330-337.
• 21.Soida D.: Ocena bazy pokarmowej jeleniowatych w siedlisku lasu górskiego Bieszczad. Zakład Badań Łowieckich. Inst. Biol. Środow. UJ, Master's thesis. Kraków 1990, 1-35.
• 22.Spaeth D. F., Bowyer R. T., Stephensen T. R., Barboza P. S.: Sexual segregation in moose Alces alces: an experimental manipulation of foraging behaviour. Wildlfe Biology 2004, 10, 59-72.
• 23.Staines B. W., Crips J. M., Parish T.: Differences in the quality of food eaten by red deer (Cervus elaphus L.) stags and hinds in winter. J. Appl. Ecol. 1982, 19, 65-77.
• 24.Takatsuki S.: The weight contribution of stomach compartment of sika deer. J. Wildl. Managem. 1988, 52, 313-331.
• 25.Users Guide. Statistics, Version 5 Edition. SAS Inst. Inc. Cary, NC. 1995.
• 26.Van Soest P. J.: Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant. Comstock. Publishing Associated a Division of Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London 1994.