DIET, NUTRITION, AND REPRODUCTIVE ... - NWIFC Access

More documents

Recommendations

Info

LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Reproductive success of nine elk herds in the Hoko GMU, Washington, 2001. Herds are listed in decreasing order of mean calf:cow ratio. Mean calf:cow was calculated from n = 7 counts per herd, 1 per month from June through December 2001. If more than 1 count was completed per herd per month, the most accurate count was used. Birthrate was calf:cow ratio in July. Productivity index was a rank derived from mean calf:cow, birthrate, December calf:cow, and survival............................................................................28 2 Chi-square goodness-of-fit for used and available vegetation groups for nine elk herds, Hoko GMU, Washington, March – December 2001. Vegetation used and available data in Appendix E...................................................................30 3 Vegetation groups used less than, equal to, or greater than expected from Chi-square goodness-of-fit analysis. Riparian/marsh vegetation group was excluded due to low expected values. Data presented were from nine elk herds in the Hoko GMU, Washington, 2001. Used and available vegetation group data is presented in Appendix E. ..................................................................31 4 Results of Mann-Whitney U test for differences in median available vegetation category (%) between highly productive and less productive elk herds, Hoko GMU, Washington, 2001. Vegetation categories were those used in Chi- square analysis, and that were available to all herds..........................33 5 Mean use (% of diet) of forage classes for nine elk herds, Hoko GMU, Washington. Mean (± 1 SE) was calculated from March 2001 – February 2002 diet data..........................................................................................................36 6 Differences in median forage class (%) in the diet between highly productive and less productive elk herds, Hoko GMU, Washington, 2001. Mean forage class for each herd was the percent of the diet averaged over the time period March 2001 – February 2002 (Table 5)..................................................................37 7 Summary of principal components 1 - 7, representing vegetation category within the home range of nine elk herds. Sign of correlation represents the sign (+ or -) of r for that vegetation category type and principal component. Values of r are reported in Appendix H. Used and available vegetation category data were for nine elk herds and home ranges from March – December 2001, Hoko GMU, Washington.............................................................49 x
LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED) 8 Summary of multiple regression analyses of reproductive success of nine elk herds and vegetation category principal components. Vegetation data was from elk locations in the Hoko GMU, Washington, March - December 2001. Only principal components with coefficients significantly different from zero are included. Additional statistical values are shown in Appendix I and Appendix J. .............................................................................................................51 9 Summary of plant species making up principal components 1d – 8d. The nomenclature 1d – 8d distinguishes principal components that summarized elk diet from principal components of vegetation category. Sign of correlation represents the sign (+ or -) of r for that vegetation category and principal component. Values of r are shown in Appendix K.................................52 10 Summary of multiple regression analyses of reproductive success and elk diet principle components. Elk diet data were for nine herds in the Hoko GMU, Washington, March – December 2001. Only principal components with coefficients significantly different from zero were included. Additional statistics are shown in Appendix L. ........................................................................53 11 Summary of multiple regression analyses of reproductive success and elk diet principal components. Elk diet data were for nine herds in the Hoko GMU, Washington, March 2001 – February 2002. Only principal components with coefficients significantly different from zero were included. Additional statistics are shown in Appendix M. ....................................54 Page xi
Page 1: DIET, NUTRITION, AND REPRODUCTIVE S
Page 4 and 5: Grasses and forbs were high in prot
Page 6 and 7: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to th
Page 8 and 9: TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT....
Page 12 and 13: LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Study
Page 14 and 15: LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page A
Page 16 and 17: INTRODUCTION Roosevelt elk (Cervus
Page 18 and 19: Similarly, high quality habitat (ve
Page 20 and 21: 5 deficiencies have been reported f
Page 22 and 23: STUDY AREA The Hoko Game Management
Page 24 and 25: acemosa), swordfern (Polystichum mu
Page 26 and 27: 11 independence, I allowed at least
Page 28 and 29: 13 counted calves and cows, one obs
Page 30 and 31: communication). Riparian areas of v
Page 32 and 33: 17 The 28 vegetation types and timb
Page 34 and 35: could indicate forage plant groups
Page 36 and 37: 21 of digestibility was not an exac
Page 38 and 39: used Pearson’s correlation analys
Page 40 and 41: RESULTS Elk Telemetry and Locations
Page 42 and 43: 27 0.8 Calf:cow ratio Calf:cow rati
Page 44 and 45: Five of the nine herds used vegetat
Page 46 and 47: Table 3. Vegetation groups used les
Page 48 and 49: 33 Table 4. Results of Mann-Whitney
Page 50 and 51: 35 summer months. Shrub consumption
Page 52 and 53: Table 6. Differences in median fora
Page 54 and 55: 39 80 March/April Total grass (%) 6
Page 56 and 57: Nutritional Analysis of Forage Plan
Page 58 and 59: IVDMD (%) IVDMD (%) IVDMD (%) 80 60
Page 60 and 61:
DE (Kcal/g) DE (Kcal/g) DE (Kcal/g)
Page 62 and 63:
0.6 47 0.5 Calf survival (%) Mean c
Page 64 and 65:
Table 7. Summary of principal compo
Page 66 and 67:
Table 8. Summary of multiple regres
Page 68 and 69:
Table 10. Summary of multiple regre
Page 70 and 71:
Birthrate was negatively related to
Page 72 and 73:
DISCUSSION Highly productive herds
Page 74 and 75:
consumption of evergreen shrubs, wi
Page 76 and 77:
61 Therefore, low percentages of gr
Page 78 and 79:
63 been able to gain adequate weigh
Page 80 and 81:
65 survival but few calves overall,
Page 82 and 83:
2004), highly nutritious forage pla
Page 84 and 85:
egardless of home range size. There
Page 86 and 87:
71 However, it is possible to have
Page 88 and 89:
73 Cook, J. G., B. K. Johnson, R. C
Page 90 and 91:
75 Hudson, R. J. and J. Z. Adamczew
Page 92 and 93:
Phillips, G. E. and A. W. Alldredge
Page 94 and 95:
APPENDICES 79
Page 96 and 97:
Appendix A. Vegetation types and st
Page 98 and 99:
Appendix C. Coefficient of Associat
Page 100 and 101:
Appendix E. Percentage of each vege
Page 102 and 103:
Appendix F. Diet of nine elk herds
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Appendix G. Total percentage of nin
Page 114 and 115:
99 Appendix I. Multiple regression
Page 116 and 117:
101 Appendix K. Correlations betwee
Page 118 and 119:
Appendix M. Multiple regression ana
show all

DIET, NUTRITION, AND REPRODUCTIVE ... - NWIFC Access

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?