首页> 外文OA文献 >Presence and distribution of the brown bear (Ursus arctos) in Friuli Venezia Giulia, from 2004 to 2011, through the non-invasive genetic monitoring ad conservation implications
【2h】

Presence and distribution of the brown bear (Ursus arctos) in Friuli Venezia Giulia, from 2004 to 2011, through the non-invasive genetic monitoring ad conservation implications

机译:2004年至2011年,弗留利·威尼斯·朱利亚(Friuli Venezia Giulia)棕熊(Ursus arctos)的存在和分布,通过无创遗传监测和保护意义

摘要

After having disappeared at the beginning of 1900, the brown bear has started in a late 1960s a slow process of recolonization of the north-eastern Alps, through an expansion of Dinaric population. At the end of the 1990s the University of Udine began the occasional monitoring of the species and from 2004 non-invasive genetic monitoring became systematic. In the last 8 years 217 hair traps have been activated in the region to monitore: Natisone Valleys, the Julian and Carnic Alps and Prealps. Twenty-six hair traps were monitored in all years, whereas 40 were observed only in 2004, 2007 and 2011. The 26 hair traps constantly monitored from 2004 to 2011 showed 17% of average success of hair’s collecting (brown bear samples collected/day control: BBSD). The 40 hair traps, monitored in the window period, showed 12% of BBSD. The BBSD value varied in relation to both season (highest in spring) and year, with a dramatic decline from 2008, and interaction between year and area. From 2004, 13 genotypes, through systematic hair traps monitoring, were identified, while only 2 genotypes were sampled opportunistically. It was observed a high turnover of the genotypes: only 7 genotypes were sampled for more than 2 years (47% of total), 4 genotypes (27% of the total) were sampled for 3 years or more. The annual attendance of bear have been constant from 2004 to 2007, with 5-6 genotypes present every year. In the period between 2008 and 2010 there was a drastic decrease in the successful collection at the hair traps, with and average of 1-2 animals genotyped per year. However, opportunistic samples have increased in the recent times, probably due to the arrivals of 3 genotypes from Trentino (KJ2G2 in 2009 and DG2 and MJ4 in 2011). The year 2011 showed a further increase in the presence of bears with 5 animals genotyped in Friuli Venezia Giulia. Three of these animals belonged to the Slovenian population, while the other 2 genotypes were from the Trentino population. The results seem to confirm the exchange of some individuals between the Dinaric and central alpine population. As an example, the dinaric bear M5 was genotyped in Friuli Venezia Giulia in 2008 and then sampled in 2009 and captured in 2010 in Trentino and finally slot in Slovenia in 2011. The distribution in the alpine and prealpine areas has changed year by year: from the 2004 to 2007 the Natisone Valley and the Julian prealpine areas along the border with Slovenia were the areas more used, whilst from 2009 there was an apparent higher presence of bears in the Carnian Prealps and Alps, and in the Julian Alps. This shift could be due to human disturbance (i.e hunting management), control of the species carried out in neighbouring Slovenia, with a decreasing of immigrant from dinaric populations, and new immigration of bears from the central Alps. The present work has highlighted the necessity for a trans-regional and cross-border management of the species, especially in consideration to the population control applied in Slovenia, which seem to limit the Dinaric population expansion in the Alps, and furthermore the philopatry behaviour of bear females, which implies the absence of females in Friuli Venezia Giulia and induces a movement bach to Slovenia (at least 3 bears genotyped in Italy were shot in Slovenia). All these elements seem to exert important limitations to the consolidation and stabilization of the population of brown bears in north-eastern Alps. From the methodological point of view the protocol of systematic non-invasive genetic monitoring, shared at the trans-regional and trans-boundary level, is fundamental to monitore the dynamics and distribution of bear; the protocol should follow a systematic experimental design and should be integrated with a efficient opportunistic data collection.
机译:在1900年初消失之后,棕熊在1960年代后期开始了,通过狄拉尼克族的扩张,东北阿尔卑斯山重新定殖的缓慢过程。在1990年代末,乌迪内大学开始对该物种进行不定期监测,从2004年开始,非侵入性基因监测开始系统化。在过去的8年中,该地区有217个诱捕器被激活以进行监视:纳蒂森山谷,朱利安和卡恩阿尔卑斯山和普雷阿尔普斯。全年共监测了26个发夹,而仅在2004年,2007年和2011年才观察到40个。从2004年至2011年持续监测的26个发夹显示,平均收集成功率达到了17%(收集棕熊样本/每日控制) :BBSD)。在窗口期监控的40个发夹显示出BBSD的12%。 BBSD值随季节(春季最高)和年份而变化,与2008年相比急剧下降,并且年份和面积之间也存在相互作用。从2004年开始,通过系统性的诱捕器监测,鉴定出13种基因型,而仅机会性地取样了2种基因型。观察到该基因型的更新率很高:仅采样7种基因型超过2年(占总数的47%),采样4种基因型(占总数27%)进行3年或更长时间。从2004年到2007年,熊的年出勤率一直保持不变,每年有5-6种基因型。在2008年至2010年期间,成功进行了捕发器收集的数量急剧下降,平均每年进行1-2种动物的基因分型。但是,机会样本最近有所增加,这可能是由于特伦蒂诺(Trentino)的3个基因型的到来(2009年为KJ2G2,2011年为DG2和MJ4)。 2011年,在弗留利·威尼斯·朱利亚(Friuli Venezia Giulia)中对5只动物进行了基因分型,结果表明熊的数量进一步增加。这些动物中的三只属于斯洛文尼亚种群,而其他两种基因型则来自特伦蒂诺种群。结果似乎证实了Dinaric和中部高山人口之间的某些人之间的交流。例如,2008年在弗留利·威尼斯·朱利亚(Friuli Venezia Giulia)对那纳纳熊M5进行了基因分型,然后在2009年对其进行了采样,并于2010年在特伦蒂诺捕获,最后在2011年在斯洛文尼亚开槽。高山和高山前地区的分布逐年变化: 2004年至2007年,与斯洛文尼亚接壤的Natisone山谷和朱利安前阿尔卑斯山地区被更频繁地使用,而从2009年开始,在Carnian Prealps和阿尔卑斯山以及朱利安阿尔卑斯山中熊的数量明显增加。这种转变可能是由于人为干扰(即狩猎管理),对在邻国斯洛文尼亚进行的物种控制,来自纳纳尔人的移民减少以及来自中部阿尔卑斯山的熊的新移民造成的。本工作强调了对该物种进行跨区域和跨境管理的必要性,特别是考虑到在斯洛文尼亚实施的人口控制,这似乎限制了阿尔卑斯山的狄纳里克族群扩张,并且进一步限制了该物种的哲学行为。母熊,这意味着弗留利·威尼斯·朱利娅(Friuli Venezia Giulia)中没有雌性,并诱使巴赫向斯洛文尼亚运动(斯洛文尼亚射杀了至少3头在意大利进行基因分型的熊)。所有这些因素似乎对东北阿尔卑斯山棕熊种群的巩固和稳定产生了重要的限制。从方法学的角度来看,在跨区域和跨边界的层面上共享的系统无创遗传监测协议对于监测熊的动态和分布至关重要。该协议应遵循系统的实验设计,并应与有效的机会主义数据收集相集成。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号