IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnljfs/v69y2023i3id19-2023-jfs.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are they both the same shit? Winter faeces of roe and red deer show no difference in nutritional components

Author

Listed:
  • Stipan Čupić

    (Department of Game Management and Wildlife Biology, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Miloš Ježek

    (Department of Game Management and Wildlife Biology, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Francisco Ceacero

    (Department of Animal Science and Food Processing, Faculty of Tropical AgriSciences, Czech University of Life Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Herbivorous ungulate diets affect population performance and overall forest health through balanced interactions on plant-herbivore relations; therefore, understanding them is critical. Faeces are frequently used in ungulate nutritional ecology because they can provide information about animals' digestive efficiency. Roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) and red deer (Cervus elaphus) have different morpho-physiological and ecological constraints, and these differences should be reflected in their faeces. On the other hand, the lack of information about the animal (sex, age, reproductive status, diet selection, etc.) may be challenging for such studies. This study aimed to detect species' different susceptibility to these factors reflected in animals' faeces. Thus, we hypothesised that near-infrared reflectance spectrometry (NIRS) could distinguish between the faecal nutrients of two cervids. We collected 94 usable faeces from both species along the forest transect in Bohemian forests in the Czech Republic, covering 2 500 ha. Roe and red deer overlap was determined using the four faecal nutritional components on two axes. No discrimination occurred, refuting our hypothesis and highlighting that out-of-control variables are critical for faecal studies in uncontrolled settings. Fibrous parts explained the most variance (48%), indicating animals' strong reliance on nutrition quality. Apparently, uncontrolled supplementary feeding produced similar faecal nutrient outcomes during the nutrition-limiting winter, which was theoretically supported by the animal's response to predation and hunting pressure. The inability of NIRS to identify the source of N in faeces may also explain the lack of discrimination.

Suggested Citation

  • Stipan Čupić & Miloš Ježek & Francisco Ceacero, 2023. "Are they both the same shit? Winter faeces of roe and red deer show no difference in nutritional components," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 69(3), pages 114-123.
  • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnljfs:v:69:y:2023:i:3:id:19-2023-jfs
    DOI: 10.17221/19/2023-JFS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/19/2023-JFS.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: http://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/19/2023-JFS.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/19/2023-JFS?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnljfs:v:69:y:2023:i:3:id:19-2023-jfs. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.