Considerations of context and scale when using fecal glucocorticoids to indicate stress in large mammals: a study of wild American plains bison
Author and article information
Abstract
Non-invasive measures of the stress response are used to understand the impacts of natural and anthropogenic disturbances on wild animals. They can, however, be challenging to interpret without additional contextual information and specifics of the animals in question. Here, we used fecal samples collected from the Henry Mountains bison herd in Utah to measure the glucocorticoid hormone corticosterone (CORT), which is indicative of stress. We compared site-specific measures of fecal CORT concentration with measures of covariates related to geography (elevation, slope, aspect, distance to roads, distance to water, food quality, habitat type, season), bison physiology (body condition, parasite load, sex), and human activity (traffic volume at multiple time scales, hunting seasons). Our aim was to determine whether an unexpected habitat selection pattern could be a response to human disturbance, and thus whether ecological covariates could explain variations in fecal CORT concentration in free-ranging bison. No meaningful relationships were found for any of the covariates included in the study. At least some of those covariates should be related to the stress state of the herd, but in large and highly mobile species such as bison there is a scale mismatch between the physiological stress response of an animal and the spatiotemporal distribution of fresh feces left on the landscape. We offer our assessment of fecal CORT in bison as a case study demonstrating the utility and complications associated with using fecal indicators of stress in wildlife populations.
Cite this as
2016. Considerations of context and scale when using fecal glucocorticoids to indicate stress in large mammals: a study of wild American plains bison. PeerJ Preprints 4:e2092v1 https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.2092v1Author comment
This is a submission to PeerJ for review.
Sections
Supplemental Information
Additional Information
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Author Contributions
Dustin H Ranglack conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, wrote the paper, prepared figures and/or tables, reviewed drafts of the paper.
Lorin A Neuman-Lee conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.
Susannah S French conceived and designed the experiments, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.
Johan T du Toit conceived and designed the experiments, wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.
Animal Ethics
The following information was supplied relating to ethical approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):
Utah State University Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee approved protocol #1452
Field Study Permissions
The following information was supplied relating to field study approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Certificate of Registrations for Banding, Collection, Depredation, and Salvage permit #6BANC8393
Data Deposition
The following information was supplied regarding data availability:
The raw data has been supplied as a supplementary file.
Funding
This work was funded by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources and Utah State University. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
