BrentD
Well-known member
Notice of this new publication just dropped into my inbox today. Perhaps some here will find it interesting. It pertains to deer, elk, pronghorn and other species.
I don't know if the link will work for most of you or not, but the abstract might suffice.
Biological relevance of antler, horn, and pronghorn size in records programs
Tayler N LaSharr, Ryan A Long, James R Heffelfinger, Vernon C Bleich, Paul R Krausman, R Terry Bowyer, Justin M Shannon, Eric M Rominger, Chadwick P Lehman, Mike Cox, Kevin L Monteith
Journal of Mammalogy, gyz123,https://doi.org/10.1093/jmammal/gyz123
Published:
28 August 2019
Abstract
Long-term datasets are becoming increasingly important for assessing population- and species-level responses to a changing environment. Programs that record morphological measurements of horns, antlers, and pronghorns were established in the early- to mid-20th century to collect biological information about animals that possess large horns, antlers, or pronghorns, which could be used to assess the effectiveness of conservation efforts for large mammals in North America. The general relevance of record books has been questioned because of the minimum size requirements for inclusion in a record book, which may mask trends when changes in the population occur. We compared trends in size of antlers, horns, and pronghorns through time using records from three records programs with different minimum size requirements to evaluate the influence of entry requirements on temporal trends. We also investigated whether horn, antler, or pronghorn size affected the probability of specimens being submitted to a records program. Only two of 17 categories exhibited less-pronounced trends in the record book with the highest size requirements for entry, and in two categories trends were more pronounced. Although societal interest in submitting eligible specimens increased slightly over time in one of six categories, the probability of voluntary entry was largely random and not affected by year of harvest or size of specimen. In contrast to previous criticisms, trends in record books should not be expected to represent the size of all males within a population. Instead, our evaluation indicates that the records programs we examined can provide a useful resource for assessing long-term changes in phenotypic characteristics of ungulates, but importantly, they represent the respective range of sizes within which each program collects data.
I don't know if the link will work for most of you or not, but the abstract might suffice.
Biological relevance of antler, horn, and pronghorn size in records programs
Tayler N LaSharr, Ryan A Long, James R Heffelfinger, Vernon C Bleich, Paul R Krausman, R Terry Bowyer, Justin M Shannon, Eric M Rominger, Chadwick P Lehman, Mike Cox, Kevin L Monteith
Journal of Mammalogy, gyz123,https://doi.org/10.1093/jmammal/gyz123
Published:
28 August 2019
Abstract
Long-term datasets are becoming increasingly important for assessing population- and species-level responses to a changing environment. Programs that record morphological measurements of horns, antlers, and pronghorns were established in the early- to mid-20th century to collect biological information about animals that possess large horns, antlers, or pronghorns, which could be used to assess the effectiveness of conservation efforts for large mammals in North America. The general relevance of record books has been questioned because of the minimum size requirements for inclusion in a record book, which may mask trends when changes in the population occur. We compared trends in size of antlers, horns, and pronghorns through time using records from three records programs with different minimum size requirements to evaluate the influence of entry requirements on temporal trends. We also investigated whether horn, antler, or pronghorn size affected the probability of specimens being submitted to a records program. Only two of 17 categories exhibited less-pronounced trends in the record book with the highest size requirements for entry, and in two categories trends were more pronounced. Although societal interest in submitting eligible specimens increased slightly over time in one of six categories, the probability of voluntary entry was largely random and not affected by year of harvest or size of specimen. In contrast to previous criticisms, trends in record books should not be expected to represent the size of all males within a population. Instead, our evaluation indicates that the records programs we examined can provide a useful resource for assessing long-term changes in phenotypic characteristics of ungulates, but importantly, they represent the respective range of sizes within which each program collects data.
