Next Article in Journal
Effect of Exhibition Facilities, Professional Competence, and Green Procurement on Green Meeting, Incentive Travel, Convention, and Exhibition Industry Performance Measurement: A Case Study of the Exhibition Industry of Taiwan
Next Article in Special Issue
Climate Change and Anthropogenic Factors Are Influencing the Loss of Habitats and Emerging Human–Elephant Conflict in the Namib Desert
Previous Article in Journal
Regional Carbon Stock Response to Land Use Structure Change and Multi-Scenario Prediction: A Case Study of Hunan Province, China
Previous Article in Special Issue
Estimation of Fishery Losses from Great Cormorants during the Wintering Period in Greek Lagoons (Ionian Sea, W. Greece)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 16
10.3390/su151612181
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Habitat Selection: Autumn and Winter Behavioral Preferences of Water Deer (Hydropotes inermis) in Northeast China

by
Yue Sun
1,
Zongzhi Li
1,
Junda Chen
1,
Romaan Hayat Khattak
1,2,
Zhensheng Liu
1,3,* and
Liwei Teng
1,3,*
1
College of Wildlife and Protected Areas, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China
2
Institute of Zoology, Guangdong Academy of Science, Guangzhou 510000, China
3
Key Laboratory of Conservation Biology, National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Harbin 150040, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(16), 12181; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612181
Submission received: 30 June 2023 / Revised: 6 August 2023 / Accepted: 8 August 2023 / Published: 9 August 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Wildlife Conservation: Managing Resources for a Sustainable World)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The wild water deer (Hydropotes inermis) population has declined rapidly over recent decades and has reached an endangered status in China. Therefore, it is important to understand their habitat selection to effectively protect both existing and emerging populations. This paper used the data of 11 habitat factors in Baishan Musk Deer National Nature Reserve in the autumn and winter from 2018 to 2019 to conduct a habitat selection study of water deer by resource selection function analysis. The results indicated that in both the autumn and winter, water deer preferred grasslands at sunny and middle slopes, dominated by Artemisia carvifolia and A. argyi, respectively. In addition, the resource selection function showed that the height of dominant herbage, hiding cover, distance from water, and distance to human settlements greatly contribute to the habitat selection of water deer in the cold season. The correct prediction rate of the resource selection function model exceeded 80%, highlighting its suitability for predicting the habitat selection of water deer. The outcomes of this study provide an effective scientific basis for the conservation and restoration of water deer, and valuable enlightenment for implementing a sustainable development strategy in northeast China.

1. Introduction

The relationship between animals and their habitats is a central component of wildlife ecology [1]. A habitat is defined as the space in which an individual, population, or community can complete their whole life process, as it provides the basic environmental conditions for wildlife, such as water, food, and shelter [2]. Hence, to protect wildlife populations, it is centrally important to understand their habitat selection. Habitat selection directly affects the survival rate of wildlife, thus also ultimately affecting population persistence [3]. However, global climate change and other factors impose direct or indirect impacts on the wildlife habitat environment, causing changes in population size [4] and distribution ranges [5,6,7] and even lead to extinction [8]. The average global temperature has increased by approximately 0.74 °C over the last century [9], and the fifth assessment report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change proposed that the global climate will continue to be warm [10]. Many studies have suggested that in response to this warming, species will migrate toward higher elevations or higher latitudes [11,12,13,14]. Furthermore, the choice of habitats by wild animals also represents a balance between physiological needs and capture risk [15,16]. Fast-growing human populations and rising global temperatures have primarily destroyed vast portions of wildlife habitats, thus forcing wildlife to live near human settlements [17,18]. The human shield hypothesis argues that humans exert different top-down pressures on the apex (hereafter dominant) predator in a system, thus indirectly helping subordinate competitors and facilitating greater spatial overlap between humans and subordinate species [19,20]. The crop attraction hypothesis argues that many large grazing animals (such as ungulates) frequently feed on agricultural crops close to human settlements [21]. Both hypotheses suggest that even species that would otherwise prefer to avoid humans may choose to approach human settlements to ensure their survival. Thus, understanding habitat selection of large grazing or subordinated animals requires assessing the importance of human-created habitats upon their decisions of habitat use.
This study addresses the habitat selection of the endangered water deer (Hydropotes inermis), a small-sized ruminant that belongs to the genus of Hydropotes and the family of Cervidae. It is endemic to East Asia with a natural distribution throughout China (e.g., Liaodong Peninsula, North China Plains, and both sides of the Yangtze River) and the Korean Peninsula [22]. In the early 1990s, China had a wild water deer population of about 10,000–30,000 individuals [23]. A study conducted in 2013 showed that because of habitat loss caused by excessive human disturbance, the population size and distribution of water deer shrunk dramatically. This has resulted in an isolated “island” distribution of less than 10,000 individuals [24]. The water deer is currently classified as a national key protected class II species in China, and according to the red list of the International Union for Conservation of Nature, its status is vulnerable [25].
In China, studies on the habitat selection of water deer have mainly focused on the southern parts of their distribution, while studies on the northeastern parts are rare. Zhang conducted a study in southern China (i.e., the Poyang Lake national nature reserve in Jiangxi Province), and found that water deer preferred Miscanthus sacchairflorus, Phragmitas, low slopes, and vegetation coverage ranging from 50% to 69%, while avoiding habitats with strong human disturbance in 2019 [26]. In 2022, Han et al. also conducted a study in southern China (Nanjing, Jiangsu Province). The authors found that water deer preferred evergreen deciduous broad-leaved forests and dominant shrubs with a height of no less than 120 cm; however, habitats close to intersections and those with a high disturbance index were avoided [27].
There has been no report on the water deer distribution in northeast China since the 1950s, and it is reasonable to assume that the species had become locally extinct, until its rediscovery in Jilin Province in 2019 [28]. Also in 2019, water deer were photographed in the Primorskiy region of Russia, which is currently the northernmost water deer distribution [29]. According to Teng (2007), the coastal tidal flats in Yancheng, Jiangsu Province, China, were once the northernmost ends of the distribution area of water deer in China [30]. Today, the rediscovery of water deer in the northeast has updated the northernmost end of the distribution of this species in China. This new finding has led to considerable speculations regarding the habitat selected by water deer in recent years in different regions. The authors suggest that for the robust conservation of small and fragmented populations of water deer in northeast China, it is vital to study their habitat selection.
In previous studies, water deer have been shown to avoid anthropogenic habitats in southern China, thus suggesting that the human shield hypothesis was not supported. Individuals of the northern population could respond differently to habitat disturbances, because northern habitat conditions may be more stressful (larger predation pressure or less foraging resources in natural habitats). Since the living environment of water deers will likely be different from that of southern China, their response to habitat conditions may be consistent with the human shield hypothesis or the crop attraction hypothesis. In the current study, the importance of different habitat factors on the habitat selection of water deer is assessed in northeast China. The implications derived from this study may help to provide reliable information for the protection and restoration of water deer populations in northeast China.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

This study was conducted from September 2018 to December 2019 in Baishan Musk Deer National Nature Reserve (126°29′50″–126°45′27″ E, 41°36′43″–41°49′54″ N), located in the southeast of Baishan City, Jilin Province, China (Figure 1). The reserve covers an area of 219.95 km2 [31]. The study area is adjacent to Sandaogou Forest Farm in Baishan City in the west and Weishahe Forest Farm Shiye District in Linjiang City in the north and east, and faces North Korea across the Yalu River to the south. The water system mainly includes the Yalu River, a length of 35 km of which flows through the nature reserve. The main differences between their southern study site and the northeast site examined in the present study are the daily temperature, longitude, latitude, duration of snow cover, and vegetation type.

2.2. Climate

The study area is the coldest region in Jilin Province. The terrain in the reserve is complex, and the temperature difference between day and night is quite large. The area is part of the temperate continental East Asian monsoon climate zone. The annual average temperature is 3–5 °C with a frost-free period of 115–140 days. The annual sunshine hours are 2232.6 h, and the annual average precipitation is 800–1000 mm [32]. The freezing period starts in the reserve in late October, and the thaw usually begins in early April. The maximum depth of the frozen layer is 1.36 m, the ice thickness of the water surface is 0.8–1.0 m, and the maximum thickness of the snow in average years is 44 cm [33].

2.3. Flora and Fauna

The forest vegetation of the reserve belongs to the typical flora of Changbai Mountains. The zonal vegetation is broad-leaved Korean pine forest and contains a large area of broad-leaved mixed forests and broad-leaved forests. The wild animal resource in the reserve is abundant.

2.4. Data Collection

We conducted a random transect line survey in the known and potential distribution areas of water deer in the reserve during autumn and winter, with 9 random transect lines per season. The observer walked along the transect line and when the activity trace of water deer was found, a 10 m × 10 m experimental plot centered at the trace was established to estimate habitat features used by the deer. In addition, a 10 m × 10 m control plot was established at an appropriate place in a random direction and was 500–1000 m away from the experimental plot and the transect line. The habitat factors of experimental plots and control plots recorded included vegetation types, dominant plants, elevation, distance to human settlements, distance from water, herbage coverage, height of dominant herbage, hiding cover, slope degree, slope position, and slope direction (Table 1). In the current study, a total of 49 experimental plots and 47 control plots were recorded in autumn, and a total of 45 experimental plots and 44 control plots were recorded in winter.
In addition to water deer, other ungulate species such as musk deer (Moschus moschiferus) and roe deer (Capreolus pygargus) also inhabit the protection area. One possibility to determine which species the feces come from is to relate the feces to the habitat they were found in. Feces from water deer are often found in habitats at lower elevations and lower slopes, while feces from musk deer and roe deer are usually found in habitats at higher elevations and larger slopes. According to “A Guide to the Mammals of China”, activity (Figure 2a,b,d) in combination with habitat can be used to identify water deer [34]. Apart from differences in habitat, the feces can be distinguished using differences in their appearance. Water deer feces are smaller particles and are slenderer than those of roe deer (Figure 2c), and the feces pile is more concentrated than that of roe deer; moreover, the distance between feces piles is smaller. Therefore, by combining habitat and fecal morphology, activity traces can be identified as belonging to water deer.

2.5. Data Analysis

Chi-square tests were used to analyze the differences in non-numerical habitat factors between experimental plots and control plots [35]. The single-sample K-S test was used to examine whether the numerical habitat factors conform to a normal distribution [36]. The independent t-test and Mann–Whitney U test were used to analyze habitat factors with normal distribution and non-normal distribution, respectively (*: p < 0.05, **: p < 0.01, ***: p < 0.001), indicating the differences in numerical habitat factors between experimental plots and control plots.
The contribution of these 11 factors to habitat selection by water deer was tested using principal component analysis. Those that have greater biological significance habitat factors were selected for logistic regression, and the “Forward-LR” method (based on assumptions for the probability of the likelihood ratio test and forward stepwise selection variables) was used to screen habitat factors.
The resource selection function model was used to analyze the influence of different habitat factors on the habitat selection of water deer [37]. The resource selection function model is a linear logarithmic model that includes multiple independent habitat variables: ω(x) = exp (β0 + β1x1 + β2x2 + … + βkxk) [38], where x represents different independent habitat variables and β represents the selection coefficient. Then, the probability of species choosing habitats is calculated as T(x) = exp (β0 + β1x1 + β2x2 + … + βkxk)/[1 + exp (β0 + β1x1 + β2x2 + … + βkxk)]. The selection coefficient β can be estimated by the logistic regression coefficient [39]. The function model of resource selection based on selected habitat factor variables is P = ez/(1 + ez), z = β0 + β1x1 + β2x2 + … + βkxk, where e is the natural number and P is the probability of habitat selection. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve can be used to gauge the accuracy of the resource selection function model with the following evaluation criteria: if the value of the area under the curve (AUC) is 0.5–0.6, failure; 0.6–0.7, poor; 0.7–0.8, general; 0.8–0.9, good; 0.9–1.0, excellent [40,41]. All data processing was performed using Origin 2021 (OriginLab Corporation in Northampton, MA, USA) and SPSS 20.0 (International Business Machines Corporation in Armonk, NY, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Habitat Selection of Water Deer in Autumn

The chi-square test showed that vegetation types (χ2 = 74.730, df = 5, p < 0.001), dominant plants (χ2 = 80.106, df = 18, p < 0.001), slope positions (χ2 = 7.898, df = 3, p < 0.05), and slope direction (χ2 = 51.184, df = 2, p < 0.001) differed between experimental plots and control plots (Table S1). Compared with control plots, in autumn, the water deer prefers grasslands on middle and sunny slopes, with A. carvifolia as the dominant plant (Figure 3).
The mann–Whitney U test showed that experimental plots with traces of water deer were found about 70.89 m father away from human settlements than control plots (Z = −5.594, p < 0.001), and they were also covered to a higher degree by herbage (23.99%, Z = −5.032, p < 0.001) and hiding cover (26.06%, Z = −5.341, p < 0.001). Furthermore, in experimental plots, the dominant herbage was about 28.29 cm higher (Z = −5.779, p < 0.001) and at an elevation that was about 51.76 m lower (Z = −2.661, p < 0.01). The slope degree (Z = −5.267, p < 0.001) was 12.82° lower in experimental plots than in control plots. Both plot types were located within the same distances from water sources (Z = −1.130, p > 0.05) (Figure 4, Table S2). Compared with control plots, in autumn, the water deer prefer habitats farther away from human settlements, with higher herbage coverage, higher hiding cover, lower elevation, higher height of dominant herbage, and gentler slope degree.
The results showed that the height of dominant herbage (HDH), elevation (E), and slope position (SP) have greater biological significance. Hence, these three habitat factors (HDH, E, and SP) were selected for logistic regression. Finally, the habitat factor that was entered into the resource selection function model was HDH. The function model of resource selection based on selected habitat factor variables is P = ez/(1 + ez), z = 2.864 − 0.041 × HDH (Table 2). The correct prediction rate of the model was 85.4%. ROC curve analysis showed that AUC = 0.840, indicating that the prediction result of the resource selection function was good. The results showed that the largest contribution rate of habitat factors was the height of dominant herbage.

3.2. Habitat Selection of Water Deer in Winter

The chi-square test showed that vegetation types (χ2 = 49.906, df = 6, p < 0.001) and dominant plants (χ2 = 72.223, df = 16, p < 0.001) were significantly different between experimental plots and control plots in winter; however, both slope positions (χ2 = 5.596, df = 2, p > 0.05) and slope direction (χ2 = 2.885, df = 1, p > 0.05) were not significantly different between experimental plots and control plots (Table S3). Compared with control plots, in winter, the water deer prefers grasslands in middle and sunny slopes, with A. argyi as the dominant plant (Figure 5).
The results of the t-test and Mann–Whitney U test showed that experimental plots were found to be around 218.61 m closer to water sources than the control plots (Z = −3.929, p < 0.001); experimental plots were also covered to a higher degree by herbage (28.49%, Z = −5.143, p < 0.001) and had higher hiding cover (18.16%, Z = −4.119, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the experimental plots showed a higher dominant herbage by about 37.81 cm (Z = −5.238, p < 0.001). Slope degree (Z = −6.177, p < 0.001) was 14.34° lower in experimental plots than in control plots. Both plot types were located within the same distance to human settlements (t = −0.336, p > 0.05) and had the same elevation (Z = −1.350, p > 0.05) (Figure 6, Table S4). Compared with control plots, in winter, the water deer prefers habitats with a shorter distance from the water, higher herbage coverage, higher hiding cover, higher height of dominant herbage, and gentler slope degree.
Hiding cover (HIC), distance from water (DW), distance to human settlements (DHS), and slope position (SP) have greater biological significance. The four habitat factors of HIC, DW, DHS, and SP were selected for logistic regression. Finally, the following habitat factors were entered into the resource selection function model: DHS, DW, and HIC. The function model of resource selection based on selected habitat factor variables is P = ez/(1 + ez), z = 0.533 − 0.013 × DHS + 0.009 × DW − 0.032 × HIC (Table 3). The total correct prediction rate of the model was 79.8%. ROC curve analysis showed that AUC = 0.867, indicating that the prediction results of the resource selection function was good. The results show that the contribution rate of these factors can be ordered from large to small as hiding cover > distance to human settlements > distance from water.

4. Discussion

Habitat selection of wildlife is one of the most important issues for researchers and conservationists, as it guides the formulation of conservation strategies for endangered species [42]. In the current study, habitat selection research was conducted on rediscovered water deer in cold regions of China. The obtained results showed that there are many similarities between water deer habitat selection in northeast China and southern China. Both prefer grasslands with higher herbage coverage, higher hiding cover, and smaller slope degree. However, there are also many differences between the southern study site and the northeastern study site, which are reflected in aspects of daily temperature, longitude, latitude, duration of snow cover, and vegetation types.
The vegetation type comprehensively reflects the characteristics of food composition, temperature, light levels, terrain, and landform of the habitat. It meets the physiological and ecological needs of animals to the greatest extent, and is an important habitat factor in the habitat selection of water deer [43]. The vegetation type water deer prefer in autumn and winter is grassland. A similar preference of these deer was also reported in other regions of China, such as their habitat selection in spring, summer, and autumn at Yancheng Nature Reserve and in winter at Dafeng Milu Natural Nature Reserve in Jiangsu Province [44,45]. A year-round habitat selection study of water deer in Shanghai Binjiang Park also found a similar preference for grasses with higher herbage height [46]. Other small ruminants had similar preferences, such as the Indian muntjac (Muntiacus muntjak), the preferred habitat of which was shrub grassland and reclaimed grassland; further, the height of trees in the habitat was the main influencing factor for the habitat selection of the Indian muntjac [47].
Furthermore, A. carvifolia and A. argyi are dominant plants for water deer in northeast China. In 2021, Li et al. conducted a study in Jilin Province, China, which was similar to the present study, and they also found that water deer preferred A. carvifolia as the dominant plant habitat [48]. A. carvifolia and A. argyi both belong to the Compositae family. Many previous studies on the diet of water deer have found that Compositae occupy a certain proportion in China, for example, up to 11.34% of their diet in Jilin Province, and up to 4% of their diet in Jiangxi Province [33,49]. Kim et al. studied the diet of Korean water deer (Hydropotes inermis argyropus) in Gyeonggi Province, Korea, and found that up to 28.4% of their diet is composed of Compositae [50]. In conclusion, it is clear that water deer habitat selection is closely related to its feeding habits. In addition, the height of dominant herbage of the experimental plots (autumn: 85.31 ± 3.00, winter: 91.33 ± 3.50) was significantly higher than that of control plots (autumn: 57.02 ± 5.00, winter: 53.52 ± 5.22). This result suggests that the water deer prefers a habitat where the herb height exceeds its own shoulder height (the shoulder height of adult water deer is 50–57 cm) [24]. Furthermore, the results of the resource selection function model show that the dominant herb height and hiding cover are habitat factors that contribute more to water deer habitat selection in the cold season. On the one hand, water deer are timid and alert, and the high herbage could supply good hiding areas for them [51]. On the other hand, winter is the season when water deer mate; hence, their higher activity would attract predators and a good hiding area is essential [52]. To survive and avoid natural enemies, habitats with high hiding cover and higher dominant herbage are their preferred activity areas.
In addition to the vegetation factor, other factors also affected the habitat selection of water deer. In northeast China, prolonged snow accumulation increases the difficulty of survival for water deer, as in winter, obtaining water and food resources is more difficult in the northern part than in the southern part. First, the obtained results show that in both autumn and winter, water deer chose a habitat closer to water. This factor is also the habitat factor that contributes most to the results of the resource selection function. The results of water deer selection of suitable distribution areas in Korea similarly showed that water deer prefer areas that are relatively close to water [53]. Second, ruminants are generally considered to migrate to lower elevations in late autumn and early winter as a strategy to find areas with shallow snow cover [54]. This is highly consistent with the results of the present study, which showed that the ecological habitat of water deer tends to be at relatively low elevation (autumn: experimental plots 547.91 ± 27.56 m, control plots: 599.70 ± 23.93 m). Snow-covered vegetation makes it more difficult to obtain food, and a habitat at lower elevation has higher temperatures and may possess relatively abundant food resources. Third, in Poyang Lake Wetland of Jiangxi Province, China, water deer prefer a distance to human settlements of 500–999 m [26]. However, the results of this study indicated that the preferred distance to human settlements was 100–200 m in both autumn and winter, which is far shorter than the results obtained for Poyang Lake Wetland. Similar to the crop attraction hypothesis, the timid water deer may be closer to human settlements because the human activity area offers domestic waste or farmland residues such as pea seedlings, soybean leaves, peanut leaves, and sweet potato leaves, which provide food sources for water deer. Some Western studies have found that other deer species also support the crop attraction hypothesis; for example, red deer spending time on the pasture increased with increasing availability, but not in a proportional manner, resulting in the strength of the trade-off varying with habitat availability driven by landscape-level variability. The seasonal variation in the trade-off may be due to the seasonally varying abundance of forage and cover in the different habitats [55]. Even in some parts of the West, large numbers of fallow, red, and roe deer have caused some damage to crops and forestry [56,57].

5. Conclusions and Suggestions

In the current study, during the cold season of northeast China, water deer activities mainly focused on grasslands in the mid-slope position and on sunny slopes, dominated by A. carvifolia and A. argyi. In addition, water deer preferred a higher dominant herbage, higher hiding cover, and closer distance to water and human settlements. The correct prediction probability of the resource selection function model exceeds 80%, indicating that the model can predict the cold season habitat selection of water deer in Baishan Musk Deer Natural Reserve. This result has positive significance for further research on water deer and the development of scientific conservation and management plans in this reserve. Water deer were rediscovered in northeast China, which is the result of the effective restoration of the ecological environment that provides more habitats for wildlife. For protected areas, the construction of wildlife nature reserves needs to be further strengthened to protect both the existing and potential habitats of water deer. In the future, reserves should pay close attention to water sources, the activities of surrounding human settlements, and grassland protection; further, patrols should be strengthened to eliminate outside interference, which will further protect water deer. Based on these efforts, water deer could better adapt to habitats in cold regions.

6. Limitations and Future Research

Due to limited data availability and imperfect knowledge, this study has some limitations. For example, global climate change is indirectly or directly affecting the distribution of wild animals, and whether Jilin Province is the northernmost edge of the future distribution of water deer in China will continue to be monitored. For future research, the methodology of habitat selection studies must be further optimized. We will focus on the combination of changes in climatic factors in north and south China in the past decades and the assessment of habitat suitability of water deer in China. With data availability and in-depth research, these issues will be further explored in our future work.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su151612181/s1, Table S1: Characteristics of habitat selection in autumn; Table S2: Mann Whitney U-test of autumn quadrat; Table S3: Characteristics of habitat selection in winter; Table S4: Independent sample t-test and Mann Whitney U-test of winter quadrat.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.S., Z.L. (Zongzhi Li), R.H.K., J.C., Z.L. (Zhensheng Liu) and L.T.; methodology, Y.S., Z.L. (Zongzhi Li) and J.C.; validation, Y.S. and J.C.; formal analysis, Z.L. (Zhensheng Liu) and L.T.; investigation, Z.L. (Zongzhi Li); data curation, Y.S. and Z.L. (Zongzhi Li); writing—original draft preparation, Y.S., Z.L. (Zongzhi Li), R.H.K. and J.C.; supervision Z.L. (Zhensheng Liu) and L.T.; writing—review and editing, Y.S., Z.L. (Zhensheng Liu), R.H.K., J.C., Z.L. (Zongzhi Li) and L.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Key Laboratory of Conservation Biology, National Forestry and Grassland Administration, China; the Heilongjiang Touyan Innovation Team Program for Forest Ecology and Conservation; and National Natural Science Foundation of China (32070519, 32071649).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are openly available in figshare at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.23963316.

Acknowledgments

We thank the staff of the Baishan Musk Deer National Nature Reserve for their support in the field work of our study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Morrison, M.L.; Marcot, B.G.; Mannan, W. Wildlife-Habitat Relationship: Concepts and Applications. J. Range Manag. 2007, 57, 980–981. [Google Scholar]
  2. Grinnell, J. Field Tests of Theories Concerning Distributional Control. Am. Nat. 1917, 51, 115–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Gaillard, J.-M.; Hebblewhite, M.; Loison, A.; Fuller, M.; Powell, R.; Basille, M.; Van Moorter, B. Habitat–performance relationships: Finding the right metric at a given spatial scale. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2010, 365, 2255–2265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Furstenburg, D.; Scholtz, M. Global Climate Change and Animal Production in Southern Africa: A Short Review. Submitted: Livestock Science. 2009 (Supplement–10th Wrld. Cong. Anim. Prod.). Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306055750_Global_climate_change_and_animal_production_in_southern_Africa_a_short_review (accessed on 29 June 2023).
  5. Ehrlén, J.; Morris, W.F. Predicting changes in the distribution and abundance of species under environmental change. Ecol. Lett. 2015, 18, 303–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Singh, B.; Mainali, K.; Jiang, Z.; Thapa, A.; Subedi, N.; Awan, M.N.; Ilyas, O.; Luitel, H.; Zhou, Z.; Hu, H. Projected distribution and climate refugia of endangered Kashmir musk deer Moschus cupreus in greater Himalaya, South Asia. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 1511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Zhu, G.; Papeş, M.; Armsworth, P.R.; Giam, X. Climate change vulnerability of terrestrial vertebrates in a major refuge and dispersal corridor in North America. Divers. Distrib. 2022, 28, 1227–1241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Campos, F.A.; Morris, W.F.; Alberts, S.C.; Altmann, J.; Brockman, D.K.; Cords, M.; Pusey, A.; Stoinski, T.S.; Strier, K.B.; Fedigan, L.M. Does climate variability influence the demography of wild primates? Evidence from long-term life-history data in seven species. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2017, 23, 4907–4921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Pacifici, M.; Foden, W.B.; Visconti, P.; Watson, J.E.M.; Butchart, S.H.M.; Kovacs, K.M.; Scheffers, B.R.; Hole, D.G.; Martin, T.G.; Akçakaya, H.R.; et al. Assessing species vulnerability to climate change. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2015, 5, 215–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. IPCC. Summary for Policymakers. In Global Warming of 1.5 °C. An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5 °C above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty; Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D., Skea, J., Shukla, P.R., Pirani, A., Moufouma-Okia, W., Péan, C., Pidcock, R., et al., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2022; pp. 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Parmesan, C.; Yohe, G. A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. Nature 2003, 421, 37–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kelly, A.E.; Goulden, M.L. Rapid shifts in plant distribution with recent climate change. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 11823–11826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chen, I.-C.; Hill, J.K.; Ohlemüller, R.; Roy, D.B.; Thomas, C.D. Rapid Range Shifts of Species Associated with High Levels of Climate Warming. Science 2011, 333, 1024–1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Prato, T. Adaptively Managing Wildlife for Climate Change: A Fuzzy Logic Approach. Environ. Manag. 2011, 48, 142–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Leslie, J.D.M.; Bowyer, R.T.; Kie, J.G. Life-History Strategies of Ungulates. J. Mammal. 1999, 80, 1067–1069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Underwood, H.B. Deer of the World: Their Evolution, Behaviour, and Ecology. Val. Geist 2000, 75, 196. [Google Scholar]
  17. Boydston, E.E.; Kapheim, K.M.; Watts, H.E.; Szykman, M.; Holekamp, K.E. Altered behaviour in spotted hyenas associated with increased human activity. Anim. Conserv. 2003, 6, 207–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Inskip, C.; Zimmermann, A. Human-felid conflict: A review of patterns and priorities worldwide. Oryx 2009, 43, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Shannon, G.; Cordes, L.S.; Hardy, A.R.; Angeloni, L.M.; Crooks, K.R. Behavioral Responses Associated with a Human-Mediated Predator Shelter. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e94630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Moll, R.J.; Cepek, J.D.; Lorch, P.D.; Dennis, P.M.; Robison, T.; Millspaugh, J.J.; Montgomery, R.A. Humans and urban development mediate the sympatry of competing carnivores. Urban Ecosyst. 2018, 21, 765–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Atickem, A.; Loe, L.E.; Stenseth, N.C. Individual Heterogeneity in Use of Human Shields by Mountain Nyala. Ethology 2014, 120, 715–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Won, C.; Smith, K.G. History and current status of mammals of the Korean Peninsula. Mammal Rev. 2002, 29, 3–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ohtaishi, N. Deer of China: Biology and Management; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1993; pp. 4–7. [Google Scholar]
  24. Li, Y.K.; Shan, J.H.; Li, J.; Yuan, F.K.; Miao, L.J.; Xie, G.Y. Research Advances on the Ecology of Chinese Water Deer (Hydropotes inermis). Chin. J. Wildl. 2013, 34, 270–273. [Google Scholar]
  25. Harris, R.B.; Duckworth, J.W. Hydropotes inermis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T10329A22163569. Available online: https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/10329/22163569 (accessed on 15 June 2023).
  26. Zhang, N. Home Range and Habitat Selection of Chinese Water Deer (Hydropotes inermis) after Release in Poyang Lake during the Dry Season. Master’s Thesis, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  27. Han, Q.; Liang, T.; Zhang, M.Y.; Liu, M.M.; Wang, Z.Q.; Lu, C.H. Analysis of activity rhythm and habitat selection of water deer based on the infrared-triggered camera technology in autumn and winter in urban forest park. Chin. J. Ecol. 2022, 41, 963. [Google Scholar]
  28. Li, Z.Z.; Wu, J.P.; Teng, L.W.; Liu, Z.S.; Wang, B.K.; Liu, Y.C.; Xu, T. The Rediscovery of Water Deer (Hydropotes inermis) in Jilin Province. Chin. J. Zool. 2019, 54, 108–112. [Google Scholar]
  29. Belyaev, D.A.; Jo, Y.-S. Northernmost finding and further information on water deer Hydropotes inermis in Primorskiy Krai, Russia. Mammalia 2021, 85, 71–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Teng, L.W. Population of Chinese Water Deer (Hydropotes inermis) in Yancheng National Nature Reserve and Feasibility of Reintroduction Chinse Water Deer to Shanghai; Research Report of Postdoctoral Fellow; East China Normal University: Shanghai, China, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  31. Chen, L.C. A brief discussion on the causes of problems in the former musk Deer National Nature Reserve of Baishan in Jilin Province and the results of rectification. Agric. Dev. Equip. 2021, 230–231. Available online: https://kns-cnki-net-443.webvpn.nefu.edu.cn/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?FileName=NJJY202103112&DbName=CJFQ2021 (accessed on 29 June 2023).
  32. Li, H.J. Investigation and Analysis of Wild Animals in Jilin Baishan Original Musk Deer National Nature Reserve. For. Prospect. Des. 2021, 50, 52–55. [Google Scholar]
  33. Ding, Y.X. Study on Diets Analysis of Water Deer (Hydropotes inermis) in the Baishan Musk Deer National Nature Reserve in Jilin Province. Master’s Thesis, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin, China, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  34. Smith, A.T.; Xie, Y. A Guide to the Mammals of China. Changsha, Hunan Province, China; Hunan Education Publishing House: Changsha, China, 2009; pp. 481–482. [Google Scholar]
  35. Chen, Y.-T.; Chen, M.C. Using chi-square statistics to measure similarities for text categorization. Expert Syst. Appl. 2011, 38, 3085–3090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Rosenthal, R. An Application of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test for Normality with Estimated Mean and Variance. Psychol. Rep. 1968, 22, 570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Lennon, J.J. Resource selection functions: Taking space seriously? Trends Ecol. Evol. 1999, 14, 399–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Murtaugh, P.A. The Statistical Evaluation of Ecological Indicators. Ecol. Appl. 1996, 6, 132–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. David, W.H.J.; Stanley, L.; Rodney, X.S. Applied Logistic Regression; John Wiley and Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  40. Swets, J.A. Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 1988, 240, 1285–1293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Boyce, M.S.; Vernier, P.R.; Nielsen, S.E.; Schmiegelow, F.K. Evaluating resource selection functions. Ecol. Model. 2002, 157, 281–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Xia, X.; Ren, J.; Li, L.; Wang, H.; Song, Y.; Yang, D.; Jiang, Z. Autumn-winter habitat selection by the re-wild Milu (Elaphurus davidianus) at the early stage after release in Dongting Lake Wetland, China. Biodivers. Sci. 2021, 29, 1087–1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Zheng, X.; Bao, Y.X.; Ge, B.M.; Zheng, R.Q. Seasonal changes in habitat use of black muntjac (Muntiacus crinifrons) in Zhejiang. Acta Theriol. Sin. 2006, 26, 201–205. [Google Scholar]
  44. Zhang, E.D.; Teng, L.W.; Wu, Y.B. Habitat selection of the Chinese water deer (Hydropotes inermis) in Yancheng Reserve, Jiangsu Province. Acta Theriol. Sin. 2006, 26, 49–53. [Google Scholar]
  45. Zhang, X.L.; Zhang, E.D. Distribution Pattern of Hydropotes inermis in various habitats in Jiangsu Dafeng Peredavids deer state nature reserve. Sichuan J. Zool. 2002, 21, 19–22. [Google Scholar]
  46. He, X. Spatial Behavioural Ecology of the Chinese Water Deer. Ph.D. Thesis, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  47. Teng, L.; Liu, Z.; Song, Y.-L.; Zeng, Z. Forage and bed sites characteristics of Indian muntjac (Muntiacus muntjak) in Hainan Island, China. Ecol. Res. 2004, 19, 675–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Li, Z.Z.; Liu, Z.S.; Mi, S.H.; Wu, J.P.; Teng, L.W. Habitat selection of the Chinese water deer at Baishan Musk Deer Natural Reserve in spring and summer. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2021, 41, 1625–1633. [Google Scholar]
  49. Huang, Y. Food-Habits of Chinese Water Deer (Hydropotes inermis) in Poyang Lake Area. Master’s Thesis, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang, China, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  50. Kim, B.J.; Lee, N.S.; Lee, S.D. Feeding diets of the Korean water deer (Hydropotes inermis argyropus) based on a 202 bp rbcL sequence analysis. Conserv. Genet. 2011, 12, 851–856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Cederlund, G.; Lindström, E. Effects of severe winters and fox predation on roe deer mortality. Acta Theriol. 1983, 28, 129–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Miao, L.J. The Population Viability Analysis, Distribution and Habitat Selection of Chinese Water Deer (Hydropotes inermis) in Poyang Lake. Master’s Thesis, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang, China, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  53. Choi, J.; Lee, S. Application of Habitat Evaluation Procedure with Quantifying the Eco-Corridor in the Process of Environmental Impact Assessment. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  54. Nelson, M.E. Winter range arrival and departure of white-tailed deer in northeastern Minnesota. Can. J. Zool. 2011, 73, 1069–1076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Godvik, I.M.R.; Loe, L.E.; Vik, J.O.; Veiberg, V.; Langvatn, R.; Mysterud, A. Temporal scales, trade-offs, and functional responses in red deer habitat selection. Ecology 2009, 90, 699–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Putman, R.J.; Moore, N.P. Impact of deer in lowland Britain on agriculture, forestry and conservation habitats. Mammal Rev. 2002, 28, 141–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Gordon, I.J.; Hester, A.J.; Festa-Bianchet, M. REVIEW: The management of wild large herbivores to meet economic, conservation and environmental objectives. J. Appl. Ecol. 2004, 41, 1021–1031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 12181 g001
Figure 1. The left part is a location map showing the Baishan Musk Deer National Nature Reserve in Baishan City, Jilin Province, China. The right part is the survey transects.
Figure 1. The left part is a location map showing the Baishan Musk Deer National Nature Reserve in Baishan City, Jilin Province, China. The right part is the survey transects.
Sustainability 15 12181 g001
Sustainability 15 12181 g002
Figure 2. (a) Water deer tracks with a length of about 0.05 m; (b) water deer track spacing of about 0.3 m; (c) water deer feces featuring small and slender granules, concentrated in a feces pile; (d) a typical habitat of water deer where their tracks and feces were found in the habitat.
Figure 2. (a) Water deer tracks with a length of about 0.05 m; (b) water deer track spacing of about 0.3 m; (c) water deer feces featuring small and slender granules, concentrated in a feces pile; (d) a typical habitat of water deer where their tracks and feces were found in the habitat.
Sustainability 15 12181 g002
Sustainability 15 12181 g003
Figure 3. Selection of water deer regarding non-numeric habitat factors in autumn for both experimental and control plots (DP: dominant plant, VT: vegetation type, SP: slope positions, SD: slope direction).
Figure 3. Selection of water deer regarding non-numeric habitat factors in autumn for both experimental and control plots (DP: dominant plant, VT: vegetation type, SP: slope positions, SD: slope direction).
Sustainability 15 12181 g003
Sustainability 15 12181 g004
Figure 4. Comparison of numerical habitat factors between experimental plots and control plots in autumn (DHS: distance to human settlements (m), DW: distance from water (m), HEC: herbage coverage (%), HIC: hiding cover (%), E: elevation (m), HDH: height of dominant herbage (cm), S: slope degree (°). **: p < 0.01, ***: p < 0.001.
Figure 4. Comparison of numerical habitat factors between experimental plots and control plots in autumn (DHS: distance to human settlements (m), DW: distance from water (m), HEC: herbage coverage (%), HIC: hiding cover (%), E: elevation (m), HDH: height of dominant herbage (cm), S: slope degree (°). **: p < 0.01, ***: p < 0.001.
Sustainability 15 12181 g004
Sustainability 15 12181 g005
Figure 5. Selection of water deer regarding non-numeric habitat factors in winter for both experimental plots and control plots (DP: dominant plant, VT: vegetation type, SP: slope positions, SD: slope direction).
Figure 5. Selection of water deer regarding non-numeric habitat factors in winter for both experimental plots and control plots (DP: dominant plant, VT: vegetation type, SP: slope positions, SD: slope direction).
Sustainability 15 12181 g005
Sustainability 15 12181 g006
Figure 6. Comparison of numerical habitat factors between experimental plots and control plots in winter (DHS: distance to human settlements (m), DW: distance from water (m), HEC: herbage coverage (%), HIC: hiding cover (%), E: elevation (m), HDH: height of dominant herbage (cm), S: slope degree (°)). ***: p < 0.001.
Figure 6. Comparison of numerical habitat factors between experimental plots and control plots in winter (DHS: distance to human settlements (m), DW: distance from water (m), HEC: herbage coverage (%), HIC: hiding cover (%), E: elevation (m), HDH: height of dominant herbage (cm), S: slope degree (°)). ***: p < 0.001.
Sustainability 15 12181 g006
Table 1. Detailed description of various habitat factors.
Table 1. Detailed description of various habitat factors.
Habitat FactorsAbbreviationMeasure Methods
Vegetation typeVTIncluding grassland, coniferous forest, broad-leaved forest, shrub, cropland, and forest edge.
Dominant plantDPThe plant with more than 70%, including Artemisia caruifolia, Amphicarpaea edgeworthii, A. argyi, Betula platyphylla, Quercus mongolica, Senna nomame.
Slope positionsSPDivide the hillside into three equal parts, uphill position: top part, mid-slope position: middle part, downhill position: bottom part.
Slope directionSDMeasured in the counterclockwise direction by the military compass Type 65 with the true north direction at 0°. Sunny slope (157.5°–337.5°), Shady slope (337.5°–157.5°).
Herbage coverage (%)HECThe average of 5 small plots (1 m × 1 m) sampled at center and 4 corners of the experimental plots or control plots
Height of dominant herbage (cm)HDHThe average of 5 small plots (1 m × 1 m) sampled at center and 4 corners of the experimental plots or control plots
Slope degree (°)SMeasured by the military compass Type 65.
Elevation (m)EMeasured by global positioning instrument.
Distance from water (m)DWThe distance between the center of plots and water resource
Distance to human settlements (m)DHSThe distance between the center of plots and human settlement.
Hiding cover (%)HICErect a 1 m wooden pole at the center of the plot, measure the visibility of the pole at 20 m away from the center in the east, south, west, and north directions, that is, the percentage of the length of the pole in the total length can be seen, and then calculate the average value.
Table 2. Selection coefficient of water deer resource selection function in autumn.
Table 2. Selection coefficient of water deer resource selection function in autumn.
Habitat FactorsRegression CoefficientWald Chi-Squarep-Value
HDH (height of dominant herbage/cm)−0.04117.5750.000 ***
Constant2.86415.6100.000 ***
***: p < 0.001.
Table 3. Selection coefficient of water deer resource selection function in winter.
Table 3. Selection coefficient of water deer resource selection function in winter.
Habitat FactorsRegression CoefficientWald Chi-Squarep-Value
DHS (distance to human settlements/m)−0.0136.8040.009 **
DW (distance from water/m)0.00916.0070.000 ***
HIC (hiding cover/%)−0.0327.8050.005 **
Constant0.5330.6690.413
**: p < 0.01, ***: p < 0.001.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sun, Y.; Li, Z.; Chen, J.; Khattak, R.H.; Liu, Z.; Teng, L. Habitat Selection: Autumn and Winter Behavioral Preferences of Water Deer (Hydropotes inermis) in Northeast China. Sustainability 2023, 15, 12181. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612181

AMA Style

Sun Y, Li Z, Chen J, Khattak RH, Liu Z, Teng L. Habitat Selection: Autumn and Winter Behavioral Preferences of Water Deer (Hydropotes inermis) in Northeast China. Sustainability. 2023; 15(16):12181. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612181

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sun, Yue, Zongzhi Li, Junda Chen, Romaan Hayat Khattak, Zhensheng Liu, and Liwei Teng. 2023. "Habitat Selection: Autumn and Winter Behavioral Preferences of Water Deer (Hydropotes inermis) in Northeast China" Sustainability 15, no. 16: 12181. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612181

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop