Ecology, Conservation and Management of Wild Pigs and Peccaries

Chapter 36: Ecological impact of wild boar in natural ecosystems

411

Figure 36.5 Regression of study

duration as a function of date (t-0.21

P = 0.84).

Another approach is to identify preferred locations and
habitats providing that a suitable number of radio-marked ani-
mals is available (Morelle et al. 2014). In any case, the simple
realization of exclusion plots to be visited a few times per year
is a poor approach to understanding the complex nature of the
interactions between wild boars and their environment. We
recommend the adoption of robust sampling designs that are
necessary to build reliable monitoring programmes (Engeman
et al. 2013; Fagiani et al. 2014) and develop suitable conserva-
tion strategies for a range of species including wild boar.

Acknowledgements

The research was funded jointly by the Bulgarian Academy of
Science (PG, AA) and by the Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche

(SF, FM) in the framework of the bilateral program denomi-

nated ‘Evaluation of photo-trapping for conservation and man-

agement of wildlife populations’. We thank E. Meijaard for the

correction of a first draft of the manuscript.

Appendix 36.1

Table of the metadata used in this study. For the sake of brev-

ity, we omitted the papers that were deleted on the first screen-

ing. We report reference, study location (at the national level),

the kind of landscape where the reseach took place, the main

habitat, the origin of the population, the climate, the length of

the study in month (LOS), the impact on biodiversity, and the

organism or soil studied, with a maximum of arguments and the

observed effect.

.038

13:02:26