data:InDoRES
Not a member yet
398 research outputs found
Sort by
Data for the article: Access to agricultural lands influences the effects of seasonal drought on early growth and juvenile body mass in a large herbivore
No full textThis project aims to investigate the influence of local agricultural landscape composition and seasonal precipitation deficits on the early growth (first weeks)
and winter body mass of juvenile (ca. 8-10 months old) European roe deer (Capreolus capreolus). The data was collected as part of the long-term research project lead by the CEFS, INRAE on the LTSER ZA PYRénées GARonne in the South Ouest of France. The code and data reproduce the analyses, tables and figures in the Results section of the manuscript, as well as the tables, additional sensitivity analyses, and figures in the Supporting Information (SI)
Replication data for: Fig 8.14, Top, Closest vs farther for alarm callers, WTPDs, 21 Nov 2025
No full textFILE DESCRIPTION
Keywords: alarm calls, closest vs farther away, WTPDs
Filename = Fig 8.14, TOP, Closest vs farther for alarm callers, WTPDs, 21 Nov 2025
Older date = Date of creation (I think) = 10 April 2019
These data are from WTPDs at the Arapaho National Wildlife Refuge
from 2006 through 2012
413/961 of closest WTPDs = 42.98% DID give alarm call
548/961 of closest WTPDs = 57.02% DID NOT give alarm call
620/1409 of farther WTPDs = 44.00% DID give alarm call
789/1409 of farther WTPDs = 56.00% DID NOT give alarm call
Variable = Frequency = number of observations of calling or non-calling for
each class of WTPD
All data were summarized by Judy, and checked by Judy and John TWO TIMES
For statistical analysis, I did a 2x2 chi-square test
These data used for Fig 8.14, Top, in Hoogland 2026.
This file ready for longterm storage on 04 June 2025.
I considered data from the same prairie dog in different years to be independent.
Counts for this file come from study of alarm call raw data sheets.
Filename = Fig 8.14, Top, Closest vs farther for alarm callers, WTPDs, 21 Nov 2025
I considered data from the same prairie dog
on the same day and on different days and in different years to be independent.
Variable = Frequency = number of observations of calling or non-calling for
closest and not closest prairie dogs
Close WTPD = 1 = closest to prairie dog
Close WTPD = 2 = NOT closest to prairie dog
WTPD alarm call = 1 = prairie dog DID give alarm call
WTPD alarm call = 2 = prairie dog did NOT give alarm call
For statistical analysis, I did a 2x2 chi-square test
Counts for this file come from study of alarm call raw data sheets
Fig 5.2, BTPDs, fleas vs colony rank, 16 Sept 2025
No full textFILE DESCRIPTION
Keywords: black-tailed prairie dog, burrow entrance, colony rank
File name = Fig 5.2, BTPDs, fleas vs colony rank, 16 Sept 2025
These data are for BTPDs only. WTPD data are in another EXCEL file called Fig 5.2, WTPDs, Fleas vs colony rank
Individuals at BTPD colonies were not marked, so I could accurately determine colony ranks (relative colony sizes),
but not exact colony sizes
These BTPD summary data for fleas per burrow entrance used for Figure 5.2 (which
also shows sample sizes) in Hoogland 2026.
This file ready for longterm storage on 07 July 2025.
Most (all?) of the raw data for these summaries are from EXCEL file = BGUW, Final flea and body masses, 14 Jan 2025.
Numbers in Column at far left are colony ranks (just left of Column-A) from smallest (1) to largest (10).
BTPDs = black-tailed prairie dogs. WTPDs = white-tailed prairie dogs
Numbers shown here are means plus one standard error (SEM).
Note: these data are summaries only. Most of the raw data are in
EXCEL file = BGUW, Final flea and body masses, 14 Jan 2025.
Note: Flea counts in this file are from TWO time periods: June of 1977 and April of 197
Replication data for: Fig 9.11, BTPDs, coterie size vs litter size, 05 Dec 2025
No full textFILE DESCRIPTION
Keywords: BTPDs, coterie size, litter size
File name = Fig 9.11, BTPDs, coterie size vs litter size, 05 Dec 2025
OLD File name = BTPDs, coterie size vs litter size, 06 Feb 2025
I cannot find the RAW DATA for these means + SEM
These data are only from females that weaned at least one offspring--i.e.,
I have deleted all cases of litter size = 0.
These means + SEM were checked TWO TIMES at creation of Figure 9.11
on 16 May 2022
Data for samples sizes are shown in Fig 9.11.
These data used for Figure 9.11 in Hoogland 2026.
This file ready for longterm storage on 06 Feb 2025.
File name = Fig 9.11, BTPDs, coterie size vs litter size, 05 Dec 202
Replication data for: Fig 10.1, Lower left, UPDs, clan size, clan type, 09 Dec 2025
No full textFILE DESCRIPTION
Keywords: Clan size, clan type, by year, GPDs
File name = Fig 10.1, Lower left, UPDs, clan size, clan type, 09 Dec 2025
OLDFile name = Fig 10.1, Upper right, GPDs, clan sizes and types, by year, 09 April 2020
* = change made on 09 April 2020. These changes affect PEFO, RMC, and VCC
OLDFile name = UPDs, Clansize and Clantype vs Fem ARS, 30 Sept 2021
I started this file from File name = UPDs, Clansize vs FEM ARS, 10 Sept 2021
I will RE-ORDER the file by ASCENDING CLANSIZE--to make it easier to assign clantypes
On 29-30 Sept 2021, I check data for Clansize and Clantype TWO TIMES. Other data checked TWO TIMES EARLIER. See below.
Clansize = clan size = Number of adults and yearlings living in same territory
Clantype = Clan type. See immediately below.
Clantype = 0 = No male clan = no resident sexually mature male
Clantype = 0.5 = half-male clan = two clans shared the same single sexually mature male
Clantype = 1 = one-male clan = single sexually mature male in single territory
Clantype = 2 = multi-male clan = single clan territory with >=2 sexually mature males
See Chapter 10 of Hoogland 2026 for more details about clan types.
Correction on 28 Sept 2021: BB8 (J81) in 1998. Littsize and Yearling now missing data. BB8 killed by dog on 03 April 1998.
Correction on 29 Sept 2021: 74 (O7) in 1999 . Clan size now 5 (was 4)
Correction on 29 Sept 2021: 91 (O87) in 2001. Clansize now 3 (was missing data), Clantype now 1 (was missing data)
Correction on 29 Sept 2021: 56A (T97) in 2001. Clansize now 3 (was missing data), Clantype now 1 (was missing data)
Correction on 29 Sept 2021: Info added for Clansize and Clantype for Unknown#5 in 2001
Correction on 29 Sept 2021: Info added for Clansize and Clantype for 56A (T97) in 2001
Correction on 30 Sept 2021: Littsize of 5 added for HRS (C65) in 1998 (was missing data)
No info on yearlings for HRS (C65) in 1998, because HRS died from plague in late June 1998.
OLD File name = UPDs, Clansize vs FEM ARS, 10 Sept 2021
I started this file from File name = UPDs, FEMS, ARS, with Mincops, 30 May 2021
On 10 Sept 2021, I carefully check clansizes. Because there is no evidence that clan
size affects any aspect of UPD female ARS, I have not checked clan sizes a second time.
Littsize = liter size at weaning
Yearling = number of emergent juveniles that survived for >=9 months.
Mothage = mother's age in years
Much of this file comes from SYSTAT file = Utahpart.sys,
which was checked TWO TIMES for Hoogland 2013 (J Mammal)
OLD File name = UPDs, FEMS, ARS, with Mincops, 30 May 2021
Females that were known to give birth sometimes were classified as either tiny
or TDF in May or June. So, information on Partur for this file might be unreliable
unless the condition was either lac, MDF, or LDF.
Tiny or TDF = tiny teats, or Tiny, and flat
Partur = parturition. Partur 1 = DID give birth. Partur = 0 did NOT give birth.
29 May 2021: The following variables have been checked TWO TIMES:
UPD, Eartag, Marchwt, Maywt, Mothage, Final age, Littsize, Yearling, Maxcop, Mincop
Still to check: Partur. I probably will NOT double check this variable--because often hard to quantify
Marchwt and Maywt were checked TWO TIMES with weights in Eartag summary sheets, all of
which were checked ONE TIME ONLY
For some UPDs in 2005, I have added an "x" to the eartag number--
to avoid confusion with UPDs in early years that had the same eartag number.
Duplicate eartags might have occurred with the following letters: A, C, F, H,
Consider using THIS DATASET for completed analyses such as body mass vs litter size,
body mass vs wean, body mass vs parturition, and so forth
I will revise certain cases after gettting information about maternites and
paternities from microsats via Steve Keller
If an estrous female and a sexually active male went to bed TOGETHER AT THE SAME TIME, I scored that
as a definite cop. If they woke up together but did not go to bed together, I scored
that as a possible cop under Maxcop, but NOT as a cop under Min cop. If they went
to bed together at DIFFERENT TIMES, I scored that as s a possible cop under Maxcop, but NOT as a cop under Mincop.
I score a 2-min BD as a good cop. I do NOT score BDs of 0.5 min or 1 min as good cops.
However, I score every ABOVEGROUND COP as a good cop--even if for only 30 sec
1st of 2 cops = 1 = data from first cop only for double-estrous females. I will EXCLUDE these cases
(N = 3) from analyses of ARS and LRS. I will INCLUDE these data for examination of polyandry
When a male and an female woke up together on the day after the female's estrus but did NOT
go to bed together at the same approximate time, I wonder how often they copulated…
Note on 14 June: I must add 6SBS (P51) from 1999--No litter, No yearlings. See below.
Note on 16 June 2021: Note change for 96 (R23) 2003. Yearlings now 5 instead of 2.
So, two changes for this file as of 16 June 2021.
This file is also in Folder for chapter on Polyandry.
I have NOT done the stats for this file for polyandry vs ARS of UPD females. I will wait until I analyze
stats for littsize and yearlings--to verify that information is correct.
For this file, changes to 6SBS (P51) in 1995 made on 09 Sept 2021
For this file, changes for 96 (R23) made earlier
No data on clan sizes and clan types in 1995, my first year of resarch with UPDs at
Horse Corral Colony at Bryce Canyon National Park. I did not start research until May 1995.
These data used for Figure 10.1 in Hoogland 2026.
This file ready for longterm storage on 05 Feb 2025.
This file also contains some variables unrelated to clansize and clantype.
File name = Fig 10.1, Lower left, UPDs, clan size, clan type, 09 Dec 2025
These UPD clan sizes and UPD clan types are for MAY.
If one Admale was in a clan and another Admale lived in that clan and
shared another clan, I consider the number of Admales for the first clan to be TWO.
If two Admales shared the same two clans, then I consider each clan
to have TWO Admales
Clan size = number of adults and yearlings in same territory.
This file contains other information beyond what I use for Fig 10.1, lower lef
Replication Data and R code for: Evaluating the links between heterophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, foraging effort and breeding success in two penguin species
No full textThis file contains the replication data and R code for the study: "Evaluating the links between heterophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, foraging effort and breeding success in two penguin species" published in Marine Biology, by Lemonnier, Colominas-Ciuró, Stier, Avril, Cillard, Dumas-Roussel, Meymy, Montblanc, Bost, Viblanc.
The data is part of the ECONERGY #119: Long-term observatory of king penguin ecophysiology, behaviour, growth and breeding success SEE-Life, IPEV and ZATA program.
The file contains a README.txt file which describes the content of each separate data set. The R code used for analyses is also provided
Suivi de l'ichtyofaune du Parc naturel marin du Golfe du Lion (PNMGL) : suivi mérou, corb, sar tambour
No full textLe corb et les mérous font partie en Méditerranée des espèces d’importance écologique et patrimoniale. Elles bénéficient également d’un statut international. En décembre 2013, les autorités compétentes en Méditerranée (préfet de la région Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur et préfet de la Corse) ont défini des mesures réglementaires dans le but de renforcer la protection du corb et de plusieurs espèces de mérous dans les eaux de Méditerranée française. Ces mesures ont été renouvelées pour 10 ans en 2023 [arrêté R93-2023-12-08-00002 du 20 décembre 2023 (corb) et arrêté R93-2023-12-08-00001 du 8 décembre 2023 (mérous)].
Le programme scientifique, appelé « programme de surveillance » du Plan d’action pour le milieu marin (PAMM) de la sous-région marine Méditerranée occidentale (SRMO) est défini pour six années. Il repose sur le suivi d’une série d’indicateurs du bon état écologique des eaux marines, dont certains directement liés au maintien de populations d’espèces patrimoniales. A ce titre, il est apparu que le suivi du corb et des mérous pourrait être intégré au programme de surveillance du PAMM, afin de participer à la caractérisation du milieu méditerranéen en application de la directive européenne établissant une stratégie pour le milieu marin (DCSMM).
Les résultats attendus du programme de suivi « mérous et corbs » sont les suivants :
- Rassembler de nombreuses données concernant l’état des populations de corbs et de mérous en Méditerranée.
- Rendre possible l’agrégation de ces données et leur interprétation, par l’emploi de méthodes d’observation et de bancarisation comparables.
- Mobiliser les acteurs intéressés (professionnels, structures associatives, partenaires institutionnels et scientifiques).
Un réseau de zones d’étude a été défini à l’échelle de la façade méditerranéenne, comprenant :
- Quatre zones témoins en-dehors des zones de réglementation spéciale de pêche (Parc naturel marin du golfe du Lion, Parc marin de la côte bleue, sites Natura 2000 Corniche varoise et Campomoro-Senetosa).
- Des aires marines protégées (AMP) avec maintien des suivis déjà existants.
Le suivi des mérous et des corbs était prévu pour 4 ans, de 2015 à 2018 et a été reconduit en 2022 et 2024. L'Université Côte d’Azur (précédemment Nice Sophia-Antipolis) est désignée comme référent scientifique du programme. Elle gère la structuration, la récupération et le traitement des données et est également en charge de la rédaction des différents rapports à l’échelle de la façade (rapports annuels, rapports finaux en 2018 et 2023).
Le Parc a souhaité ajouter le sar tambour aux espèces de ce suivi car lors des comptages GEM dans la RNMCB l’espèce est prise en compte, ses effectifs relativement faibles étant préoccupants
Replication data for: Fig 6.3. Observed vs expected predations for immigrants, pregnant females, juveniles, UPDs, 03 Nov 2025
No full textFILE DESCRIPTION
Keywords: Observed vs expected predations for immigrants, pregnant females, juveniles, UPDs
File name: Fig 6.3. Observed vs expected predations for UPD immigrants, UPD pregnant females, and UPD juveniles, 03 Nov 2025
UPD immigrants had arrived at the study colony <2 days before predation.
UPD pregnancy lasted for a mean of 29.1 days (Chapter 17).
Following first emergence from the natal nursery-burrow, UPD weanlings could not run as fast as adults.
All these UPD data are from the Horse Corral Colony at Bryce Canyon National Park in 2016.
Expected numbers resulted from the assumption that predation was equally likely for (a) adult immigrants
vs longterm adult residents, (b) pregnant vs nonpregnant adult females, and (c) recently weaned juveniles vs adults.
All P-values are from the Fisher exact test
Some of the predations in Figs 6.3 and 6.4 applied to more than one analysis.
A victimized pregnant female foraging at the periphery of the study-site, for example,
affected analyses regarding both center vs edge and pregnancy vs nonpregnancy.
All nine juvenile UPD victims were captured by northern goshawks.
Both immigrant UPD victims were adult males that were captured by northern goshawks.
All four pregnant UPD victims were captured by red foxes.
These data used for Fig 6.3 in Hoogland 2026.
This file ready for longterm storage on 03 Nov 2025.
File name: Fig 6.3. Observed vs expected predations for UPD immigrants, UPD pregnant females, and UPD juveniles, 03 Nov 202
Replication data for Fig 10.2, Lower right, WTPDs, clan type vs clan size vs copfems, 10 Dec 2025
No full textFILE DESCRIPTION
Keywords: white-tailed prairie dog, clan size, clan type, copulating females
File name = Fig 10.2, Lower right, WTPDs, clan type vs clan size vs copfems, 10 Dec 2025
OLDFile name = WTPDs, Clantype vs clansize and vs copfems
These data are the means and standard errors only.
I cannot find the RAW DATA for these numbers. I could find and re-calculate, if necessary.
I did, however, check the means and standard errors
TWO TIMES when I created Figure 10.2 (on 11 Feb 2025?)
These data used for Figure 10.2 in Hoogland 2026.
This file ready for longterm storage on 11 Feb 2025.
These data used for Figure 10.2 in Hoogland 2026.
This file ready for longterm storage on 11 Feb 2025.
Clansize = clan size = number of adult and yearling GPDs living in same clan territory
Clantype = Clan type. See below for definitions.
Females that copulated = number of females in coterie that copulated
Female WTPDs first copulated as yearlings, and almost ALL WTPD adult and yearling females copulated every year
No-male clan had no resident sexually mature male in May
Half-male clan shared a single sexually mature male in May with another clan
One-male clan had a single resident sexually mature male in May
Multi-male clan had >=2 sexually mature males in May
For more information about clan types, see Chapter 10 of Hoogland 2025
File name = Fig 10.2, Upper right, GPDs, clan type vs clan size vs copfems, 10 Dec 2025
All clan sizes and clan types are from MAY
Replication data for: Fig 10.2, Lower left, UPDs, Clan type vs clan size vs copfems, 19 Dec 2025
No full textFILE DESCRIPTION
Keywords: Utah prairie dog, clan size, clan type, copulating females
File name = Fig 10.2, Lower left, UPDs, Clan type vs clan size vs copfems, 19 Dec 2025
OLDFile name = UPDs, Male ARS vs wt, clansize, clantype, 24 Sept 2021
I started this file from File name = UPDs, Male ARS for cops vs male body mass, No 0s, 28 Aug 2021, Details below.
In this file, clantype = 0.5 = Half-male clan, for which >=1 females are controlled by single male
No-male clan had no resident sexually mature male in May
Half-male clan shared a single sexually mature male in May with another clan
One-male clan had a single resident sexually mature male in May
Multi-male clan had >=2 sexually mature males in May
For more information about clan types, see Chapter 10 of Hoogland 2025
Clantype = 1 = One male clan
Clantype = 2 = Multi-male clan
Clantype = 0 = Male that lived alone, with no other females in his territory, who did not DISAPPEAR shortly after mating season
If a UPD male mated and then disappeared in early April, I did not assign a clantype to that male. But
I DO assign a clan size for a male that disappeared in April if he copulated before disappearance.
This file has now been checked TWO TIMES on 24 Sept 2021 for Clansize and Clantype
Clantype = 0 refers to where UPD male lived in May. He might have lived in a typical clan territory
during the mating season, and then move away and lived alone in May and June. Hence Clantype = 0.
Other data checked on earlier dates. See below for details.
OLD File name = UPDs, Male ARS for cops vs male body mass, No 0s, 28 Aug 2021
I started this file from File name = UPDs, Male ARS for cops, 14 Aug 2021. Details below.
On 28 Aug 2021, I add Junewts.
Note well: All males in this file had at least ONE Sexpartner for each year
On 28 Aug 2021, I checked Marchwt and Junewt TWO TIMES.
All other variables checked TWO TIMES earlier. See below for details.
Date = 22 Jan 2021 for EARLIER VERSION of this file.
This file has been checked TWO TIMES on 21-22 Jan 2021. But see notes below.
A UPD male will have the SAME EARTAGS in different years, but will have a
different Dognum in different years
For most analyses, I will consider data from the same UPD male in different
years to be statistically independent
OKtouse = 1 means that we think we observed most or all copulations
by a UPD male in a particular year
OKtouse = 0 means that we think we DID NOT OBSERVE most or all copulations
by a UPD male in a particular year
I confess some subjectivity in the assignments of 1 or 2 to variable
= OK to use.
I only use AGE if I was certain--or almost certain--about a UPD male's exact age
SEXPARTNERS = minimal number of UPD females with whom UPD male copulated,
with or without MCs by the copulating male
Note that 1, 2, or 3 UPD males might have the same UPD Marker, but they will
have different Eartags.
Copfems = Sexpartners
On 10 August 2021, I discover that eartag for UPD male-16 should
be K7 instead of K75. This affects both male-16 (missing) in 1998 and
male-40 (2 entries instead of 1)
Should I include 48 (O85) in 2000? No, so Oktouse = 0.
Should I include 29 (P55) in 2000? Yes, because 29 was a roaming male during the 2000 mating season.
Should I include 23 in 2001? No, so Oktouse = 0.
Should I include 40 in 2001 and 2002? No, so Oktouse = 0 for 2001 and 2002.
I should delete R16-20 in 2004 for analysis of LRS--but no need to delete for ARS in 2004
Wait! This file is for ARS--so I can RETAIN OF THE LAST FEW CASES IN
Lines 278-283.
R41 (Y31) was not sexually mature in 2001. Percent MCs is now missing data for R41.
Note on 11 Aug 2021: Notice this note from above on 22 Jan 2021:
SEXPARTNERS = minimal number of UPD females with whom UPD male copulated,
with or without MCs by the copulating male
OLDFile name on 14 Aug 2012 = UPDs, Male ARS for cops, 13 Aug 2021
I revise this file today for Variable = SEXPARTNERS. This revision is based
on checking UPD Copulation Summary SHEETS AND INCORPORATING ANY
CHANGES IN SEXPARTNERS SINCE VERSION OF 22 Jan 2021
Revision = 0 = No change
Revision = 1 = change on 13 Aug 2021
This file has now been checked TWO TIMES on 13 Aug 2021
I will use this file for figure that shows ARS for UPD male cops
Eventually, I will add info from microsatellites = microsats on ARS for UPD babies and UPDs yearlings
On 13 Aug 2021, I delete most data for R01 (F3A) in 2005
In this file if SEXPARTNERS = 0, then I have changed PERCENTMCS to MISSING DATA (.)
Earlier version of this file was based on MAXCOPS. This version is based on Mincops=
my best estimate of the number of sexual partners for each UPD male. I had three
categories of confidence of whether a copulation occurred:
Definite cop, with no ambiguities. I score all these.
Probable cop, but I could not be sure, with ONE ?. I score all these.
Possible cop, but unlikely, with TWO ?s or brackets. For this file, I do NOT score these.
On 13 Aug 2021, I also verify eartags for all UPDs in this file.
Remember: For all valid cases in this file, Sexpartners is always >=1.
For about 5 cases, Sexpartners = . = missing data.
File name = UPDs, Male ARS for cops, 16 Aug 2021.
This file has now been checked TWO TIMES on 16 Aug 2021
On 16 Aug 2021, I check the following variables TWO TIMES:
UPD MALE, AGE, and BODY MASS
I do NOT re-check the following variables, which were checked TWO TIMES
in earlier files: BODY MASS
All information on siring of emergent juveniles and yearlings from microsatellites determined by
Stephen R. Keller and Regina Trott.
These data used for Figure 10.2 in Hoogland 2026.
This file ready for longterm storage on 11 Feb 2025.
File name = Fig 10.2, Lower left, UPDs, Clan type vs clan size vs copfems, 19 Dec 2025
Note well: This file contains copious data beyond what is needed for Fig 10.2. See other EXCEL files for details.
for variables such as Marchwt, Junewt
All clan sizes and clan types are from MAY