↓ Skip to main content

Group or ungroup – moose behavioural response to recolonization of wolves

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Zoology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

5 tweeters
1 Facebook page


6 Dimensions

Readers on

50 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Group or ungroup – moose behavioural response to recolonization of wolves
Published in
Frontiers in Zoology, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12983-017-0195-z
Pubmed ID

Johan Månsson, Marie-Caroline Prima, Kerry L. Nicholson, Camilla Wikenros, Håkan Sand


Predation risk is a primary motivator for prey to congregate in larger groups. A large group can be beneficial to detect predators, share predation risk among individuals and cause confusion for an attacking predator. However, forming large groups also has disadvantages like higher detection and attack rates of predators or interspecific competition. With the current recolonization of wolves (Canis lupus) in Scandinavia, we studied whether moose (Alces alces) respond by changing grouping behaviour as an anti-predatory strategy and that this change should be related to the duration of wolf presence within the local moose population. In particular, as females with calves are most vulnerable to predation risk, they should be more likely to alter behaviour. To study grouping behaviour, we used aerial observations of moose (n = 1335, where each observation included one or several moose) inside and outside wolf territories. Moose mostly stayed solitary or in small groups (82% of the observations consisted of less than three adult moose), and this behavior was independent of wolf presence. The results did not provide unequivocal support for our main hypothesis of an overall change in grouping behaviour in the moose population in response to wolf presence. Other variables such as moose density, snow depth and adult sex ratio of the group were overall more influential on grouping behaviour. However, the results showed a sex specific difference in social grouping in relation to wolf presence where males tended to form larger groups inside as compared to outside wolf territories. For male moose, population- and environmentally related variables were also important for the pattern of grouping. The results did not give support for that wolf recolonization has resulted in an overall change in moose grouping behaviour. If indeed wolf-induced effects do exist, they may be difficult to discern because the effects from moose population and environmental factors may be stronger than any change in anti-predator behaviour. Our results thereby suggest that caution should be taken as to generalize about the effects of returning predators on the grouping behaviour of their prey.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Researcher 5 10%
Other 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 10 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 42%
Environmental Science 12 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 13 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 March 2017.
All research outputs
of 20,269,949 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Zoology
of 625 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 274,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Zoology
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,269,949 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 625 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.6. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,537 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.