Mikael Åkesson

Scavenging is an important part of food acquisition for many carnivore species that switch between scavenging and predation. In landscapes with anthropogenic impact, humans provide food that scavenging species can utilize. We quantified the magnitude of killing versus scavenging by gray wolves ( Canis lupus ) in Scandinavia where humans impact the ecosystem through hunter harvest, land use practices, and infrastructure. We investigated the cause of death of different animals utilized by wolves, and examined how the proportion of their consumption time spent scavenging was influenced by season, wolf social affiliation, level of inbreeding, density of moose ( Alces alces ) as their main prey, density of brown bear ( Ursus arctos ) as an intraguild competitor, and human density. We used data from 39 GPS‐collared wolves covering 3198 study days (2001–2019), including 14,205 feeding locations within space–time clusters, and 1362 carcasses utilized by wolves. Most carcasses were wolf‐killed (80.5%) while a small part had died from other natural causes (1.9%). The remaining had either anthropogenic mortality causes (4.7%), or the cause of death was unknown (12.9%). Time spent scavenging was higher during winter than during summer and autumn. Solitary wolves spent more time scavenging than pack‐living individuals, likely because individual hunting success is lower than pack success. Scavenging time increased with the mean inbreeding coefficient of the adult wolves, possibly indicating that more inbred individuals resort to scavenging, which requires less body strength. There was weak evidence for competition between wolves and brown bears as well as a positive relationship between human density and time spent scavenging. This study shows how both intrinsic and extrinsic factors drive wolf scavenging behavior, and that despite a high level of inbreeding and access to carrion of anthropogenic origin, wolves mainly utilized their own kills.

The study of carnivores' diet is a key component to enhance knowledge on the ecology of predators and their effect on prey populations. Although molecular approaches to detect prey DNA in carnivore scats are improving, the validation of their accuracy, a prerequisite for reliable applications within ecological frameworks, is still lagging behind the methodological advances. Indeed, variation in detection probability among prey species can occur, representing a potentially insidious source of bias in food‐habit studies of carnivores. Calibration of DNA‐based methods involves the optimization of specificity and sensitivity and, whereas priority is usually given to the former to avoid false positives, sensitivity is rarely investigated so that false negatives may be largely overlooked. We conducted feeding trials with captive wolves ( Canis lupus ) to validate a nanofluidic array technology recently developed for the detection of multiple prey species in scats. Using 371 scat samples from 12 wolves fed with a single‐prey diet, the sensitivity of our nanofluidic array method varied between 0.45 and 0.95 for the six main ungulate prey species. The method sensitivity was enhanced by using multiple markers per species and by a relatively low threshold of number of amplifying markers required to confirm a detection. Yet, at least two markers should be used to avoid false positives. By acknowledging sources of bias in sensitivity to reliably interpret the results of DNA‐based dietary methods, our study highlights the relevance of feeding experiments to optimally calibrate the relative thresholds to define a positive detection and investigate the occurrence and extent of biases in sensitivity.