Date of Award:
5-1975
Document Type:
Thesis
Degree Name:
Master of Science (MS)
Department:
Wildland Resources
Department name when degree awarded
Range Science
Committee Chair(s)
A. D. Smith
Committee
A. D. Smith
Committee
John C. Malechek
Committee
J. J. Spillett
Abstract
An increasing interest in fecal analysis as a method of determining diets of herbivores prompted research to determine if this method could be used successfully to determine diets of pronghorn antelope found in Utah's cold desert rangelands. In addition to fecal analysis, quantitative estimates of pronghorn diets were derived from rumen analysis and feeding site observations. Rumen samples were analyzed by three different methods: (1) microscopic, (2) gravimetric, and (3) point frame. In addition to field experiments, samples from a feeding trial with a diet of known composition were used to determine whether or not differential digestion of plant epidermis occurs.
Fourteen male pronghorn antelope were collected between July, 1970 and June 4, 1971 on the Desert Experimental Range near Milford, Utah. A fecal sample was taken from the intestine of each. In addition, fecal samples and estimates of vegetative composition were collected at 14 sites. These, plus eight rumen samples collected from hunter kills during August 1970, were used to compare methods of rumen analysis and fecal analysis with the other conventional techniques used in this study.
Of the methods used, the microscopic technique, as described in this study, provided the most accurate and efficient method of analyzing pronghorn rumen samples. fecal analysis results compared favorably to the other methods used. The known diet study indicated that differential digestion of epidermal fragments may occur under certain conditions.
Checksum
8f934fce8761220a578bccd0c607850d
Recommended Citation
Shandruk, Leonard J., "A Comparison of Three Methods Used to Analyze Pronghorn Antelope Diets" (1975). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations, Spring 1920 to Summer 2023. 1616.
https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/1616
Included in
Copyright for this work is retained by the student. If you have any questions regarding the inclusion of this work in the Digital Commons, please email us at .