Mammalian Biology

, Volume 78, Issue 2, pp 87–93 | Cite as

The role of forage availability on diet choice and body condition in American beavers (Castor canadensis)

  • William J. SeverudEmail author
  • Steve K. Windels
  • Jerrold L. Belant
  • John G. Bruggink
Original Investigation


Forage availability can affect body condition and reproduction in wildlife. We used terrestrial and aquatic vegetation sampling, stable isotope analysis, and livetrapping to investigate the influence of estimated forage biomass on diet, body condition, and reproduction in American beavers (Castor canadensis) in the Namakan Reservoir, Voyageurs National Park, Minnesota, USA, May 2008–September 2009. Available terrestrial and emergent aquatic forage varied greatly among territories, but floating leaf aquatic forage was low in abundance in all territories. Variation in estimated biomass of available emergent and terrestrial vegetation did not explain variation in respective assimilated diets, but variation in floating leaf vegetation explained 31% of variation in assimilated floating leaf diets. No models using available vegetation explained variation in body condition. Body condition of individual females in spring did not affect kit catch per unit effort, and overwinter body condition of subadults and adults was similar between territories with and without kits. We found no evidence that available aquatic vegetation affected beaver body condition or fitness. Available forage may be above minimum thresholds to detect differences in diet choice or body condition. Other factors such as water level fluctuations or climatic variables may also explain variation in beaver body condition.


American beaver Available forage Body condition Castor canadensis Diet Minnesota Stable isotope analysis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aleksiuk, M., 1970. The function of the tail as a fat storage depot in the beaver (Castor canadensis). J. Mammal. 51, 145–148.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, A.W., 1983. Habitat suitability index models: beaver. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-82/10.30.Google Scholar
  3. Ayers, C.R., Belant, J.L., Millspaugh, J.J., 2012. Directness of resource use metrics affects predictions of bear body fat gain. Polar Biol., Scholar
  4. Baker, B.W., 2003. Beaver (Castor canadensis) in heavily browsed environments. Lutra 46, 173–181.Google Scholar
  5. Baker, B.W., Ducharme, H.C., Mitchell, D.C.S., Stanley, T.R., Peinetti, H.R., 2005. Interaction of beaver and elk herbivory reduces standing crop of willow. Ecol. Appl. 15, 110–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baker, B.W., Hill, E.P., 2003. Beaver (Castor canadensis). In: Feldhamer, G.A., Thompson, B.C., Chapman, J.A. (Eds.), Wild Mammals of North America: Biology, Management, and Conservation. , 2nd edition. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp. 288–310.Google Scholar
  7. Barnes, D.M., Mallik, A.U., 1997. Habitat factors influencing beaver dam establishment in a northern Ontario watershed. J. Wildlife Manage. 61, 1371–1377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beauvais, G.P., Buskirk, S.W., 1999. Modifying estimatesof sampling effort to account for sprung traps. Wildlife Soc. B 27, 39–43.Google Scholar
  9. Beier, P., Barrett, R.H., 1987. Beaver habitat use and impact in Truckee River Basin, California. J. Wildlife Manage. 51, 794–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Belant, J.L., Kielland, K., Follmann, E.H., Adams, L.G., 2006. Interspecific resource partitioning in sympatric ursids. Ecol. Appl. 16, 2333–2343.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Belovsky, G.E., 1984. Summer diet optimization by beaver. Am. Midl. Nat. 111, 209–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Breck, S.W., Wilson, K.R., Anderson, D.C., 2001. The demographic response of bankdwelling beavers to flow regulation: a comparison on the Green and Yampa rivers. Can. J. Zool. 79, 1957–1964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Buech, R.R., Rugg, D.J., 1995. Biomass of food available to beavers on five Minnesota shrubs. Research Paper NC-326. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, MN.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Busher, P.E., 1995. Food caching behavior of beavers (Castor canadensis): selection and use of woody species. Am. Midl. Nat. 135, 343–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Buskirk, S.W., Millspaugh, J.J., 2006. Metrics for studies of resource selection. J. Wildlife Manage. 70, 358–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cloern, J.E., Canuel, E.A., Harris, D., 2002. Stable carbon and isotope composition of aquatic and terrestrial plants of the San Francisco Bay estuarine system. Limnol. Oceanogr. 47, 713–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Connolly, B.J., Grigal, D.F., 1983. Biomass estimations for wetland tall shrubs. Minnesota Forestry Research Notes 284.Google Scholar
  18. Cook, R.D., 1979. Influential observations in linear regression. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 74, 169–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Craig, H., 1957. Isotopic standards for carbon and oxygen and correction factors for mass-spectrometric analysis of carbon dioxide. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 12, 133–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dennington, M., Johnson, B., 1974. Studies of beaver habitat in the MacKenzie Delta and northern Yukon. Environmental-Social Committee, Northern Pipelines, Task Force on Northern Oil Development, Ottawa, Rep. 74–39.Google Scholar
  21. Doucet, C.M., Fryxell, J.M., 1993. The effect of nutritional quality on forage preference by beavers. Oikos 67, 201–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fraser, D., Chavez, E.R., Paloheimo, J.E., 1984. Aquatic feeding by moose: selection of plant species and feeding areas in relation to plant chemical composition and characteristics of lakes. Can. J. Zool. 62, 80–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fryxell, J.M., 2001. Habitat suitability and source-sink dynamics of beavers. J. Anim. Ecol. 70, 310–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gallant, D., Bérubé, C.H., Tremblay, E., Vasseur, L., 2004. An extensive study of the foraging ecology of beavers (Castor canadensis)in relation to habitat quality. Can. J. Zool. 82, 922–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gogan, P.J.P., Route, W.T., Olexa, E.M., Thomas, N., Kuehn, D., Podruzny, K.M., 2004. Gray wolves in and adjacent to Voyageurs National Park, Minnesota: Research and synthesis 1987–1991. Technical Report NPS/MWR/NRTR/2004-01. National Park Service, Omaha, Nebraska.Google Scholar
  26. Hiner, L.E., 1938. Observations on the foraging habits of beavers. J. Mammal. 19, 317–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hop, K., Faber-Langendoen, D., Lew-Smith, M., Aaseng, N., Lubinski, S., 2001. Voyageurs National Park, Minnesota: USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program. US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey, Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, La Crosse, WI, US.Google Scholar
  28. Howard, R.J., Larson, J.S., 1985. A stream habitat classification system for beaver. J. Wildlife Manage. 49, 19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Huey, W.S., 1956. New Mexico beaver management. New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Bulletin 4.Google Scholar
  30. Jenkins, S.H., 1979. Seasonal and year-to-year differences in food selection by beavers. Oecologia 44, 112–116.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jenkins, S.H., 1980. Problems, progress, and prospects in studies of food selection by beaver. In: Chapman, J.A., Pursley, D. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Worldwide Furbearer Conference. Frostburg, MD, pp. 559–579.Google Scholar
  32. Kallemeyn, L.W., Holmberg, K.L., Perry, J.A., Odde, B.Y., 2003. Aquatic synthesis for Voyageurs National Park. US Geological Survey, Information and Technology Report 2003-0001.Google Scholar
  33. Keeley, J.E., 1998. CAM photosynthesis in submerged aquatic plants. Bot. Rev. 64, 121–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kelly, J.F., 2000. Stable isotopes of carbon and nitrogen in the study of avian and mammalian ecology. Can. J. Zool. 78, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kielland, K., 2001. Stable isotope signatures of moose in relation to seasonal forage composition: a hypothesis. Alces 37, 329–337.Google Scholar
  36. Kurmis, V., Webb, S.L., Merriam Jr., L.C., 1986. Plant communities of Voyageurs National Park, Minnesota, U. S. A. Can. J. Bot. 64, 531–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lancia, R.A., Dodge, W.E., Larson, J.S., 1982. Winter activity patterns of two radiomarked beaver colonies. J. Mammal. 63, 598–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Larson, J.S., van Nostrand, F.C., 1968. An evaluation of beaver aging techniques. J. Wildlife Manage. 32, 99–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. LaZerte, B.D., Szalados, J.E., 1982. Stable carbon isotope ratio of submerged freshwater macrophytes. Limnol. Oceanogr. 27, 413–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Longley, W.H., Moyle, J.B., 1963. The beaver in Minnesota.Minnesota Department of Conservation, Technical Bulletin 6.Google Scholar
  41. MacNally, R., 2000. Regression and model-building in conservation biology, biogeography and ecology: the distinction between – and reconciliation of – ‘predictive’ and ‘explanatory’ models. Biodivers. Conserv. 9, 655–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mariotti, A., 1984. Atmospheric nitrogen is a reliable standard for natural 15N abundance measurements. Nature 303, 685–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McNamara, J.M., Houston, A.I., 1992. Risk-sensitive foraging: a review of the theory. Bull. Math. Biol. 54, 355–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Milligan, H.E., Humphries, M.M., 2010. The importance of aquatic vegetation in beaver diets and the seasonal and habitat specificity of aquatic-terrestrial ecosystem linkages in a subarctic environment. Oikos 119, 1877–1886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Milligan, H.E., Pretzlaw, T.D., Humphries, M.M., 2010. Stable isotope differentiation of freshwater and terrestrial plants in two subarctic regions. Ecoscience 17, 265–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mizukami, R.N., Goto, M., Izumiyama, S., Hayashi, H., Yoh, M., 2005. Estimation of feeding history by measuring carbon and nitrogen stable isotope ratios in hair of Asiatic black bears. Ursus 16, 93–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Northcott, T.H., 1972. Water lilies as beaver food. Oikos 23, 408–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Novakowski, N.S., 1967. The winter bioenergetics of a beaver population in northern latitudes. Can. J. Zool. 45, 1107–1118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Noyce, K.V., Garshelis, D.L., 1994. Body size and blood characteristics as indicators of condition and reproductive performance in black bears. Int. Conf. Bear Res. Manage. 9, 481–496.Google Scholar
  50. Osborn, D.J., 1955. Techniques of sexing beaver, Castor canadensis. J. Mammal. 36, 141–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Parker, J.D., Caudill, C.C., Hay, M.E., 2007. Beaver herbivory on aquatic plants. Oecologia 151, 616–625.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Peig, J., Green, A.J., 2009. New perspectives for estimating body condition from mass/length data: the scaled mass index as an alternative method. Oikos 118, 1883–1891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Phillips, D.L., 2012. Converting isotope values to diet composition: the use of mixing models. J. Mammal. 93, 342–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Phillips, D.L., Newsome, S.D., Gregg, J.W., 2005. Combining sources in stable isotope mixing models: alternative methods. Oecologia 144, 520–527.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Raffel, T.R., Smith, N., Cortright, C., Gatz, A.J., 2009. Central place foraging by beavers (Castor canadensis) in a complex lake habitat. Am. Midl. Nat. 162, 62–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ray, A.M., Rebertus, A.J., Ray, H.L., 2001. Macrophyte succession in Minnesota beaver ponds. Can. J. Bot. 79, 487–499.Google Scholar
  57. Rogowitz, G.L., 1996. Trade-offs in energy allocation during lactation. Am. Zool. 36, 197–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rutherford, W.H., 1964. The beaver in Colorado: its biology, ecology, management, and economics. Colorado Game, Fish, and Parks Department. Technical Publication 17.Google Scholar
  59. Severud, W.J., 2011. American beaver (Castor canadensis) foraging ecology: predation avoidance, diet, and forage availability. Thesis. Northern Michigan University, Marquette, USA.Google Scholar
  60. Severud, W.J., Belant, J.L., Windels, S.K., Bruggink, J.G., 2013. Seasonal variation in assimilated diets of American beavers. Am. Midl. Nat. 169, 30–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shelton, P.C., 1966. Ecological studies of beavers, wolves, and moose in Isle Royale National Park, Michigan. Dissertation. Purdue University, Lafayette, USA.Google Scholar
  62. Sikes, R.S., Gannon, W.L., The Animal Care and Use Committee of the American Society of Mammalogists, 2011. Guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists for the use of wild mammals in research. J. Mammal. 92, 235–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Smith, D.W., 1997. Dispersal strategies and cooperative breeding in beavers. Dissertation. University of Nevada, Reno, USA.Google Scholar
  64. Smith, D.W., Jenkins, S.H., 1997. Seasonal change in body mass and size of tail of northern beavers. J. Mammal. 78, 869–876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Smith, D.W., Peterson, R.O., 1988. The effects of regulated lake levels on beaver in Voyageurs National Park, Minnesota. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Research/Resources Management Report MWR-11. Midwest Regional Office, Omaha, Nebraska 68102, 84 pp.Google Scholar
  66. Smith, D.W., Peterson, R.O., 1991. Behavior of beaver in lakes with varying water levels in northern Minnesota. Environ. Manage. 15, 395–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Smith, D.W., Peterson, R.O., Drummer, T.D., Sheputis, D.S., 1991. Over-winter activity and body temperature patterns in northern beavers. Can. J. Zool. 69, 2178–2182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sponheimer, M., Robinson, T., Ayliffe, L., Passey, B., Roeder, B., Shipley, L., Lopez, E., Cerling, T., Dearing, D., Ehleringer, J., 2003a. An experimental study of carbonisotope fractionation between diet, hair, and feces of mammalian herbivores. Can. J. Zool. 81, 871–876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sponheimer, M., Robinson, T., Ayliffe, L., Passey, B., Roeder, B., Shipley, L., Lopez, E., Cerling, T., Dearing, D., Ehleringer, J., 2003b. Nitrogen isotopes in mammalian herbivores: hair δ15N values from a controlled feeding study. Int. J. Osteoarcheol. 13, 80–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Stewart, K.M., Bowyer, R.T., Kie, J.G., Dick, B.L., Ben-David, M., 2003. Niche partitioning among mule deer, elk, and cattle: do stable isotopes reflect dietary niche? Ecoscience 10, 297–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Struck, U., Altenbach, A.V., Gaulke, M., Glaw, F., 2002. Tracing the diet of the monitor lizard Varanus mabitang by stable isotope analyses (δ15N, δ13C). Naturwissenschaften 89, 470–473.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Ter-Mikaelian, M.T., Korzukhin, M.D., 1997. Biomass equations for sixty five North American tree species. Forest Ecol. Manage. 97, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Therrien, J.F., Côté, S.C., Festa-Bianchet, M., Ouellet, J.P., 2008. Maternal care in white-tailed deer: trade-off between maintenance and reproduction under food restriction. Anim. Behav. 75, 235–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Thompson, I.D., Colgan, P.W., 1987. Numerical responses of martens to a food shortage in Northcentral Ontario. J. Wildlife Manage. 51, 824–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Urton, E.J., Hobson, K.A., 2005. Intrapopulation variation in gray wolf isotope (δ15N and δ13C) profiles: implications for the ecology of individuals. Oecologia 145, 317–326.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. van Nostrand, F.C., Stephenson, A.B., 1964. Age determination for beavers by tooth development.J. Wildlife Manage. 28, 430–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Ward, J.H., 1963. Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 58, 236–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wheatley, M., 1997a. Beaver, Castor canadensis, home range size and patterns of use in the taiga of southeastern Manitoba: III. Habitat variation. Can. Field-Nat. 111, 217–222.Google Scholar
  79. Wheatley, M., 1997b. Beaver, Castor canadensis, home range size and patterns of use in the taiga of southeastern Manitoba: I. Seasonal variation. Can. Field-Nat. 111, 204–210.Google Scholar
  80. Wigley, T.B., Roberts, T.H., Arner, D.H., 1983. Reproductive characteristics of beaver in Mississippi.J. Wildlife Manage. 47, 1172–1177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Williams, C.L., Breck, S.W., Baker, B.W., 2004. Genetic methods improve accuracy of gender determination in beavers. J. Mammal. 85, 1145–1148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Windels, S.K., 2008. 2007 aerial beaver survey, Voyageurs National Park. Report to Voyageurs National Park, 11 pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Deutsche Gesellschaft für Säugetierkunde 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • William J. Severud
    • 1
    Email author
  • Steve K. Windels
    • 2
  • Jerrold L. Belant
    • 3
  • John G. Bruggink
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyNorthern Michigan UniversityMarquetteUSA
  2. 2.National Park ServiceVoyageurs National ParkInternational FallsUSA
  3. 3.Carnivore Ecology Laboratory, Forest and Wildlife Research CenterMississippi State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations