Mammalian Biology

, Volume 79, Issue 1, pp 71–76 | Cite as

Habitat selection by two predators in an urban area: The stone marten and red fox in Wrocław (SW Poland)

  • Leszek DuduśEmail author
  • Andrzej Zalewski
  • Olga Kozioł
  • Zbigniew Jakubiec
  • Nina Król
Original Investigation


We analyzed the habitat use of stone martens and red foxes based on incidental observations within the urbanized zone of Wrocław, SW Poland. We compared proportional habitat use at observation sites with randomly selected points and evaluated differences in distance to the water sources and to urban boundaries. Habitat use by both species was different from what we had expected from random points. Stone martens used high-density housing more frequently than red foxes and that expected from random points and avoided open and industrial areas, whereas red foxes used housing estates significantly more often than expected and avoided high-density housing. Both species used the other habitats according to their availability. Stone martens often selected habitats located closer to the city centre, whereas red foxes often selected habitats closer to urban borders than expected. The distribution of red foxes and stone martens is influenced by several factors including the availability of shelter and food, as well as the opportunity to move around undetected. Interspecific competition may also play an important role in habitat selection. Stone martens seem to be better adapted to urbanized areas than red foxes.


Martes foina Vulpes vulpes Habitat use Predation avoidance Interspecific competition 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baker, P.J., Harris, S., 2004. Red foxes. The behavioral ecology of red foxes in urban Bristol. In: MacDonald, D.W., Sillero-Zubiri, C. (Eds.), Biology and Conservation of Wild Canids. Bloomsbury Publishing Inc, London, pp. 207–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bateman, P.W., Fleming, P.A., 2012. Big city life: carnivores in urban environments. J. Zool. 287, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beckmann, J.P., Lackey, C.W., 2008. Carnivores, urban landscapes, and longitudinal studies: a case history of black bears. Hum. Wildl. Confl. 2, 168–174.Google Scholar
  4. Bissonette, J.A., Broekhuizen, S., 1995. Martens populations as indicators of habitat spatial patterns: the need of multiscale approach. In: Lidicker, W.Z. (Ed.), Landscape Approaches in Mammalian Ecology and Conservation. University of Minnesota Press, Minnesota, pp. 95–121.Google Scholar
  5. Blair, R., 2001. Birds and butterflies along urban gradients in two ecoregions of the U.S. In: Lockwood, J.L., McKinney, M.L. (Eds.), Biotic Homogenization. Kluwer, New York, pp. 33–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bontadina, F., Contesse, P.,Gloor, S., 2001. How does personal involvement influence attitudes towards urban foxes? For. Snow Landsc. Res. 76, 255–266.Google Scholar
  7. Bozek, C.K., Prange, S., Gehrt, S.D., 2007. The influence of anthropogenic resources on multi-scale habitat selection by raccoons. Urban Ecosyst. 10, 413–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brangi, A., 1995. Seasonal changes of trophic niche overlap in the stone marten (Martes foina) and the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) in a mountainous area of the Northern Apennines (N-Italy). Hystrix 7, 113–118.Google Scholar
  9. Buchalczyk, T., 1984. Rzad: Drapiezne-Carnivora (Order: Carnivora). In: Pucek, Z. (Ed.), Klucz do oznaczania ssaków Polski (A Key to Identify Mammals of Poland). PWN, Warszawa, pp. 256–310.Google Scholar
  10. Carlsson, N.O.L., Jeschke, J.M., Holmqvist, N., Kindberg, J., 2010. Long-term data on invaders: when the fox is away, the mink will play. Biol. Invasions 12, 633–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cignini, B., Riga, F., 1997. Red fox sightings in Rome. Hystrix 9, 1–74.Google Scholar
  12. Contesse, P., Hegglin, D., Gloor, S., Bontadina, F., Deplazes, P., 2004. The diet of urban foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and the availability of anthropogenic food in the city of Zurich, Switzerland. Mamm. Biol. 69, 81–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ditchkoff, S., Saalfeld, S., Gibson, C, 2006. Animal behavior in urban ecosystems: modifications due to human-induced stress. Urban Ecosyst. 9, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Donadio, E., Buskrik, S.W., 2006. Diet, morphology, and interspecific killing in Carnivora. Am. Nat. 167, 534–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Doncaster, C.P., Dickman, C.R., Macdonald, D.W., 1990. Feeding ecology of red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) in the city of Oxford, England. J. Mamm. 71, 188–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Francis, R.A., Chadwick, M.A., 2012. What makes a species synurbic? Appl. Geogr. 32, 514–521.Google Scholar
  17. Genovesi, P., Secchi, M., Boitani, L., 1996. Diet of stone martens: an example of ecological flexibility. J. Zool. 238, 545–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gloor, S., 2002. The Rise of Urban Foxes (Vulpes vulpes) in Switzerland and Ecological and Parasitological Aspects of a Fox Population in the Recently Colonised City of Zurich. Universität Zürich, Zürich (PhD thesis).Google Scholar
  19. Goszczyński, J., 1989. Population dynamics of the red fox in central Poland. Acta Theriol. 34, 141–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Göppert, H.R., 1857. Der Königliche botanische Garten der Universität Breslau (The Royal Botanical Garden of Wroclaw University). Heyn’sche Buchhandlung, Göerlitz.Google Scholar
  21. Hall, R.J., 2011. Intraguild predation in the presence of a shared natural enemy. Ecology 92, 352–361.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Harrison, W.S.R., Cypher, B.L., Bremner-Harrison, S., Job, C.L.V.H., 2011. Resource use overlap between urban carnivores: implications forendangered San Joaquin kit foxes (Vulpes macrotis mutica). Urban Ecosyst. 14, 303–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hawrylak, M., Hawrylak, P., 2010. Gospodarka przestrzenna. In: Lewicki, Z. (Ed.), Srodowisko Wrocławia (Environment of Wrocław). ATUT, Wrocław, pp. 62–76.Google Scholar
  24. Herr, J., 2008. Ecology and Behavior of Urban Stone Martens (Martes foina) in Luxembourg. University of Sussex, Brighton (PhD thesis).Google Scholar
  25. Herr, J., Schley, L, Engel, E., Roper, T.J., 2008. Den preferences and denning behavior in urban stone martens (Martes foina). Mamm. Biol. 75, 138–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Holisová, V., Obrtel, R., 1982. Scat analytical data on the diet of urban stone martens, Martes foina (Mustelidae, Mammalia). Folia Zool. 31, 21–30.Google Scholar
  27. Horak, P., Lebreton, J.D., 1998. Survival of adult Great Tits Parus major in relation to sex and habitat; a comparison of urban and rural populations. Ibis 140, 205–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hunter, M.D., 2009. Trophic promiscuity, intraguild predation and the problem of omnivores. Agric. Forest Entomol. 11, 125–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jakubiec-Benroth, D., Jakubiec, Z., 2001. Synanthropisation of the red fox Vulpes vulpes in Wrocław. Przegl. Zool. 55, 21–126.Google Scholar
  30. Komarowska, D., 2010. Rocznik Miasta Wrocławia 2010 (Statistical yearbook of Wrocław city 2010). Statistical Office in Wrocław – Printing Department, Legnica.Google Scholar
  31. König, A., 2008. Fears, attitudes and opinions of suburban residents with regards to theirurban foxes. Eur. J. Wildlife. Res. 54, 101–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Luniak, M., 2004. Synurbization-adaptation of animal wildlife to urban development. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Urban Wildlife Symposium, Tucson, Arizona, pp. 50–55.Google Scholar
  33. Lindström, E.R., Brainerd, S.M., Helldin, J.O., Overskaug, K., 1995. Pine marten–red fox interactions: a case of intraguild predation? Ann. Zool. Fenn. 32, 123–130.Google Scholar
  34. Marks, C.A., Bloomfield, T.E., 2006. Home-range size and selection of natal den and diurnal shelter sites by urban red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) in Melbourne. Wild. Res. 33, 339–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McKinney, M.L., 2002. Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation. Bioscience 52, 883–890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mulder, J.L., 1990. The stoat Mustela erminea in the Duch dune region, its local extinction, and possible cause: the arrival of the red fox Vulpes vulpes. Lutra 33, 1–21.Google Scholar
  37. Neu, C.W., Byer, C.R., Peek, J.M., 1974. A technique for analysis of utilization-availability data. J. Wild. Manage. 38, 541–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Padial, J., Ávila, E., Gil-Sánchez, J.M., 2002. Feeding habits and overlap among red fox (Vulpes vulpes) and stone marten (Martes foina) in two Mediterranean mountain habitats. Mamm. Biol. 67, 137–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Palomares, F., Caro, T.M., 1999. Interspecific killing among mammalian Carnivores. Am. Nat. 153, 492–508.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Papakosta, M., Vlachos, C, Bakaloudis, D., Kitikidou, K., Chatzinikos, E., 2010. Dietary overlap among seasons and habitats of red fox and stone marten in Central Greece. Eur. J. Sci. Res. 45, 122–127.Google Scholar
  41. Posłuszny, M., Pilot, M., Goszczyński, J., Gralak, B., 2007. Diet of sympatric pine marten (Martes martes) and stone marten (Martes foina) identified by genotyping of DNA from faeces. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 44, 269–284.Google Scholar
  42. Randa, L, Yunger, J., 2006. Carnivore occurrence along an urban–rural gradient: a landscape-level analysis. J. Mamm. 87, 1154–1164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rauer, G., Kaczensky, P., Knauer, F., 2003. Experiences with aversive conditioning of habituated brown bears in Austria and other European Countries. Ursus 14, 215–224.Google Scholar
  44. Rondinini, C, Boitani, L, 2002. Habitat use by beech martens in a fragmented landscape. Ecography 25, 257–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sacchi, O., Meriggi, A., 1995. Habitat requirements of the stone marten (Martes foina) on the Tyrrhenian slopes of the northern Apennines. Hystrix 7, 99–104.Google Scholar
  46. Salek, M., Sicova, P., Sedlacek, F., 2005. Stone martens Martes foina in urban environment: abundance and distribution. Lynx 36, 111–116.Google Scholar
  47. Saunders, G., White, P.C.L., Harris, S., 1997. Habitat utilisation by urban foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and the implications for rabies control. Mammalia 61, 497–510.Google Scholar
  48. Storch, I., Lindstrom, E., De Jounge, J., 1990. Diet and habitat selection of the pine marten in relation to competition with the red fox. Acta Theriol. 35, 311–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tomiałojc, L, 2011. Changes in breeding bird communities of two urban parks in Wrocław across 40 years (1970-2010): before and after colonization by important predators. Ornis Polonica 52, 1–25.Google Scholar
  50. Tóth, M., Bárány, A., Kis, R., 2009. An evaluation of stone marten records in the city of Budapest, Hungary. Acta Zool. Hung. 55, 199–209.Google Scholar
  51. Voigt, D.R., Earle, B.D., 1983. Avoidance of coyotes by red fox families. J. Wild. Manage. 47, 852–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zar, J.H., 1999. Biostatistical Analysis, 4th edn. Prentice Hall Inc, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Deutsche Gesellschaft für Säugetierkunde 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leszek Duduś
    • 1
    Email author
  • Andrzej Zalewski
    • 2
  • Olga Kozioł
    • 1
  • Zbigniew Jakubiec
    • 1
  • Nina Król
    • 3
  1. 1.Lower-Silesian Field StationInstitute of Nature Conservation, Polish Academy of SciencesWrocławPoland
  2. 2.Mammal Research InstitutePolish Academy of SciencesBiałowieżaPoland
  3. 3.Department of Microbial Ecology and Environmental ProtectionInstitute of Genetics and Microbiology, University of WroclawWrocławPoland

Personalised recommendations