{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03291880029261156, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0043891733723482075, 'mean_word_length': 5.874371859296482, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Ecological and allometric determinants of home‐range size for mountain lions (Puma concolor)

We examined how several ecological factors influenced home‐range size for 57 mountain lions inhabiting three regions of California. Our specific objectives were to investigate: (1) the relationship between home‐range size and sex, age and reproductive status; (2) how broad‐scale habitat differences and prey relative abundances influenced home‐range size; (3) how seasonality, within these habitats, affected home‐range size; (4) whether there was a significant relationship between body mass and home‐range size. Results indicate that the effects of season on home‐range size influenced the study areas differently. Both intrinsic factors, such as sex and body mass, and extrinsic factors, such as deer relative abundance and study site, influenced home‐range size for mountain lions in this analysis. Linear relationships, however, between body mass and home‐range size were not evident for any of our study locations. Curvilinear relationships, in contrast, existed between body mass and home‐range size for all study areas during particular seasons, influenced strongly by animal sex. Conservation strategies designed to protect mountain lions and their habitats should reflect the above balance between intrinsic and extrinsic factors which influence home‐range size.