<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>Tomas A. Carlo</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Todd K. Fuller</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Stephen DeStefano</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>John F. Organ</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>Nereyda Falconi</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2022</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;Bears, Ursidae, are considered omnivores, except for giant pandas&amp;nbsp;Ailuropoda melanoleuca&amp;nbsp;and polar bears&amp;nbsp;Ursus maritimus. However, omnivory includes a wide range of dietary variation and trophic positions, making bear dietary ecology unclear. We inferred bear trophic positions from δ&lt;sup&gt;15&lt;/sup&gt;N (‰) values and examined their correlation with diets reported in the literature, including frequency of human–bear conflicts (livestock predation and crop damage incidents). Overall,&amp;nbsp;15N signatures were consistent with diet estimates. Bear species with higher&amp;nbsp;&lt;sup&gt;15&lt;/sup&gt;N signatures differed more from each other, including cases of large regional intraspecific variance, than bear species with lower&amp;nbsp;&lt;sup&gt;15&lt;/sup&gt;N signatures. Bear trophic position and frequency of reports of human–bear conflicts were uncorrelated, suggesting that livestock predation by bears is an opportunistic behaviour rather than a response to food availability dynamics.&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1111/mam.12285</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Wiley</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Bear diets and human-bear conflicts: Insights from isotopic ecology</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>