Figure - available from: ZooKeys
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Historical distribution of coyotes from 10,000 years before present (BP) to 1899. Zooarchaeological (FAUNMAP) records document the distribution of coyotes during the Holocene (0–10,000 BP).
Source publication
The geographic distribution of coyotes ( Canislatrans ) has dramatically expanded since 1900, spreading across much of North America in a period when most other mammal species have been declining. Although this considerable expansion has been well documented at the state/provincial scale, continent-wide descriptions of coyote spread have portrayed...
Similar publications
Interactions between species can influence their distribution and fitness, with potential cascading ecosystem effects. Human disturbance can affect these competitive dynamics but is difficult to measure due to potential simultaneous spatial and temporal responses. We used camera traps with a multispecies occupancy model incorporating a continuous‐t...
Citations
... Coyotes (Canis latrans) are a highly adaptable, omnivorous carnivore species and dietary generalist found throughout North America and most major cities in the USA and Canada (Hody and Kays 2018). Their diets include a wide range of vertebrate and invertebrate prey, such as rabbits, small rodents, birds, domestic pets, ungulates, herpetofauna, arthropods, and fish (Gehrt and Riley 2010;Jensen et al. 2022). ...
... Furthermore, urbanization influences the nutritional quality of foods, which can impact wildlife physiology and behavior by promoting stress (e.g., cortisol, oxidative stress, and inflammation), altering body condition, increasing rates of disease, as well as reducing the success of some management interventions (Ditchkoff et al. 2006;Murray, Edwards, et al. 2015;Murray et al. 2019;Isaksson 2015;Birnie-Gauvin et al. 2017;Stothart et al. 2019;Young et al. 2019;Sugden et al. 2020;Bernat-Ponce et al. 2023). Urbanization can also alter coyote occupancy (Gehrt and Riley 2010;Bateman and Fleming 2012;Hody and Kays 2018), diet (Gehrt and Riley 2010;Newsome et al. 2015;Larson et al. 2020), behavior , predator-prey relationships in both space and time (Weiss 2024), as well as interactions with people . Understanding coyote macronutrient intake may therefore provide key information to promote more sustainable futures between people and coyotes. ...
Diet selection informs the health, fitness, and behavior of wild predators. Due to assumptions that vertebrate prey contains similar compositions of macronutrients (i.e., protein, carbohydrates, and lipids), whole prey items traditionally define carnivore diets. However, increasing evidence suggests that prey differ in terms of their macronutrient compositions, particularly relative to body size. Furthermore, omnivorous predators, like coyotes (Canis latrans), integrate both prey and nonprey diet items whose macronutrient compositions vary. This is particularly important in urbanized systems, which introduce or alter the distributions of prey (e.g., domestic pets) and nonprey (e.g., ornamental plants) foods in ways that contribute to carnivore diet selection and human–wildlife coexistence. We assessed the macronutrient composition of coyote diets seasonally and relative to urbanization in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area, AZ, USA. We collected coyote scats in the field and assessed their macronutrient compositions using values gathered from the literature, as well as the volumetric composition of diet items found in coyote scats. We then assessed the macronutrient composition of coyote diets in geometric space using the geometric framework of nutrition. We observed that the macronutrient composition of coyote diets was similar between moderately and less urbanized sites, particularly in the spring–summer season. However, coyote macronutrient consumption differed seasonally, with coyotes eating more nonprotein energy relative to protein energy when carbohydrate‐rich mesquite (Prosopis spp.) was more available in the fall–winter. Our results suggest that the seasonal availability and macronutrient composition of foods contribute to coyote diets. Macronutrients directly translate to energy and subsequent animal physiology and behavior. Our findings therefore advance our understanding of coyote behavior, particularly in ways that support human–wildlife management in anthropogenic areas.
... Understanding how ungulates perceive (or fail to perceive) risk is particularly important for species where top-down predation effects on populations are of management concern. Recent declines in white-tailed deer populations in the southeastern United States have been linked to reduced recruitment caused by increased fawn mortality attributed to the coyote, a recent arrival to the region Chitwood, Lashley, Kilgo, Pollock, et al., 2015;Gingery et al., 2018;Hody & Kays, 2018;Jackson & Ditchkoff, 2013;Kilgo et al., 2010Kilgo et al., , 2014Shuman et al., 2017). Young fawns (<4 weeks of age) are the most susceptible deer demographic to coyote predation in the Southeast; thus, the peak fawning season is when deer populations are most impacted by predation and behaviors should be most responsive to variation in predation risk . ...
Prey species can perceive and respond to spatiotemporal variation in predation risk to increase survival. In addition to adjusting spatial and temporal activity patterns to avoid predation, prey employ other antipredator behaviors, such as vigilance and fleeing, and these behaviors can be further modulated by intrinsic, environmental, and anthropogenic factors. However, few studies simultaneously examine multiple potential antipredator behavioral responses of prey or examine prey responses to multiple scales of risk. In the southeastern United States, coyotes (Canis latrans) have become established as the top predator of white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) populations mainly through fawn predation, and deer adjust behaviors in response to coyotes. Using passive camera trap data from summer 2019 to 2021, we simultaneously tested for evidence that deer adjust spatial activity patterns, diel activity patterns, and vigilance behavior in response to various abiotic and biotic factors including long‐term and short‐term coyote encounter risk. Overall, our results suggest that deer are unable to eliminate the risk of encountering coyotes by modifying their spatial activity and thus employ other demographic‐specific behavioral adaptations to reduce coyote encounter risk. Deer nursery groups were significantly more diurnal than adult males or adult female deer traveling alone, likely in an attempt to reduce predation risk for fawns. Deer nursery groups increased spatial activity but decreased vigilance at sites the day following increased wild pig (Sus scrofa) activity, suggesting invasive competitors have impacts on maternal behaviors in deer. Adult female deer collectively increased vigilance at sites with greater long‐term coyote encounter risk, and in support of the “many‐eyes” hypothesis, were less vigilant when in larger groups. Spatial activity of adult female deer traveling alone was positively related to short‐term coyote encounter risk, potentially indicating coyotes seek areas with increased doe activity to help locate fawn prey. The results of our study show that behavioral responses to predators and competitors are modulated by individual state (demography), grouping behavior, and habitat features. Our study highlights the need to analyze multiple potential antipredator behaviors and multiple scales of risk to gain a more complete understanding of prey responses to risk.
... As part of their continent-wide range expansion, coyotes colonized urban areas of North America to take advantage of a resource-rich environment with relatively little competition from other predators (Hody andKays 2018, DeCandia et al. 2019). Range expansion occurred from west to east in North America, so western cities like Los Angeles, California, USA, were colonized in the beginning of the twentieth century, whereas cities in the east like Atlanta, Georgia, and New York City, New York, USA, were not colonized until the end of the twentieth or beginning of the twenty-first century (DeCandia et al. 2019, Mowry et al. 2021. ...
Wildlife often serves as a catalyst for conflict among stakeholders. Management actions that are intended to address sources of disagreement may initiate additional conflict. The Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Human-Wildlife Conflict Working Group initiated an effort to identify management actions commonly used to address unwanted coyote (Canis latrans) interactions within urban environments and identify the benefits and challenges associated with each action. Challenges with coyotes in urban environments include aggressive behavior toward humans and pets, attacks, disease exposure, and domestic livestock damage. Although elimination of all attractants would prove preventative in most instances, in practice this can be difficult. Actions evaluated include modifying human behavior, modifying coyote behavior, modifying public expectations, mitigating attractants, modifying urban habitats, exclusion, hazing, trapping (with and without relocation), sterilization, and shooting. Although specific approaches differ in financial cost, human resources investment, public acceptance, and efficacy, management agencies and municipalities must work together to determine what actions are best suited for their individual situations based on environmental, regulatory, and public sideboards.
... One species predicted to influence the distribution (occupancy and detection probability) of free-ranging cats is a recent colonizer of the New York metropolitan area: the eastern coyote (Canis latrans). In recent decades, coyotes have expanded from their historical range in the western United States and now occupy most of the continent (Hody and Kays 2018), including densely populated cities such as Chicago (Morey et al. 2007;Gehrt et al. 2009Gehrt et al. , 2011Gehrt et al. , 2013Gese et al. 2012;Hennessy et al. 2012), Los Angeles (Shargo 1988;Tigas et al. 2002;Riley et al. 2003), Toronto (Thompson et al. 2021, and most recently, the New York metropolitan area (Weckel et al. 2015;Nagy et al. 2016Nagy et al. , 2017Stark et al. 2020;Bradfield et al. 2022;Caragiulo et al. 2022). If coyotes now occupy, to some extent, the ecological niche formerly occupied by apex predators, the expansion of coyotes into urban environments might have trophic impacts on smaller mesocarnivores, including free-ranging cats (Soulé et al. 1988;Estes 1996;Crooks and Soulé 1999;Faeth et al. 2005;Weckel et al. 2015). ...
The free-ranging cat (Felis catus) is an invasive carnivore that can inflict extensive mortality on wildlife. The New York metropolitan area, the most densely populated region of the United States, is home to several urban greenspaces that support local populations of wildlife. It is currently unknown to what extent free-ranging cats make use of these greenspaces and what factors influence their distribution. To address these gaps, we used motion-activated cameras to survey free-ranging cat occupancy and detection probability in 31 major greenspaces in the New York metropolitan area. We compared the daily detection rate of free-ranging cats to other local carnivores and investigated anthropogenic and ecological variables predicted to influence their occupancy and detection probability. Finally, because the eastern coyote (Canis latrans) has expanded its historic range and now occupies several greenspaces in the New York metropolitan area, we tested whether free-ranging cats avoid habitats occupied by coyotes. Our study yielded three main results. First, free-ranging cats were documented in all 31 greenspaces surveyed and were second only to the raccoon (Procyon lotor) in terms of daily rate of detection. Second, free-ranging cat occupancy and detection probability were significantly higher in greenspaces with smaller patch areas that were surrounded by more developed land cover and lower densities of humans. Third, free-ranging cat detection probability was significantly lower in habitats where coyotes were present. Because cats are an invasive species that can cause extensive mortality on urban wildlife, these findings may inform conservation practices and help protect vulnerable species.
... Coyotes have emerged as an exciting potential case of ecosystem sentinelsspecies that provide information about an ecosystem (Zacharias and Roff 2001)sentinels in cities. The coyote is set to expand its range across the Americas (Hody and Kays 2018), and their intimacy with (toxic) landscapes will be greater than we will understand. With this range expansion, the images of the coyote will continually collide and be rebuilt to articulate who the coyote is both materially and cosmically in modernity, "generating friction and leakage" between these identities (Luciano and Chen 2015, 186). ...
Homes are intimate spaces where many bodies come together in space and time to deeply learn and understand the processes that have created one another. Ecology, the study of the relationship between organisms and their environment, is based on the study of a home. Yet ecologists are trained in patriarchal, heteronormative, and otherwise Western articulations and understandings of nature that prevent access to this ecological home. In this article, I argue that through (re)constructing ecology as a home, ecologists can better understand the social and ecological processes that shape an organism. To (re)construct ecology as a home, I first dissect conflict with wildlife as a concept that reinforces taxonomical hierarchies and prevents humans from making a home with wildlife. I then leverage Queer theory to flatten taxonomical hierarchies and create a landscape that invites the (re)construction of ecology as a homemaking discipline. Lastly, I sit within the ecological home to examine urban wildlife and the environmental pressures they are subjected to—using the urban coyote as an example. This work leverages Queerness to collapse taxonomical hierarchies and push traditional ecology towards a boundless relationality with wildlife to more holistically understand the various social and ecological pressures that ultimately create their phenotype.
... Over the course of the 20th century, coyotes (Canis latrans) expanded from their historical geographical range west of the Mississippi River to a current range of almost all of North America [1][2][3][4]. The eastward spread of coyotes has been explained by both natural expansions and introductions by humans. ...
... The eastward spread of coyotes has been explained by both natural expansions and introductions by humans. Natural expansions have been explained by the decline of native eastern canid species, such as the eastern gray wolf (Canis lupus lycaon) and red wolf (Canis rufus), which removed competition and created an open ecological niche for coyotes [2,3]. Coyotes have also been introduced to the Eastern United States by people hoping to make them pets, or by fox hunters who were mistakenly sent coyotes instead of fox pups. ...
... The clearing of forested land created ecotones, where fields abut fencerows, thereby increasing habitat availability for their primary food items such as rodents and rabbits [5,6]. Despite ecosystem differences, coyotes have become an established species in the Southeastern United States [3]. One factor that has facilitated coyotes' movement into both new geographic areas and more urban areas is a remarkable degree of dietary plasticity. ...
Throughout the 20th century, coyotes (Canis latrans) expanded from their historical geographic range west of the Mississippi River to a current range of almost all of North America. Over the course of this expansion, coyotes have demonstrated diverse and variable omnivorous diets that change with the food resources available. This study examined the stomach contents of 25 coyotes in an area where they are relatively new, the Qualla Boundary in North Carolina, to better understand the diets of coyotes in this area. A combination of morphological identification and DNA barcoding was used to characterize the stomach contents of coyotes. Both plant and animal material were identified from anthropogenic and natural sources, the latter including native mammals. This study provides one example of the breadth and flexibility of coyote diets and helps build an understanding of how coyotes can adapt to new conditions.
... The coyote (Canis latrans) is a behaviourally flexible carnivore that has expanded its range across North America over the last century (Hody and Kays 2018) and has been the subject of considerable publicity and debate (Draheim et al. 2019;Niesner et al. 2024). Coyotes may serve as bioindicators of urban ecological health, since their residence in highly developed areas and reliance on anthropogenic food correlate with stress and disease (Murray, Edwards, et al. 2015;Raymond et al. 2024;Robertson et al. 2023). ...
How societal, ecological and infrastructural attributes interact to influence wildlife movement is uncertain. We explored whether neighbourhood socioeconomic status and environmental quality were associated with coyote (Canis latrans) movement patterns in Los Angeles, California and assessed the performance of integrated social–ecological movement models. We found that coyotes living in more anthropogenically burdened regions (i.e. higher pollution, denser development, etc.) had larger home ranges and showed greater daily displacement and mean step length than coyotes in less burdened regions. Coyotes experiencing differing levels of anthropogenic burdens demonstrated divergent selection for vegetation, pollution, road densities and other habitat conditions. Further, movement models that included societal covariates performed better than models that only assessed ecological features and linear infrastructure. This study provides a unique social–ecological lens examining the anthropogenic drivers of urban wildlife movement, which should be applicable to urban planners and conservationists when building more equitable, healthy and wildlife‐friendly cities.
... Coyotes (Canis latrans) have expanded their range across the eastern United States in the last century [1]. Though their historic range was limited to the arid deserts and plains of the mid-West, the extirpation of predators like wolves (Canis lupus) and mountain lions (Puma concolor) as well as changes to the landscape have allowed coyotes to thrive in areas previously ...
Coyotes are exposed to many parasites and pathogens of veterinary and zoonotic concern. To assess the prevalence of the diseases caused by these microbes, we opportunistically obtained coyote samples from a variety of sources including a GPS collaring study, rabies testing facilities, wildlife resources agents, and road-side mortalities. We performed necropsies, serological testing, fecal flotations, and molecular analyses on coyotes from Tennessee and South Carolina. Dirofilaria immitis (heartworm) infected 46% (41/89) of coyotes and was associated with eosinophilic alveolitis and arteritis. Paragonimus kellicotti, a zoonotic lung fluke, was found in 24% (17/71) of Tennessee coyotes, including one coyote with extrapulmonary infection affecting the liver and lymph nodes. Trichinella spp., a zoonotic nematode, was present in 17% (12/71) of Tennessee coyotes but was not associated with muscular inflammation. Sarcoptes scabiei, the causative agent of sarcoptic mange, was detected in one Tennessee coyote. Most coyotes (86% [90/105]) were seropositive for Toxoplasma gondii, while 8.5% (9/106) were seropositive for Trypanosoma cruzi, an emerging zoonotic, vector-borne parasite. This study demonstrated that coyotes are commonly exposed to numerous parasites and pathogens that affect people and pets and are excellent sentinels for these diseases.
... By 12-10kya, coyotes expanded into California, crossbred with red wolves, and effectively replaced them in western North America (Sacks et al. 2021). Following the Pleistocene, coyotes remained limited to prairie and desert environments in western North America from Canada to southern Mexico and Central America (Hidalgo-Mihart et al. 2004;Hody and Kays 2018). The extirpation of gray wolves, red wolves, and cougar (Puma concolor) in the eastern U.S. and Canada by European colonists created a niche that coyotes opportunistically filled starting in the early 1900s (Hody and Kays 2018). ...
... Following the Pleistocene, coyotes remained limited to prairie and desert environments in western North America from Canada to southern Mexico and Central America (Hidalgo-Mihart et al. 2004;Hody and Kays 2018). The extirpation of gray wolves, red wolves, and cougar (Puma concolor) in the eastern U.S. and Canada by European colonists created a niche that coyotes opportunistically filled starting in the early 1900s (Hody and Kays 2018). ...
Zooarchaeological identification often rests heavily on analysts’ opinion, experience, and access to reference specimens or manuals. A review of the literature reporting archaeological domestic dog remains demonstrates the danger of this approach. Domestic dogs have played, and continue to play, important roles in many human societies; however, they also exhibit strong skeletal similarities to wild canids -to the extent that post-cranial elements are often identified only as “canid”. Accessing these data is dependent upon the ability to correctly identify domestic dog remains. To accomplish this, zooarchaeologists rely on an array of often poorly tested methods, many developed to separate dogs from only their progenitor the grey wolf. Despite the potential and implications of misidentification, archaeologists frequently do not specify the methods used to identify dog remains rendering it impossible to assess data quality and reliability. The absence of data quality standards critically weakens zooarchaeological (and other) archaeological data, especially increasingly popular efforts to synthesize published data, and contribute to debates outside of the field.
... Beringia; (4,5)]. Coyotes likewise successfully adapted to Holocene environments in temperate North America (6,7) and have recently expanded into the Subarctic following anthropogenic environmental change (8). ...
Large canids (wolves, dogs, and coyote) and people form a close relationship in northern (subarctic and arctic) so-cioecological systems. Here, we document the antiquity of this bond and the multiple ways it manifested in interior Alaska, a region key to understanding the peopling of the Americas and early northern lifeways. We compile original and existing genomic, isotopic, and osteological canid data from archaeological, paleontological, and modern sites. Results show that in contrast to canids recovered in non-anthropic contexts, canids recovered in association with human occupations are markedly diverse. They include multiple species and intraspecific lineages, morphological variation, and diets ranging from terrestrial to marine. This variation is expressed along both geographic and temporal gradients, starting in the terminal Pleistocene with canids showing high marine dietary estimates. This paper provides evidence of the multiple ecological relationships between canids and people in the north-from predation, probable commensalism, and taming, to domestication-and of their early onset.
