Lee Kantar's research while affiliated with Nevada Department of Wildlife and other places

... In North America, moose are also subject to infection by Anaplasma spp. Its presence was confirmed in Eastern moose (Alces alces americana) with a prevalence of 54% [37], which is markedly higher than our present findings. ...

... The large majority of hunted cervids are adult males, with very few female animals hunted and only by First Nations communities as part of traditional practice [52]. In Maine, U.S.A., a survey of winter ticks on moose hunted in October found that male moose may contain both greater abundances and ticks at a higher stage of development than female moose or calves [62]. This suggests that, although our detections of winter tick presence are unlikely to be negatively affected by biases in selection by sex, there may be limits in the inferences regarding winter tick prevalence at the population level. ...

... These fungi are presumably acquired by moose that frequent wallows (rut pits) where the fungi's natural environment has been significantly disturbed. After exposure, natural, fungus-based biocontrol could occur (Yoder et al. , 2019c. Larval ticks treated with autumn applications of formulated, fungus-based biopesticides while questing, if then recruited to the host, may provide an additional source of fungal inoculum. ...

... This short-term deer population control was, however, unlikely to have caused noticeable changes in hare and moose populations. Local moose population is limited [52], and other factors such as hunting pressure and increases in winter tick (Dermacentor albipictus Packard) abundance contribute to maintaining low moose numbers [53]. With regard to hare, competition with deer has been observed in some contexts [54]. ...

... Recent reviews have highlighted variation in population dynamics across management jurisdictions, with some populations declining and others increasing or stable (Timmermann andRodgers 2017, Jensen et al. 2020). Population dynamics are complex and geographically varied, but broadly reflect habitat composition, forest management, abiotic environmental conditions, hunter harvest, predation pressure, and parasites (Boutin 1992, Messier 1994, Rempel et al. 1997, Solberg et al. 1999, Musante et al. 2010, Jones et al. 2017, Pekins 2020. Climate change has an underlying influence on these factors as well as moose behavior and susceptibility to parasites and disease (Joly et al. 2012, Tape et al. 2016, Montgomery et al. 2019, Pekins 2020, underscoring the need for techniques that accurately monitor moose populations over time (van Ballenberghe andBallard 2007, Jensen et al. 2020). ...

... However, DeCesare et al. (2020) suggested that environmental factors rather than genetic differences were the primary influence of observed differences in antler size between these subspecies. Since antlers vary with age and body size , Stewart et al. 2000, Bowyer et al. 2002, Child et al. 2010a, Jensen et al. 2013, Andreozzi et al. 2015, and presumably between subspecies , we expect that the prevalence of S/F antlers would be highest in A. a. shirasi, intermediate in A. a. andersoni, and lowest in A. a. gigas. Furthermore, we expect more S/F antlers in yearlings compared to 2-year-olds, as well as in moose from southern versus northern areas across the distribution of A. a. andersoni. ...

... The expanding human population increases the chance of human contact with nature, which inevitably reduces or changes the natural habitat of wild fauna [1][2][3][4]. Mining and industrial use of pristine lands, as well as urban and rural development, produce a humaninduced impact on the environment, thus causing the transformation and degradation of natural biocenoses and increasing/reducing biodiversity [5,6]. In the conditions of limited natural resources, the effectiveness of environmental management decisions depends on an accurate and timely analysis of environmental data. ...

... In the reviewed literature, we found contradictory information on the response of moose to agricultural areas and the usage of crops [37,54,55,[58][59][60]. Even in the winter season, moose were reported to browse 95% of the time within a zone no more than 80 m from cover [61]. ...