Talk:Alligator

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Alligator is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use amphibians and reptiles resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7 (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
Checklist icon
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

alligator population rebounds after hunting ceases[edit]

I am confused about the author's intent in the following:


" ...immediately following the outlawing of alligator hunting, populations rebounded quickly due to the suppressed number of adults preying upon juveniles, increasing survival among the young alligators..."


How is it possible for the survival rate of young alligators to improve if MORE adults exist to eat them ?


Aardfilm (talk) 23:53, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Let's say 100 adult alligators eats 1000 juveniles (for example) out of 10,000 hatchlings. And 100 alligators is the entire adult population in a given area. Once humans stop hunting, there are still only 100 adults eating 1,000 juveniles but the hatchlings don't have to contend with human hunters who are much more voracious (and capture eggs, as well)! So instead of the other 9000 falling to humans, many of those 9,000 reach adulthood. So, for a relatively short time, the population expands enormously. This sort of rebound would be fairly typical for many reptiles and insects, I would think. Student7 (talk) 00:11, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I see ... I had assumed that taking hatchlings or eggs would be illegal ... and only adult animals could be hunted. Aardfilm (talk) 13:43, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't know about restrictions now on eggs, but alligators were considered more of a nuisance up until the time that they started being "protected" by the US government in 1967. Kind of like spiders. Not exactly cuddly creatures!  :) I think that hunting them is much more controlled now. But the point was, reptiles can reproduce rapidly. In the case of sea turtles, there are "other" problems, but initial reproduction is quite high. Student7 (talk) 19:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)


Let's go through this one more time (citation needed: apparent non sequitur)[edit]

The article says - without a citation to check:

Predation by adults on young can account for a mortality rate of up to 50% in the first year. In the past, immediately following the outlawing of alligator hunting, populations rebounded quickly due to the suppressed number of adults preying upon juveniles, increasing survival among the young alligators.

Aardfilm asked:

How is it possible for the survival rate of young alligators to improve if MORE adults exist to eat them ?

And Student7 answered with a somewhat plausible response, while citing no authority and while acknowledging Aardfilm's hypothesis that with hunting outlawed, "MORE adults exist to eat them," that outlawed hunting eliminates the eggs and hatchlings taken by human hunters. The most obvious problem with this plausible explanation is that the article said that following the hunting restriction, "populations rebounded quickly due to the suppressed number of adults preying upon juveniles." Those are alligator adults, right? So riddle me this: How does it work that not hunting alligators — embryonic, juvenile and adult — somehow manages to suppress rather than increase the number of adults preying upon juveniles? The quoted passage is a complete non sequitur, the conclusion not following from the premise. What would redeem it's logic? It would make sense if it were to say:

Predation by adults on young can account for a mortality rate of up to 50% in the first year. In the past, immediately following the legalization of alligator hunting, populations rebounded quickly due to the suppressed number of adults preying upon juveniles, increasing survival among the young alligators.

The "immediately following" qualification would rule out long-term heavy hunting of alligators which presumably would reduce all alligator numbers, including juveniles. Perhaps my version would be correct or Student7's understanding is correct, or neither, but in any case the passage as it stands is highly dubious and requires a cited reference in order to remain as is. Marked as such. —Blanchette (talk) 22:04, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I found some sources for the cannibalism rates, but they're inferred by toe-tags retained in larger gator stomachs. The older study found a rate of 50% by assuming the tags were retained about 1 year, but the newer one suggests a longer retention and thus a lower rate. I cited both.
As for population recovery, that needs more expert attention. Most sources agree that cannibalism is density-dependent, and several suggest it could function as a way to stabilize population size distribution in favor of larger, reproductively active adults. There's a simulation paper from the 70's which seems to show that the overall strategy allows them to bounce back more by having lots of babies "waiting in the wings" that can either grow up or get eaten, but someone with more expertise in this field needs to evaluate that. I suspect there are some complex dynamics relating the hunting removing adults who are cannibalistic but are also the source of new eggs. HCA (talk) 22:46, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

See you later[edit]

I cant help but feel as though the expression "see you later, alligator" should be included on this wiki article it's significance culturally is undeniable and has had an impact on the linguist patterns of the majority of humans. period. Please include a funfacts section with this and others. it would provide many opportunities for advanced learning and encourage learning this is our hope. please.


Rather than "fun facts", an "In popular culture" section would be more appropriate. Many Wiki articles have such a section. Pciszek (talk) 01:36, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alligator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:19, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alligator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)