Cover, food, competitors and individual densities within bushbuck Tragelaphus scriptus female clan home ranges

• Autorzy: Wronski T. , Tiedemann R. , Apio A. , Plath M.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

We examined factors predicting female densities within the common home ranges of related females (“clans”) in bushbuckTragelaphus scriptus Pallas, 1776. In this species, each female forms an individual home range, but the home ranges of matrilineal clan members strongly overlap. We found female densities to increase in areas with high canopy cover. Moreover, individual home range sizes tended to decrease with increasing cover. Food plant availability and intruder pressure by two heterospecific competitors did not significantly affect female densities. Apparently, canopy cover is the major limited resource in this species. A possible explanation is that both adult bushbuck and — even more markedly — fawns hide from predators in dense vegetation, in particular in thicket clumps and coalescences. The study shows an effect of habitat properties (eg sufficient canopy cover) on a within-population level in bushbuck, where female densities differ even among proximate clan areas.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Theriologica
• Rocznik: 2006
• Tom: 51
• Numer: 3
• Opis fizyczny: p.319-326,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Wronski T.

• Universitat Hamburg, Martin-Luther-King Platz 3, 20146 Hamburg, Germany

autor

Tiedemann R.

autor

Apio A.

autor

Plath M.

Bibliografia

• Adams E. S. 2001. Approaches to the study of territory size and shape. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 32: 277–303.
• Allsopp R. 1978. Social biology of bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus Pallas, 1776) in the Nairobi National Park, Kenya. East African Wildlife Journal 16: 153–165.
• Apio A. 2003. Foraging behaviour and gastro-intestinal tract parasitic infections of bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus) in Queen Elizabeth N. P. MSc thesis, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, Mbarara: 1–126.
• Apio A. and Wronski T. 2005. Foraging behaviour and diet composition of bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus) in Queen Elizabeth National Park, Uganda. African Journal of Ecology 43: 1–8.
• Brown J. L. 1969. Territorial behaviour and population regulation in birds: A review and re-evaluation. Wilson Bulletin 81: 293–329.
• Brown J. L. and Orians G. H. 1970. Spacing patterns in mobile animals. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 1: 239–262.
• Burt W. H. 1943. Territory and home range concepts as applied to mammals. Journal of Mammalogy 24: 346–352.
• Cerling T. E. and Viehl K. 2004. Seasonal diet changes of the forest hog (Hylochoerus meinertzhageni Thomas) based on the carbon isotopic composition of hair. African Journal of Ecology 42(2): 88–92.
• Civantos E. 2000. Home-range ecology, aggressive behaviour, and survival in juvenile lizards,Psammodromus algirus. Canadian Journal of Zoology 78: 1681–1685.
• Clarke R. 1986. The handbook of ecological monitoring. Oxford Science Publications, Oxford: 1–298.
• Cole L. C. 1949. The measurement of interspecific association. Ecology 30: 411–424.
• Dunham K. M. 1994. The effect of drought on the larger mammal population of Zambesi riverine woodlands. Journal of Zoology, London 234: 489–526.
• Dunk J. R. and Cooper R. 1994. Territory size-regulation in black-shouldered kites. The Auk 111: 588–595.
• Ebersole S. P. 1980. Food density and territory size: An alternative model and test on the reef fishEupomacentrus leucostius. American Naturalist 115: 492–509.
• Eccard J. A. and Ylönen H. 2003. Who bears the costs of interspecific competition in an age structured population? Ecology 84: 3284–3293.
• Elchuk C. L. and Wiebe K. L. 2003. Home-range size of northern flickers (Colaptes auratus) in relation to habitat and parental attributes. Canadian Journal of Zoology 81: 954–961.
• Estes R. D. 1991. The behavior guide to African mammals. The University of California Press, Los Angeles: 1–611.
• Fabricius C. and Mentis M. T. 1992. Modelling the habitat relations of kudu in arid savanna. South African Journal of Science 88: 280–284.
• Field C. R. 1971. Elephant ecology in Queen Elizabeth N.P., Uganda. East African Wildlife Journal 9: 99–124.
• Fretwell S. D. and Lucas H. L. 1970. On territorial behaviour and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. I. Theoretical development. Acta Biotheoretica 19: 16–36.
• Ganey J. L., Block W. M., Ackers S. H. 2003. Structural characteristics of forest stands within home ranges of Mexican spotted owls in Arizona and New Mexico. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 18: 189–198.
• Giesen K. M. and Brown C. E. 1992. Winter home range and habitat characteristics of white-tailed ptarmigan in Colorado. Wilson Bulletin 104: 263–272.
• Haltenorth T. and Diller H. 1977. Säugetiere Afrikas und Madagaskars. BLV Verlags GmbH, München, Bern, Wien: 1–403.
• Hixon M. A. 1980. Food production and competitor density as the determinants of feeding territory size. American Naturalist 115: 510–530.
• Hooge P. N. 1998. Animal movement analysis ArcView extensions. USGS-BRD, Alaska Biological Science Center, Glacier Bay Field Station: 1–28.
• Hubbs A. H. and Boonstra R. 1998. Effects of food and predators on the home-range sizes of Arctic ground squirrel (Spermophilus parryii). Canadian Journal of Zoology 76: 592–596.
• Hudson P. J., Dobson A. P., Cattadori I. M., Newborn D., Haydon D. T., Shaw D. J., Benton T. G. and Grenfell B. T. 2002. Trophic interactions and population growth rates: describing patterns and identifying mechanisms Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 357: 1259–1271.
• Jacobsen N. H. G. 1971. Home range, behaviour and feeding patterns of bushbuck in the Lutope River Valley. Certificate in Field Ecology, University of Rhodesia, Salisbury: 1–58.
• Jacobsen N. H. G. 1974. Distribution, home range and behaviour patterns of bushbuck in the Lutope and Sengwa Valleys, Rhodesia. Journal of the Southern African Wildlife Association 4(2): 75–93.
• Jenkins S. H. and Busher P. E. 1979.Castor canadensis. Mammalian Species 120: 1–8.
• Kent M. and Cocker P. 1992. Vegetation description and analysis. J. Wiley & Sons, New York: 1–363.
• Kenward R. 2001. A Manual for Wildlife Radio Tagging. Academic Press, London: 1–287.
• Klingel H. and Klingel U. (in press). Das RiesenwaldschweinHylochoerus meinertzhageni. [In: Wilde Schweine und Flußpferde. A. A. Mcdonald and U. Gansloßer, eds]. Filander Verlag, Fürth.
• Lewis M. A. and Moorcroft P. 2001. ESS Analysis of Mechanistic Models for Territoriality: the Value of Scent Marks in Spatial Resource Partitioning. Journal of Theoretical Biology 210: 449–461.
• Lock J. M. 1977. The vegetation of the Rwenzori National Park, Uganda. Botanische Jahrbücher für Systematik 98: 372–148.
• Lock J. M. 1985. Recent changes in the vegetation of Queen Elizabeth National Park, Uganda. African Journal of Ecology 23: 63–65.
• Mech L. D. 1970. The wolf: Ecology and behavior of an endagered species. Natural History Press, Garden City, N.J.: 1–384.
• MacLeod S. B., Kerley G. I. H. and Gayland A. 1996. Habitat and diet of bushbuckTragelaphus scriptus in the woody Cape Nature Reserve: observations from faecal analysis. South African Journal of Wildlife Research 26: 19–25.
• Mäher C. R. and Lott D. F. 1995. Definitions of territoriality used in the study of variation in vertebrate spacing systems. Animal Behaviour 49: 1581–1597.
• Maynard Smith J. 1976. Evolution and the theory of games. American Scientist 64: 41–45.
• Mech L. D. 1970. The wolf: Ecology and behavior of an endagered species. Natural History Press, Garden City, N.J.
• Moorcroft P. R., Lewis M. A. and Crabtree R. L. 1999. Home range analysis using a mechanistic home range model. Ecology 80: 1656–1665.
• Morris N. E. 1973. A preliminary investigation of the bushbuck population in the Matsikiti area and its relevance to Tsetse Control Hunting. MSc thesis, University of Rhodesia, Salisbury: 1–109.
• Morse D. H. 1976. Variables determining the density and territory size of breeding spruce-woods warblers. Ecology 57:290–301.
• Norton M. E., Arcese P. and Ewald P. W. 1982. Effect of intrusion pressure on territory size in black-chinned hummingbirds (Archilochus alexandri). The Auk 99: 761–764.
• Norton-Griffiths M. 1978. Counting animals. Serengeti Ecological Monitoring Program, African Wildlife Foundation, Nairobi, Kenya: 1–140.
• Okiria R. 1977. The behaviour and ecology of the bushbuckTragelaphus scriptus Pallas in Rwenzori National Park. MSc thesis, Makerere University, Kampala: 1–113.
• Owen-Smith R. N. 1976. The problem of territoriality, with reference to the tragelaphine antelopes. Publikasies van dil Universiteit van Pretoria 97: 80–83.
• Pejchar L., Holl K. D. and Lockwood J. L. 2005. Hawaiian honeycreeper home range size varies with habitat implications for naitiveAcacia koa forestry. Ecological Applications 15: 1053–1061.
• Plumptre A. J. 1991. Plant herbivore dynamics in the Virungas. PhD thesis, University of Bristol, Bristol: 1–240.
• Powell R. A. 1989. Effects of resource productivity, patchiness and predictability on mating and dispersal strategies. [In: Comparative socioecology of mammals and humans. V. Standen and R. A. Foley, eds]. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford, U.K.: 101–123.
• Powell R. A. 2000. Animal home ranges and territories and home range estimators. [In: Research techniques in animal ecology, controversies and consequences. L. Boitani and T. K. Fuller, eds]. Columbia University Press, New York: 65–111.
• Powell R. A. and Fried J. J. 1992. Helping by juvenile pine voles (Microtus pinetorum) growth and survival of younger siblings, and the evolution of pine vole sociality. Behavioral Ecology 4: 325–333.
• Powell R. A. and Mitchell M. S. 1998. Topographical constraints on home range quality. Ecography 21: 337–341.
• Powers D. R. and McKee T. 1994. The effect of food availability on time and energy expenditure of territorial and non-territorial hummingbirds. Condor 96: 1064–1075.
• Rood J. P. 1986. Ecology and social evolution in the mongooses. [In: Ecological aspects of social evolution. D. I. Rubenstein and R. W. Wrangham, eds]. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.: 131–152.
• Schoener T. W. 1983. Simple models of optimal feeding territory size: a reconciliation. American Naturalist 121: 608–629.
• Shiraki S., Nashimoto M., Yatake H., Shimano K. and Matsuki R. 2001. Study on the ecosystem sustaining a pair of Golden Eagles. Food resource use on Golden Eagles. CRIEPI Rep. U01021: 1–24.
• Simpson C. D. 1974a. Habitat reference and seasonal movement in the Chobe bushbuck,Tragelaphus scriptus ornatus Pocock, 1900. Arnoldia 31(6): 1–7.
• Simpson C. D. 1974b. Ecology of the Zambesi valley bushbuckTragelaphus scriptus ornatus Pocock. PhD thesis, Texas A&M University, Galveston: 1–265.
• Sinclair A. R. E. and Grimsdell J. J. R. 1982. Population dynamics of large mammals. African Wildlife Foundation, Handbook No. 5, Nairobi, Kenya: 1–54.
• Smits C. M. M. 1986. Diet composition and habitat use of the West African bushbuckTragelaphus scriptus scriptus (Pallas, 1776) during the first half of the dry season. South African Journal of Zoology 21(1): 89–94.
• Sodhi N. S. 1993. Correlations of hunting range size in breeding merlins. Condor 95: 316–321.
• Spinage C. A. 1982. A territorial antelope: the Uganda waterbuck. Academic Press, New York: 1–334.
• Steubing L. and Fangmeier A. 1992. Pflanzenökologisches Praktikum. Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, Germany: 1–205.
• Taylor K. L., Spinage C. A. and Lyman C. P. 1969. Water relations of waterbuck, an East African antelope. American Journal of Physiology 217: 630–634.
• Thomson G. R. 1972. The distribution and habitat preference of bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus ornatus) within the Victoria falls National Park. Certificate in Field Ecology, University of Rhodesia, Salisbury: 1–70.
• Tsuji Y. and Takatsuki S. 2004. Food habits and home range use of Japanese macaques on an island inhabited by deer. Ecological Research 19: 381–388.
• Vlasman K. L. and Fryxell M. 2002. Seasonal changes in territory use by red squirrels,Tamiasciurus hudsonicus, and responses to food augmentation. Canadian Journal of Zoology 80: 1957–1965.
• Walters J. R., Doerr P. D. and Carter J. H. 1988. The cooperative breeding system of the red cockaded woodpecker. Ethology 78: 275–305.
• Walther F. R. 1964. Verhaltensstudien an der GattungTragelaphus de Blainville (1816) in Gefangenschaft, unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Sozialverhaltens. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 21: 393–476.
• Waser P. M. 1975a. Spatial association and social interactions in a “solitary ungulate”: the bushbuckTragelaphus scriptus (Pallas). Zeitschrift für Tierpsychology 37: 24–36.
• Waser P. M. 1975b. Diurnal and nocturnal strategies of the bushbuckTragelaphus scriptus (Pallas). East African Wildlife Journal 13: 49–63.
• Wilson E. O. 1975. Sociobiology — the new synthesis. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA: 1–720.
• Woolfenden G. E. and Fitzpatrick J. W. 1984. The Florida Scrub Jay. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey: 1–185.
• Wronski T. 2004. The social and spatial organisation of bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus Pallas, 1766) in Queen Elizabeth National Park, Uganda. PhD thesis, University of Hamburg, Hamburg: 1–222.
• Wronski T. 2005. Home range overlap and spatial organisation as indicators for territoriality among male bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus). Journal of Zoology, London 266: 227–235.
• Wronski T. and Apio A. 2006. Home range overlap, social vicinity and agonistic interactions denoting matrilineal organisation in bushbuck,Tragelaphus scriptus. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology 59: 819–828.
• Wronski T., Apio A., Wanker R. and Plath M. 2006. Behavioural repertoire of the bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus): agonistic interactions, mating behaviour and parent-off-spring relations. Journal of Ethology, online first.
• Zandri E and Viskanic P. 1992. Vegetation survey and mapping in the Queen Elizabeth National Park, Kyambura Game Reserve and Kigezi Game Reserve. Uganda National Parks, technical assistance to the Uganda Institute of Ecology, Commission of European Communities, EDF project 6100.037.42.031: 1–54.