Simultaneous GPS tracking reveals male associations in a solitary carnivore

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Mia Lana Lührs ; Peter M. Kappeler
• 关键词：Social organization ; Carnivores ; Cryptoprocta ferox ; GPS telemetry ; Male sociality ; Dynamic interaction test
• 刊名：Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology
• 出版年：2013
• 出版时间：November 2013
• 年：2013
• 卷：67
• 期：11
• 页码：1731-1743
• 全文大小：298KB
• 参考文献：1. Altmann J (1990) Primate males go where the females are. Anim Behav 39:193-95 CrossRef
  2. Baker PJ, Funk SM, Harris S, White PCL (2000) Flexible spatial organization of urban foxes, / Vulpes vulpes, before and during an outbreak of sarcoptic mange. Anim Behav 59:127-46 CrossRef
  3. Bandeira de Melo LF, Lima Sábato MA, Vaz Magni EM, Young RJ, Coelho CM (2007) Secret lives of maned wolves ( / Chrysocyon brachyurus Illiger 1815): as revealed by GPS tracking collars. J Zool Lond 271:27-6 CrossRef
  4. Barlow ACD, Smith JLD, Ahmad IU, Hossain ANM, Rahman M, Howlader A (2011) Female tiger / Panthera tigris home range size in the Bangladesh Sundarbans: the value of this mangrove ecosystem for the species' conservation. Oryx 45:125-28 CrossRef
  5. Bekoff M, Daniels TJ, Gittleman JL (1984) Life history patterns and the comparative social ecology of carnivores. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 15:191-32 CrossRef
  6. Bertram BCR (1975) The social system of lions. Sci Am 232:54-5 CrossRef
  7. B?rger L, Franconi N, De Michele G, Gantz A, Meschi F, Manica A et al (2006) Effects of sampling regime on the mean and variance of home range size estimates. J Anim Ecol 75:1393-405 CrossRef
  8. Calenge C (2006) The package “adehabitat-for the R software: a tool for the analysis of space and habitat use by animals. Ecol Model 197:516-19 CrossRef
  9. Caro TM (1994) Cheetahs of the Serengeti plains: group living in an asocial species. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
  10. Caro TM, Collins DA (1986) Male cheetahs of the Serengeti. Natl Geogr Res 2:75-6
  11. Caro TM, Stoner CJ (2003) The potential for interspecific competition among African carnivores. Biol Conserv 110:67-5 CrossRef
  12. Carr GM, Macdonald DW (1986) The sociality of solitary foragers: a model based on resource dispersion. Anim Behav 34:1540-549 CrossRef
  13. Cavallini P (1996) Variation in the social system of the red fox. Ethol Ecol Evol 8:323-42 CrossRef
  14. Cavallini P, Nel JAJ (1990) Ranging behaviour of the Cape grey mongoose / Galerella pulverulenta in a coastal area. J Zool 222:353-62 CrossRef
  15. Clutton-Brock TH, Janson CH (2012) Primate socioecology at the crossroads: past, present, and future. Evol Anthropol 21:136-50 CrossRef
  16. Clutton-Brock TH, Parker GA (1992) Potential reproductive rates and the operation of sexual selection. Q Rev Biol 67:437-56 CrossRef
  17. Clutton-Brock TH, Guinness FE, Albon SD (1982) Red deer: behavior and ecology of two sexes. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
  18. Creel S, Creel NM (1995) Communal hunting and pack size in African wild dogs, / Lycaon pictus. Anim Behav 50:1325-339 CrossRef
  19. Creel S, Creel NM (1996) Limitation of African wild dogs by competition with larger carnivores. Conserv Biol 10:526-38 CrossRef
  20. Crook JH (1970) Social organization and the environment: aspects of contemporary social ethology. Anim Behav 18:197-09 CrossRef
  21. Crook JH, Gartlan JS (1966) Evolution of primate societies. Nature 210:1200-203 CrossRef
  22. da Silva J, Woodroffe R, Macdonald DW (1993) Habitat, food availability and group territoriality in the European badger, / Meles meles. Oecologia 95:558-64
  23. da Silva J, Macdonald DW, Evans PGH (1994) Net costs of group living in a solitary forager, the Eurasian badger ( / Meles meles). Behav Ecol 5:151-58 CrossRef
  24. Dalerum F (2005) Sociality in a solitary carnivore, the wolverine. Dissertation, Stockholm University
  25. Dalerum F, Creel S, Hall SB (2006) Behavioral and endocrine correlates of reproductive failure in social aggregations of captive wolverines ( / Gulo gulo). J Zool 269:527-36 CrossRef
  26. Dammhahn M, Kappeler PM (2009) Females go where the food is: does the socio-ecological model explain variation in social organisation of solitary foragers? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:939-52 CrossRef
  27. Davies NB, Hartley IR, Hatchwell BJ, Desrochers A, Skeer J, Nebel D (1995) The polygynandrous mating system of the alpine accentor, / Prunella collaris. I. Ecological causes and reproductive conflicts. Anim Behav 49:769-88
  28. De Solla SR, Bonduriansky R, Brooks RJ (1999) Eliminating autocorrelation reduces biological relevance of home range estimates. J Anim Ecol 68:221-34 CrossRef
  29. Development Core Team R (2011) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna
  30. Doncaster CP (1990) Non-parametric estimates of interaction from radio-tracking data. J Theor Biol 143:431-43 CrossRef
  31. Durant SM (1998) Competition refuges and coexistence: an example from Serengeti carnivores. J Anim Ecol 67:370-86 CrossRef
  32. Emlen ST, Oring LW (1977) Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science 197:215-23 CrossRef
  33. Feist JD, McCullough DR (1975) Reproduction in feral horses. J Reprod Fertil 23 (Suppl.):13-8
  34. Gannon WL, Sikes RS (2007) Guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists for the use of wild mammals in research. J Mammal 88:809-23 CrossRef
  35. Geffen E, Hefner R, Macdonald DW, Ucko M (1992) Habitat selection and home range in the Blanford's fox, / Vulpes cana: compatibility with the resource dispersion hypothesis. Oecologia 91:75-1
  36. Gehrt SD, Fritzell EK (1998) Resource distribution, female home range dispersion and male spatial interactions: group structure in a solitary carnivore. Anim Behav 55:1211-227 CrossRef
  37. Getz WM, Wilmers CC (2004) A local nearest-neighbor convex-hull construction of home ranges and utilization distributions. Ecography 27:489-05 CrossRef
  38. Gittleman JL (1984) The behavioural ecology of carnivores. PhD thesis, University of Sussex
  39. Gittleman JL, Harvey PH (1982) Carnivore home-range size, metabolic needs and ecology. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 10:57-3 CrossRef
  40. Gompper ME, Gittleman JL (1991) Home range scaling: intraspecific and comparative trends. Oecologia 87:343-48 CrossRef
  41. Hawkins CE (1998) The behaviour and ecology of the fossa, / Cryptoprocta ferox, (Carnivora: Viverridae) in a dry deciduous forest in western Madagascar. PhD thesis, University of Aberdeen.
  42. Hawkins CE, Racey PA (2005) Low population density of a tropical forest carnivore, / Cryptoprocta ferox: implications for protected area management. Oryx 39:35-3 CrossRef
  43. Hawkins CE, Racey PA (2008) Food habits of an endangered carnivore, / Cryptoprocta ferox, in the dry deciduous forests of western Madagascar. J Mammal 89:64-4 CrossRef
  44. Hawkins CE, Racey PA (2009) A novel mating system in a solitary carnivore: the fossa. J Zool 277:196-04 CrossRef
  45. Hawkins CE, Dallas JF, Fowler PA, Woodroffe R, Racey PA (2002) Transient masculinization in the fossa, / Cryptoprocta ferox (Carnivora, Viverridae). Biol Reprod 66:610-15 CrossRef
  46. Hays WST, Conant S (2003) Male social activity in the small Indian mongoose / Herpestes javanicus. Acta Theriol 48:485-94 CrossRef
  47. Herrera EA, Macdonald DW (1989) Resource utilization and territoriality in group-living capybaras ( / Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris). J Anim Ecol 58:667-79 CrossRef
  48. Hooge PN, Eichenlaub B (2000) Animal movement extension to Arcview. Ver. 2.0. Alaska Science Center - Biological Science Office, U.S. Geological Survey, Anchorage, AK, USA
  49. Jarman PJ (1974) The social organisation of antelope in relation to their ecology. Behaviour 48:215-67 CrossRef
  50. Jenness J (2004) Weighted mean of points (weightmean.avx). Extension for ArcView 3.x, v. 1.2c. Jenness Enterprises
  51. Johnson DDP, Macdonald DW, Newman C, Morecroft MD (2001) Group size versus territory size in group-living badgers: a large-sample field test of the resource dispersion hypothesis. Oikos 95:265-74 CrossRef
  52. Johnson DDP, Kays R, Blackwell PG, Macdonald DW (2002) Does the resource dispersion hypothesis explain group living? Trends Ecol Evol 17:563-70 CrossRef
  53. Kappeler PM, van Schaik CP (2002) Evolution of primate social systems. Int J Primatol 23:707-40 CrossRef
  54. Kleiman DG, Eisenberg JF (1973) Comparisons of canid and felid social systems from an evolutionary perspective. Anim Behav 21:637-59 CrossRef
  55. Klingel H (1975) Social organization and reproduction in equids. J Reprod Fertil 23(Suppl.):7-1
  56. Krause J, Ruxton GD (2002) Living in groups. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  57. Kruuk H (1972) The spotted hyena: a study of predation and social behavior. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
  58. Lindstr?m E (1986) Territory inheritance and the evolution of group-living in carnivores. Anim Behav 34:1825-835 CrossRef
  59. Lührs ML, Dammhahn M (2010) An unusual case of cooperative hunting in a solitary carnivore. J Ethol 28:379-83 CrossRef
  60. Lührs ML, Dammhahn M, Kappeler PM (2013) Strength in numbers: males in a carnivore grow bigger when they associate and hunt cooperatively. Behav Ecol 24:21-8 CrossRef
  61. Macdonald DW (1983) The ecology of carnivore social behaviour. Nature 301:379-84 CrossRef
  62. McNab BK (1963) Bioenergetics and the determination of home range size. Am Nat 97:133-40 CrossRef
  63. Mohr CO (1947) Table of equivalent populations of North American small mammals. Am Midl Nat 37:223-49 CrossRef
  64. Mundry R, Nunn CL (2009) Stepwise model fitting and statistical inference: turning noise into signal pollution. Am Nat 173:119-23 CrossRef
  65. Pusey AE, Packer C (1987) Dispersal and philopatry. In: Smuts BB, Cheney DL, Seyfarth RM, Wrangham RW, Struhsaker TT (eds) Primate societies. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 250-66
  66. Rasoloarison RM, Rasolonandrasana BPN, Ganzhorn JU, Goodman SM (1995) Predation on vertebrates in the Kirindy Forest, western Madagascar. Ecotropica 1:59-5
  67. Rathbun GB, Cowley TE (2008) Behavioural ecology of the black mongoose ( / Galerella nigrata) in Namibia. Mammal Biol 73:444-50
  68. Rood JP, Waser PW (1978) The slender mongoose ( / Herpestes sanguineus) in the Serengeti. Carnivore 1:54-8
  69. Sandell M (1989) The mating tactics and spacing patterns of solitary carnivores. In: Gittleman JL (ed) Carnivore behavior, ecology and evolution. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, pp 164-82 CrossRef
  70. Schaller GB (1972) The Serengeti lion: a study of predator–prey relations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
  71. Schülke O (2003) To breed or not to breed—food competition and other factors involved in female breeding decisions in the pair-living nocturnal fork-marked lemur ( / Phaner furcifer). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 55:11-1 CrossRef
  72. Shapiro SS, Wilk MB (1965) An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 52:591-11
  73. Soisalo MK, Cavalcanti SMC (2006) Estimating the density of a jaguar population in the Brazilian Pantanal using camera-traps and capture-recapture sampling in combination with GPS radio-telemetry. Biol Conserv 129:487-96 CrossRef
  74. Sorg JP, Rohner U (1996) Climate and tree phenology of the dry deciduous forest of the Kirindy Forest. In: Ganzhorn JU, Sorg JP (eds) Ecology and economy of a tropical dry forest in Madagascar. Primate Report 46:57-0
  75. Swihart RK, Slade NA (1985) Testing for independence of observations in animal movements. Ecology 66:1176-184 CrossRef
  76. Terborgh J, Janson CH (1986) The socioecology of primate groups. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 17:111-35 CrossRef
  77. van Schaik CP, Kappeler PM (1996) The social systems of gregarious lemurs: lack of convergence with anthropoids due to evolutionary disequilibrium? Ethology 102:915-41
  78. Wagner AP, Frank LG, Creel S (2008) Spatial grouping in behaviourally solitary striped hyaenas, / Hyaena hyaena. Anim Behav 75:1131-142 CrossRef
  79. Waser PM, Keane B, Creel SR, Elliott LF, Minchella DJ (1994) Possible male coalitions in a solitary mongoose. Anim Behav 47:289-94 CrossRef
  80. Williams GC (1966) Adaptation and natural selection. University Press, Princeton
  81. Woodroffe R, Macdonald DW (1993) Badger sociality—models of spatial grouping. Symp Zool Soc Lond 65:145-69
  82. Worton BJ (1989) Kernel methods for estimating the utilization distribution in home-range studies. Ecology 70:164-68 CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Mia Lana Lührs (1)
  Peter M. Kappeler (1) (2)
  
  1. Department of Sociobiology/Anthropology, Johann-Friedrich-Blumenbach-Institute of Zoology and Anthropology, Georg-August-University, Kellnerweg 6, 37077, G?ttingen, Germany
  2. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Unit, German Primate Center, Leibniz Institute for Primate Research, Kellnerweg 4, 37077, G?ttingen, Germany
  
• ISSN：1432-0762

文摘

In hypercarnivorous species, females have large spatial requirements to meet their nutritional needs, and food competition among females is intense. As a result, females are typically solitary and territorial, and solitary males compete for access to dispersed females. Yet, largely anecdotal reports indicate that facultative male sociality may be more common in solitary carnivores than previously thought. We studied spatial interactions among fossas (Cryptoprocta ferox), Madagascar's largest carnivore, using simultaneous GPS tracking of 13 adult individuals to determine patterns of sex-specific spatial distribution and sociality. Male home ranges were larger than those of females, male home ranges overlapped more with those of other males than those of females with other females. Whereas some males were solitary, a subset of adult males was found to have very high home range overlap, high rates of co-location within <50?m, low minimum inter-individual distances, and significantly positive “dynamic interaction- These associated dyads sometimes, but not always, were close relatives. The fact that solitary and associated males coexist in this population raises interesting questions concerning constraints and flexibility of social tolerance. This study yielded preliminary indications that female distribution appears to be primarily structured by resource competition, whereas male sociality seems to depend on demographic chance events, yet unknown proximate determinants of social tolerance, and it is associated with somatic and reproductive advantages. Male associations among carnivores are therefore more widespread and appear to be based on a wider range of factors than previously thought.