Oecologia

, Volume 78, Issue 3, pp 317–321

Flexibility of digestive responses in two generalist herbivores, the tortoises Geochelone carbonaria and Geochelone denticulata

  • Karen A. Bjorndal
Original Papers

Summary

To test the prediction that digestive responses digestibility, intake and passage time-of generalist herbivores vary with different diets, feeding trials were conducted in Venezuela with two sympatric tortoise species, Geochelone carbonaria and G. denticulata. Three single-species diets (two fruit, one foliage) were fed to both species. For a given diet, digestibility, mass-specific intake and passage time did not differ between the two tortoise species, nor did they vary by sex or body mass within each species. However, the digestive parameters varied for tortoises feeding on the different diets. The responses ranged from nearly abandoning cell wall fermentation and depending entirely on extraction of cell contents to relying heavily on cell wall fermentation. Therefore, these generalist herbivores have flexible digestive responses that are influenced by diet, not fixed digestive responses that limit the diet, as previously observed in other generalist herbivores. A three-part classification of herbivores (specialist, specialized mixed feeder and opportunistic mixed feeder) is suggested as an approach to understanding flexible and inflexible digestive strategies in herbivores.

Key words

Digestion Frugivory Herbivory Nutrition Tortoise 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bell RHV (1971) A grazing ecosystem in the Serengeti. Sci Amer 225:86–93Google Scholar
  2. Bjorndal KA (1979) Cellulose digestion and volatile fatty acid production in the green turtle, Chelonia mydas. Comp Biochem Physiol 63A:127–133Google Scholar
  3. Bjorndal KA (1982) The consequences of herbivory for the life history pattern of the Caribbean green turtle. In: Bjorndal KA (ed) Biology and conservation of sea turtles, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C., pp 111–116Google Scholar
  4. Bjorndal KA (1985) Nutritional ecology of sea turtles. Copeia 1985:736–751Google Scholar
  5. Bjorndal KA (1987) Digestive efficiency in a temperate herbivorous reptile Gopherus polyphemus. Copeia 1987:714–720Google Scholar
  6. Demment MW, Van Soest PJ (1985) A nutritional explanation for body-size pattern of ruminant and nonruminant herbivores. Am Nat 125:641–672Google Scholar
  7. Gallaher RN, Weldon CO, Futral JG (1975) An aluminum block digester for plant and soil analysis. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 39:803–806Google Scholar
  8. Goering HK, Van Soest PJ (1970) Forage fiber analyses (apparatus, reagents, procedures and some applications). Agriculture Handbook No. 379. USDA, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  9. Golding EJ, Carter MF, Moore JE (1985) Modification of the neutral detergent fiber procedure for hays. J Dairy Sci 68:2732–2736Google Scholar
  10. Guard CL (1980) The reptilian digestive system: general characteristics. In: Schmidt-Nielsen K, Bolis L, Taylor CR, Bentley PJ, Stevens CE (eds) Comparative physiology: primitive mammals. Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, pp 43–51Google Scholar
  11. Hambleton LG (1977) Semiautomated method for simultaneous determination of phosphorus, calcium and crude protein in animal feeds. J Ass Off Agric Chem 60:845–852Google Scholar
  12. Hukuhara T, Naitoh T, Kameyama H (1975) Observations on the gastrointestinal movements of the tortoise (Geoclemys reevesii) by means of the abdominal window technique. Jap J Smooth Musc Res 11:39–46Google Scholar
  13. Janis C (1976) The evolutionary strategy of the equidae and the origins of rumen and cecal digestion. Evolution 30:757–774Google Scholar
  14. Milton K (1981) Food choice and digestive strategies of two sympatric primate species. Am Nat 117:496–505Google Scholar
  15. Moskovits DK (1985) The behavior and ecology of the two Amazonian tortoises, Geochelone carbonaria and Geochelone denticulata, in northwestern Brazil. PhD Dissertation. Univ Chicago, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  16. Parr Instrument Co (1960) Oxygen bomb calorimetry and combustion methods. Tech Man Parr Instr Co 130:1–56Google Scholar
  17. Robbins CT (1983) Wildlife feeding and nutrition. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Robertson JB, Van Soest PJ (1977) Dietary fiber estimation in concentrate feedstuffs. J Anim Sci 45 (Suppl 1):254Google Scholar
  19. Schneider BH, Flatt WP (1975) The evaluation of feeds through digestibility experiments. Univ Georgia Press, AthensGoogle Scholar
  20. Seigel S (1956) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. McGraw-Hill Book Co, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Van Soest PJ (1982) Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. O & B Books, CorvallisGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karen A. Bjorndal
    • 1
  1. 1.Archie Carr Center for Sea Turtle Research, Department of ZoologyUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations