European Journal of Wildlife Research

, Volume 57, Issue 3, pp 627–637 | Cite as

Prey preference of large carnivores in Anamalai Tiger Reserve, India

  • Arumugam Kumaraguru
  • R. Saravanamuthu
  • K. Brinda
  • S. Asokan
Original Paper

Abstract

Prey preferences of large carnivores (tiger (Panthera tigris), leopard (Panthera pardus) and dhole (Cuon alpinus)) in the tropical forest of Anamalai Tiger Reserve (ATR) were evaluated. This was the first study in ATR to estimate the density of prey and the food habits of these large carnivores. The 958-km2 intensive study area was found to have a high mammalian prey density (72.1 animals per square kilometre) with wild boar (20.61 animals per square kilometre) and chital (20.54 animals per square kilometre) being the most common species, followed by nilgiri tahr (13.6 animals per square kilometre). When the density figures were multiplied by the average weight of each prey species, a high biomass density of 14,204 kg km−2 was obtained for the intensive study area. Scat analysis and incidental kill observation were used to determine the dietary composition of these predators. During the study from the period of March 2001 to April 2004, 1,145 tiger scats, 595 leopard scats and 2,074 dhole scats were collected and analysed. Kill data were based on direct observation of 66 tiger kills and 39 leopard kills. Sambar, with a density of 6.54 kg km−2 was the preferred prey for these carnivores. Sambar constitutes 35% of the overall diet of tiger, whereas it constitutes 17% and 25% in leopard and dhole diets, respectively. Chital was utilized less than sambar in the range of about 7%, 11% and 15% by tiger, leopard and dhole, respectively. Predator diet was estimated more accurately by scat analysis, which reveals 30% of smaller prey species in leopard’s diet, which was not observed by kill data. This study reveals that ATR harbours high prey density, and these large carnivores seem mostly dependent on the wild prey rather than on domestic livestock as in some other areas in the subcontinent. These factors make ATR a potential area for long-term conservation of these endangered carnivores.

Keywords

Prey preference Food habits Tiger Leopard Dhole Anamalai Tiger Reserve (ATR) 

References

  1. Ackerman BB, Lindzey FG, Hemker TP (1984) Cougar food habits in Southern Utah. J Wildl Manage 48:147–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amerasinghe FP (1983) The structure and identification of the hair of the mammals of Sri Lanka. Ceylon J Sci Biol Sci 16:76–125Google Scholar
  3. Bekoff M, Daniels TJ, Gittleman JL (1984) Life history patterns and the comparative social ecology of carnivores. Ann Rev Ecolog Syst 15:191–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berger J, Stacey-Peter B, Bellis L, Johnson MP (2001) A mammalian predator–prey imbalance: grizzly bear and wolf extinction affect avian neotropical migrants. Ecol Appl 11:947–960Google Scholar
  5. Biswas S, Sankar K (2002) Prey abundance and food habit of tigers (Panthera tigris tigris) in Pench National Park, Madhya Pradesh, India. J Zool 256:411–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buckland ST, Anderson DR, Burnham KP, Laake JL (1993) Distance sampling: estimating abundance of biological populations. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Burnham KP, Anderson DR, Laake JL (1980) Estimation of density from line transect sampling of biological populations. Wildl Monogr 72:1–202Google Scholar
  8. Caro TM, Stoner CJ (2003) The potential for interspecific competition among African carnivores. Biol Conserv 110:67–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clutton-Brock TH, Harvey PH (1983) The functional significance of variation in body size among mammals. In: Eisenberg JF, Kleiman DG (eds) Advances in the study of mammalian behaviour. Allen, Lawrence, pp 632–663Google Scholar
  10. Dinerstein E (1980) An ecological survey of the Royal Karnali-Bardia Wildlife Reserve, Nepal. Part III: ungulate populations. Biol Conserv 18:5–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eberhardt LL (1968) A preliminary appraisal of line transect. J Wildl Manage 32:82–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eisenberg JF, Lockhart M (1972) An ecological reconnaissance of Wilpattu National Park, Ceylon. Smithsonian contribution to Zoology 101:1–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eisenberg JF, Seidensticker J (1976) Ungulates in Southern Asia: a consideration of biomass estimates for selected habitats. Biol Conserv 10:293–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eisenberg JF (1980) The density and biomass of tropical mammals. In Conservation Biology, an Evolutionary-Ecological Perspective (eds M. E. Soule and B. A. Wilcox). Sinauer Press, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  15. Eloff FC (1984) Food ecology of the Kalahari lion (Panthera leo). Koedoe 27:249–258Google Scholar
  16. Eltringham SK (1979) The ecology and conservation of large African mammals. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  17. Estes JA, Tinker MT, Williams TM, Doak DE (1998) Killer whale predation on sea otters linking oceanic and near shore ecosystems. Science 282:473–476PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Floyd TJ, Mech LD, Jordan PJ (1978) Relating wolf scat contents to prey consumed. J Wildl Manage 42:528–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Griffiths D (1975) Prey availability and the food of predators. Ecology 56:1209–1214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hersteinsson P, Macdonald DW (1996) Diet of Arctic foxes (Alopex lagopus) in Iceland. J Zool Lond 240:457–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hayward MW, Kerley GIH (2008) Prey preferences and the conservation status of Africa's large predators. S Afr J Wildl Res 38:93–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hayward MW, Henschel P, Brien J, Hofmeyr M, Balme G, Kerley GIH (2006) Prey preferences of the leopard (Panthera pardus). J Zool Lond 270:298–313Google Scholar
  23. Hayward MW, Brien J, Kerley GIH (2007) Carrying capacity of large African predators: predictions and tests. Biol Conserv 139:219–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jedrzejewska B, Jedrzejewski W (2005) Large carnivores and ungulates in European temperate forest ecosystems: bottom-up and top-down control. In: Ray JC, Redford KH, Steneck RS, Berger J (eds) Large carnivores and the conservation of biodiversity. Island, Washington, pp 230–246Google Scholar
  25. Johnsingh AJT (1983) Large mammalian prey–predators in Bandipur. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc 80:1–57Google Scholar
  26. Karanth KU (1993) Predator–prey relationships among large mammals of Nagarhole National Park. Mangalore University, Bangalore, India. Ph.D. dissertationGoogle Scholar
  27. Karanth KU, Nichols JD (1998) Estimation of tiger densities in India using photographic captures and recaptures. Ecology 79:2852–2862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Karanth KU, Sunquist ME (1992) Population structure, density and biomass of large herbivores in the tropical forests of Nagarhole, India. J Trop Ecol 8:21–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Karanth KU, Sunquist ME (1995) Prey selection by tiger, leopard and dhole in tropical forests. J Anim Ecol 64:439–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Karanth KU, Sunquist ME (2000) Behavioural correlates of predation by tiger (Panthera tigris), leopard (Panthera pardus) and dhole (Cuon alpinus) in Nagarhole, India. J Zool Lond 250:255–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Karanth KU, Nicholas JD, Kumar NS, Link WA, Hines JE (2004) Tigers and their prey: predicting carnivore densities from prey abundance. Proc Natl Acad Sci 101:4854–4858PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Khan JA, Chellam R, Rodgers WA, Johnsingh AJT (1996) Ungulate densities and biomass in the tropical dry deciduous forests of Gir, Gujarat, India. J Trop Ecol 12:149–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Khorozyan I, Malkhasyan A (2002) Ecology of the leopard (Panthera pardus) in Khosrov Reserve, Armenia: implications for conservation. Societa Zoologica ‘La Torbiera’, Italy, scientific report no. 6Google Scholar
  34. Kitsos AJ, Hunter MJ, Sabnis JH, Mehta A (1995) A guide to the identification of some Indian mammal hairs. In: Berwick SH, Saharia VB (eds) The development of international principles and practices of wildlife research and management, Asian and American approaches. Oxford University Press, New Delhi, pp 125–130Google Scholar
  35. Kopikar BR, Sabins JH (1976) Identification of hairs of some Indian mammals. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc 73:5–20Google Scholar
  36. Korschgen LJ (1971) Procedures for food-habits analysis. In: Giles RH (ed) Wildlife management technique. Wildlife Society, London, pp 233–258Google Scholar
  37. Krebs JR, Davies NB (1979) Behavioral ecology and evolutionary approach. Sinauer, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  38. Kruuk H (1972) The spotted hyena: a study of predation and social behavior. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  39. Kumaraguru A (2002) The influence of prey species diversity and densities in different vegetation types on the foraging ecology and community structure of large carnivores in Indira Gandhi Wildlife Sanctuary and National Park, South India. Report submitted to Tamil Nadu Forest Department, Tamil Nadu, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  40. McDougal C (1977) The face of the tiger. Rivington Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  41. Mills MGL (1984) Prey selection and feeding habits of the large carnivores in the Southern Kalah. Koedoe 27:281–294Google Scholar
  42. Miquelle DG, Smirnov EN, Quigley HB, Hornocker MG, Nikolaev IG, Matyukshin EN (1996) Food habits of Amur tigers in Sikhote-Alin Zapovednik and the Russian Far East and implications for conservation. J Wildl Res 1:138–147Google Scholar
  43. Prins HHT, Reitsma JM (1989) Mammalian biomass in an African equatorial rain forest. J Anim Ecol 58:851–861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rabinowitz A, Nottingham BG (1986) Ecology and behaviour of the jaguar (Panthera onca) in Belize, Central America. J Zool 210:149–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ramakrishnan U, Coss RG, Pelkey NW (1999) Tiger decline caused by the reduction of large ungulate prey: evidence from a study of leopard diets in Southern India. Biol Conserv 89:113–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ranawana KB, Bambaradeniya CNB, Bogahawatte TD, Amerasinghe FP (1998) A preliminary survey of the food habits of the Sri Lanka leopard (Panthera pardus fusca) in three montane wet zone forests of Sri Lanka. Ceylon J Sci Biol Sci 25:65–71Google Scholar
  47. Schaller GB (1967) The deer and the tiger. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  48. Schaller GB (1972) The Serengeti lion: a study of predator–prey relations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, p 504Google Scholar
  49. Seidensticker J (1976) On the ecological separation between tigers and leopards. Biotropica 8(4):225–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sinclair ARE, Olsen PD, Redhead TD (1990) Can predators regulate small mammal populations? Evidence from house mouse outbreaks in Australia. Oikos 59:382–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sovada MA, Sargeant AB, Grier JW (1995) Differential effects of coyotes and red foxes on duck nest success. J Wildl Manage 59:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stander PE, II Ghau, Tsisaba D, II OMA, VI (1997) Tracking and the interpretation of spoor: a scientifically sound method in ecology. J Zool 242:329–341Google Scholar
  53. Stelfox JB (1986) Effects of livestock enclosures (bomas) on the vegetation of the Athi Plains, Kenya. Afr J Ecol 24:41–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Stephens DW, Krebs JR (1987) Foraging theory. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  55. Sunquist ME (1981) The social organization of tigers (Panthera tigris) in Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal. Smithsonian contributions to zoology no. 336. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, p 98Google Scholar
  56. Sunquist ME, Sunquist FC (1989) Ecological constraints on predation by large felids. In: Gittleman JL (ed) Carnivore behaviour, ecology and evolution. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, pp 283–301Google Scholar
  57. Swaminathan S, Desai AA, Daniel JC (2002) Large carnivores in Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary and National Park. Report submitted to Bombay Natural History Society, Bombay, 80Google Scholar
  58. Tamang KM (1982) The status of tiger and its impact on principal prey populations in the Royal Chitawan National Park, Nepal. Ph.D Thesis, Michigan State University, East LansingGoogle Scholar
  59. Taylor RJ (1976) Value of clumping to prey and the evolutionary response of ambush predators. Am Nat 110:13–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Temple SA (1987) Do predators always capture sub standard individuals disproportionately from prey populations? Ecology 68:669–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Terborgh J (1986) Keystone plant resources in the tropical forest. Sinauer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  62. Terborgh J, Lopez L, Nunez P, Rao M, Shahabudin G, Orihuela G, Riveros M, Ascanio R, Adler GH, Lambert TD, Balbas L (2002) Ecological meltdown in predator-free forest fragments. Science 294:1923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Varman KS, Sukumar R (1995) The line transect method for estimating densities of large mammals in a tropical deciduous forest: an evaluation of models and field experiment. J Biosci 20:273–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Venkataraman AB, Arumugam R, Sukumar R (1995) The foraging ecology of dhole (Cuon alpinus) in Mudumalai Sanctuary, southern India. J Zool 237:543–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Werner EE, Hall D (1974) Optimal foraging and the size selection of prey by the bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus). Ecology 55:1042–1052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wilson RP, Putz K, Gremillet D, Culik BM, Kierspel M, Regel J, Charles AB, Lage J, Cooper J (1995) Reliability of stomach temperature changes in determining feeding characteristics of seabirds. J Exp Biol 198:1115–1135PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arumugam Kumaraguru
    • 1
    • 3
  • R. Saravanamuthu
    • 1
  • K. Brinda
    • 2
  • S. Asokan
    • 1
  1. 1.PG Research and Development of Wildlife Biology, Division of ZoologyAVC CollegeMayiladuthuraiIndia
  2. 2.Project Trainee, National Facility for Marine CyanobacteriaBharathidasan UniversityTiruchirappalliIndia
  3. 3.Centre for Cellular and Molecular BiologyHyderabadIndia

Personalised recommendations