Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Understorey structure and refuges from predators influence habitat use by a small ungulate, the Indian chevrotain (Moschiola indica) in Western Ghats, India

  • 242 Accesses

  • 2 Citations

Abstract

The availability of refuges from predators and high quality food are thought to determine habitat use in small ungulates. We tested this hypothesis on habitat use by the Indian chevrotain in a tropical rainforest in the Western Ghats, using pellet-groups to infer habitat use. Between December 2009 and April 2010, we sampled 204 grids of 50 m × 50 m with four spatial replicates in each, using occupancy framework. We quantified refuges such as fallen logs and boulders, understorey complexity, and noted the presence of fruiting trees in the grid. Detection probability, p, of pellet-groups was estimated at 0.61. The naive estimate of occupancy was 0.52, which increased to 0.73 when p was accounted for. Out of eight candidate models compared using AICC, the one with the number of refuges and understorey complexity was the best model. Both covariates had non-zero positive slopes. Fruiting trees occurred very infrequently and did not influence habitat use, perhaps because the chevrotain fed more on buds, shoots and young leaves during the dry period covered by this study. The strong influence of understorey complexity on habitat use was perhaps also due to the abundance of these food items. These results highlight the need to control human use that adversely impacts the availability of refuges and understorey complexity such as removal of fallen logs and rattans. This study also demonstrates the application of the occupancy approach in the study of small and elusive ungulates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Baillie JEM, Hilton-Taylor C, Stuart S (2004) 2004 IUCN Red List of threatened species: a global assessment. IUCN, Switzerland

  2. Barrette C (1987) The comparative behavior and ecology of chevrotains, musk deer, and morphologically conservative deer. In: Wemmer CM (ed) Biology and management of the Cervidae. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp 200–213

  3. Bodmer RE (1990) Ungulate frugivores and the browser-grazer continuum. Oikos 57:319–325

  4. Bowland AE, Perrin MR (1995) Temporal and spatial patterns in blue duikers Philatomba monticola and red duikers Cephalophus natalensis. J Zool 237:487–498

  5. Branan WV, Marchinton RL (1985) Food habits of brocket and white-tailed deer in Suriname. J Wild Manage 49:972–976

  6. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (1998) Model selection and multi-model inference. Springer, New York

  7. Corlett RT (2007) The impact of hunting on the mammalian fauna of tropical Asian forests. Biotropica 39:292–303

  8. Daniel JC (1991) Ungulate conservation in India—problems and prospects. Appl Anim Behav Sci 29:349–356

  9. Demment MW, van Soest PJ (1985) A nutritional explanation for body-size patterns of ruminant and non-ruminant herbivores. Am Nat 125:641–672

  10. Dubost G (1984) Comparison of the diets of frugivorous forest ruminants of Gabon. J Mammal 65:298–316

  11. Dubost G (2001) Chevrotains. In: MacDonald D, Norris S (eds) The new encyclopedia of mammals. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 500–501

  12. Duckworth JW, Hemsagar Baral, Timmins RJ, (2008) Moschiola indica. IUCN red list of threatened species. http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/136585/0

  13. Eisenberg JF, Lockhart M (1972) An ecological reconnaissance of Wilpattu National Park, Ceylon. Smithsonian Contrib Zool 101:1–118

  14. Gagnon M, Chew AE (2000) Dietary preferences in extant African Bovidae. J Mammal 81:490–511

  15. Gautier-Hion A, Emmons LH, Dubost G (1980) A comparison of the diets of three major groups of primary consumers of Gabon primates, squirrels and ruminants. Oecologia 45:182–189

  16. Geist V (1998) Deer of the world: their evolution, behaviour, and ecology. Stackpole Books, Mechanicsburg

  17. Gopalaswamy AM, Karanth KU, Kumar NS, Macdonald DW (2012) Estimating tropical forest ungulate densities from sign surveys using abundance models of occupancy. Anim Conserv 15:669–679. doi:10.1111/j.1469-1795.2012.00565.x

  18. Groves CP, Meijaard E (2005) Interspecific variation in Moschiola, the Indian chevrotain. Raffles Bull Zool 12:413–421

  19. Hayward MW, Henschel P, O’Brien J, Hofmeyr M, Balme G, Kerley GIH (2006) Prey preferences of the leopard (Panthera pardus). J Zool 270:298–313

  20. Hines JE (2006) PRESENCE2—Software to estimate patch occupancy and related parameters. USGS-PWRC. http://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/software/presence.html

  21. Hofmann RR (1989) Evolutionary steps of ecophysiological adaptation and diversification of ruminants: a comparative view of their digestive system. Oecologia 78:443–457

  22. Jarman PJ (1974) The social organisation of antelope in relation to their ecology. Behaviour 48:215–267

  23. Kendall WL, White GC (2009) A cautionary note on substituting spatial subunits for repeated temporal sampling in studies of site occupancy. J Appl Ecol 46:1182–1188

  24. Krishna YC, Krishnaswamy J, Kumar NS (2008) Habitat factors affecting site occupancy and relative abundance of four-horned antelope. J Zool 276:63–70

  25. Kumara HN, Singh M (2004) The influence of differing hunting practices on the relative abundance of mammals in two rainforest areas of the Western Ghats, India. Oryx 38:321–327

  26. Macdonald DW (2001) The new encyclopedia of mammals. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  27. MacKenzie DI, Bailey LL (2004) Assessing the fit of site occupancy models. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 9:300–318

  28. MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Lachman GB, Droege S, Royle AJ, Langtimm CA (2002) Estimating site occupancy rates when detection probabilities are less than one. Ecology 83:2248–2255

  29. MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Royle JA, Pollock KH, Bailey LA, Hines JE (2006) Occupancy modeling and estimation. Elsevier, San Diego

  30. Madhusudan MD, Karanth KU (2002) Local hunting and the conservation of large mammals in India. Ambio 31:49–54

  31. Matsubayashi H, Bosi E, Kohshima S (2003) Activity and habitat use of lesser mouse-deer (Tragulus javanicus). J Mammal 84:234–242

  32. Nag K (2008) Assessing animal abundance from photographic capture data using an occupancy approach. MSc thesis, Manipal University

  33. Pascal JP (1988) Wet evergreen forests of the Western Ghats of India: ecology, structure, floristic composition and succession. French Institute of Pondicherry, Pondicherry

  34. Prasad S, Sukumar R (2010) Context-dependency of a complex fruit-frugivore mutualism: temporal variation in crop size and neighborhood effects. Oikos 119:514–523

  35. Prins HH, de Boer WF, van Oeveren H, Correia A, Mafuca J, Olff H (2006) Co-existence and niche segregation of three small bovid species in southern Mozambique. Afr J Ecol 44:186–198

  36. Ramakrishnan U, Coss RG, Pelkey N (1999) Leopard diets in southern India: management implications for tiger conservation. Biol Conserv 89:113–120

  37. Ramesh T, Kalle R, Sankar K, Qureshi Q (2012) Dry season factors determining habitat use and distribution of mouse deer (Moschiola indica) in the Western Ghats. Eur J Wildl Res. doi:10.1007/s10344-012-0676-5

  38. Rhodes JR, Lunney D, Moon C, Mattews A, McAlpine CA (2011) The consequences of using indirect signs that decay to determine species’ occupancy. Ecography 34:141–150

  39. Richard E, Julia JP (2001) Dieta de Mazama gouazoubira (Mammalia, Cervidae) en un ambiente secundario de Yungas, Argentina. Iheringia Ser Zool 90:147–156

  40. Sidhu S, Mudappa D, Raman TRS (2011) People and predators: leopard diet and interactions with people in a tea plantation dominated landscape in the Anamalai Hills, Western Ghats. NCF Technical Report #18, Nature Conservation Foundation, Mysore

  41. Sodhi NS, Koh LP, Brook BW, Ng PKL (2004) Southeast Asian biodiversity: an impending disaster. Trends Ecol Evol 19:654–660

  42. Sundarapandian SM, Chandrasekaran S, Swamy PS (2005) Phenological behaviour of selected tree species in tropical forests at Kodayar in the Western Ghats, Tamil Nadu, India. Curr Sci 88:805–810

  43. Toit JT (1993) The feeding ecology of a very small ruminant, the steenbok (Raphicerus campestris). Afr J Ecol 31:35–48

  44. van Schaik Terborgh J, Wright JS (1993) The phenology of tropical forests: adaptive significance and consequences for primary consumers. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 24:353–377

  45. Williams BK, Nichols JD, Conroy MJ (2002) Analysis and management of animal populations. Academic, New York

  46. Wilson DE, Reeder DM (2005) Mammal species of the World, 3rd edn. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by Department of Science and Technology, Government of India. We thank the Karnataka Forest Department for research permits and logistical support. Discussions with Ullas Karanth, Samba Kumar, Arjun Gopalaswamy and Devcharan Jathanna helped conceptualise the study. We are grateful to Srinivasa for his invaluable help in the field. Meghna Krishnadas supported all stages of the study. Two anonymous reviewers provided very useful comments.

Author information

Correspondence to Sachin Sridhara.

About this article

Cite this article

Sridhara, S., Edgaonkar, A. & Kumar, A. Understorey structure and refuges from predators influence habitat use by a small ungulate, the Indian chevrotain (Moschiola indica) in Western Ghats, India. Ecol Res 28, 427–433 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-013-1031-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Occupancy models
  • Rainforest
  • Feeding ecology
  • Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary