| Literature DB >> 26536667 |
Timothy M Eppley1,2, Giuseppe Donati2, Jean-Baptiste Ramanamanjato3, Faly Randriatafika3, Laza N Andriamandimbiarisoa3, David Rabehevitra3, Robertin Ravelomanantsoa3, Jörg U Ganzhorn1.
Abstract
The lemurs of Madagascar are among the most threatened mammalian taxa in the world, with habitat loss due to shifting cultivation and timber harvest heavily contributing to their precarious state. Deforestation often leads to fragmentation, resulting in mixed-habitat matrices throughout a landscape where disturbed areas are prone to invasion by exotic plants. Our study site, the Mandena littoral forest (southeast Madagascar), is a matrix of littoral forest, littoral swamp, and Melaleuca swamp habitats. Here, Melaleuca quinquenervia has invaded the wetland ecosystem, creating a mono-dominant habitat that currently provides the only potential habitat corridor between forest fragments. We sought to understand the role of this invasive Melaleuca swamp on the behavioral ecology of a threatened, small-bodied folivore, the southern bamboo lemur (Hapalemur meridionalis). We collected botanical and behavioral data on four groups of H. meridionalis between January and December 2013. Our results confirm Melaleuca swamp as an important part of their home range: while lemurs seasonally limited activities to certain habitats, all groups were capable of utilizing this invasive habitat for feeding and resting. Furthermore, the fact that Hapalemur use an invasive plant species as a dispersal corridor increases our knowledge of their ecological flexibility, and may be useful in the conservation management of remaining threatened populations.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26536667 PMCID: PMC4633110 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140981
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Location of Mandena Conservation Zone in southeast Madagascar, relative to the larger, continuous forest of Tsitongambarika.
Fig 2Monthly total precipitation (mm), mean temperature (°C), and mean day length (h) at Mandena in 2013.
Comparison of trees (mean ± SD) measured in different habitats within Mandena.
| Habitat |
| Species ( | Families ( | DBH (cm) | Height (m) | Crown volume (m3) | Shannon ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Littoral Forest | |||||||
| ≥ 5 cm (DBH) | 1454 | 84 | 40 | 9.53 ± 5.09 | 7.22 ± 1.48 | 10.41 ± 18.31 | 3.54 ± 0.05 |
| Littoral Swamp | |||||||
| ≥ 5 cm (DBH) | 2211 | 49 | 32 | 11.66 ± 5.95 | 6.47 ± 1.13 | 3.91 ± 6.68 | 2.92 ± 0.08 |
|
| |||||||
| ≥ 5 cm (DBH) | 2194 | 6 | 6 | 12.11 ± 5.89 | 6.76 ± 2.33 | 4.61 ± 7.64 | 0.39 ± 0.07 |
Fig 3Vertical structure comparison between each of the three Mandena habitats based on Gautier-transects [45]: littoral forest, littoral swamp, and Melaleuca swamp.
Total area (ha) and area per habitat type as obtained via 95% kernel density estimate.
| Group | Forest (ha) | % | Swamp (ha) | % |
| % | Total (ha) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 11.67 | 53.45 | 1.27 | 5.81 | 8.89 | 40.74 | 21.82 |
| 2 | 19.95 | 94.16 | 0.85 | 4.03 | 0.38 | 1.80 | 21.19 |
| 4 | 3.68 | 27.13 | 4.69 | 34.58 | 5.19 | 38.29 | 13.55 |
Group 3 habitat data were not included as they constitute a smaller dataset.
Fig 4Home ranges (95% kernel) of Hapalemur meridionalis focal groups at Mandena between January and December 2013.
Areas for each habitat (i.e., littoral forest, littoral swamp, Melaleuca swamp) are shown within each.
Repeated measures analysis of variance for effects of habitat type on activity (using monthly percentages) of H. meridionalis at Mandena, January-December 2013.
Significant differences indicated in bold.
| Activity | Source of variation |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| Habitat | 1.786 | 1.303 | 0.278 | |
| Temperature x Habitat | 1.786 | 3.521 |
| |
| Precipitation x Habitat | 1.786 | 2.170 | 0.129 | |
| Day length x Habitat | 1.786 | 3.756 |
| |
| Group x Habitat | 3.573 | 23.713 |
| |
|
| ||||
| Temperature | 1 | 7.144 |
| |
| Precipitation | 1 | 1.330 | 0.258 | |
| Day length | 1 | 3.271 | 0.081 | |
|
| ||||
| Group | 2 | 4.848 |
| |
|
|
| |||
| Habitat | 1.995 | 3.523 |
| |
| Temperature x Habitat | 1.995 | 3.868 |
| |
| Precipitation x Habitat | 1.995 | 0.991 | 0.377 | |
| Day length x Habitat | 1.995 | 6.249 |
| |
| Group x Habitat | 3.990 | 25.583 |
| |
|
| ||||
| Temperature | 1 | 24.282 |
| |
| Precipitation | 1 | 1.431 | 0.241 | |
| Day length | 1 | 10.154 |
| |
|
| ||||
| Group | 2 | 0.473 | 0.628 | |
|
|
| |||
| Habitat | 1.995 | 1.396 | 0.256 | |
| Temperature x Habitat | 1.995 | 1.309 | 0.278 | |
| Precipitation x Habitat | 1.995 | 3.454 |
| |
| Day length x Habitat | 1.995 | 2.108 | 0.131 | |
| Group x Habitat | 3.991 | 27.393 |
| |
|
| ||||
| Temperature | 1 | 15.279 |
| |
| Precipitation | 1 | 1.619 | 0.213 | |
| Day length | 1 | 5.504 |
| |
|
| ||||
| Group | 2 | 0.107 | 0.899 |
Role of Melaleuca swamp habitat on daily activity budget of H. meridionalis.
| Observ. days |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of days | % of days | % of observation record | ||
| Group 1 | 65 | 37 | 56.92 | 24.22 |
| Group 2 | 63 | 13 | 20.63 | 1.70 |
| Group 4 | 66 | 55 | 83.33 | 30.97 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fig 5Monthly percentage of time spent by H. meridionalis groups in the Melaleuca habitat from January-December, 2013.