| Literature DB >> 28832584 |
Joseph J Erinjery1,2, Shanthala Kumar3, Honnavalli N Kumara4, K Mohan1, Tejeshwar Dhananjaya1, P Sundararaj3, Rafi Kent2, Mewa Singh1,5.
Abstract
The populations of many species that are widespread and commensal with humans have been drastically declining during the past few decades, but little attention has been paid to their conservation. Here, we report the status of the bonnet macaque, a species that is considered 'least-concern' for conservation. We show that the widely ranging rhesus macaque is expanding its range into the distributional range of the bonnet macaque, a species endemic only to southern India. Bonnet macaques have very low abundance in forests of all types indicating that it is not a typically forest dwelling species. The traditionally preferred habitats of bonnet macaques have been Hindu temples/ tourist spots but our data reveal that nearly 50% population of bonnet macaques has disappeared from such previously occupied spots. Another preferred habitat of bonnet macaques has been roadsides with abundant Ficus trees adjoining croplands. We found that between 2003 and 2015, the roadsides have drastically changed where vegetation has been replaced with barren lands and urbanization. Consequently, the populations of bonnet macaques have declined by more than 65% over the past 25 years, and by more than 50% between 2003 and 2015 alone. We, therefore, conclude that this 'least-concern' species is actually facing serious conservation challenges. We also identify a few places such as small hillocks with natural vegetation and a few temples/tourist spots which are likely to remain stable and thus can serve as 'bonnet macaque conservation reserves'. Since the bonnet macaque shares many traits with several other commensal and 'low-risk' species, it can serve as a model for the development of long-term conservation strategies for most such species.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28832584 PMCID: PMC5568106 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0182140
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Locations of line transects and bonnet macaque groups in the Parambikulam landscape.
Number of groups encountered and group parameters during the 1140 km of sampling in northern Karnataka and adjoining Telangana states.
| Population parameter | ||
|---|---|---|
| Number of groups | 35 | 12 |
| Number of groups/km | 0.03 | 0.01 |
| Mean group size (N) | 12.3 ± 6.2 (6) | 9.8 ± 3.7 (5) |
| Group size range | 5–21 | 5–15 |
Fig 2Range extension of the rhesus macaque at its southern distribution range limit.
(Adapted and modified from Kumar et al. 2011[20]).
Covariates influencing the bonnet macaque occupancy ranked on the basis of summed model weights of covariates, with beta coefficient and associated standard error of the models more than 2 ΔAICc.
| Covariate | Summed AICc weights | S | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ELE | 0.33 | -2.95 | 2.24 |
| EG | 0.27 | -2.21 | 2.05 |
| CANO | 0.24 | -1.70 | 2.09 |
| DISTU | 0.17 | 0.18 | 1.93 |
EG: proportion of evergreen forests; ELE: elevation range; CANO: height of the canopy; DISTU: disturbance index
Abundance of bonnet macaque groups encountered in different protected areas of Karnataka.
| State | Name of PA/RF | Forest type | No. of km | No. of groups | Groups/km | Density | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goa | Mollem NP, Bhagwan Mahaveer WLS, Bondla WLS, Mhadei WLS, Cotigao WLS, Netravali WLS | EGF+ MDF +DDF | 149 | 11 | 0.073 | - | Senguptha and Radhakrishna[ |
| Karnataka | Biligiri Rangaswamy Temple TR | EGF+ MDF +DDF | 795 | 43 | 0.030 | 6.56 | Kumara et al.[ |
| Karnataka | Bannerghatta NP | DDF+SCR+PLA | 170 | 2 | 0.011 | - | Kumara et al. [ |
| Karnataka | Bandipur TR | MDF+DDF | 245 | 8 | 0.033 | - | Kumara et al. [ |
| Karnataka | Nagarahole TR | MDF+DDF | 261 | 9 | 0.034 | - | Kumara et al. [ |
| Karnataka | Brahmagiri WLS | EGF | 118 | 8 | 0.068 | - | Kumara et al. [ |
| Karnataka | Talakaveri WLS | EGF | 302 | 23 | 0.076 | - | Kumara et al. [ |
| Karnataka | Pushpagiri WLS | EGF | 184 | 6 | 0.037 | - | Kumara et al.[ |
| Karnataka | Kudremukh NP | EGF | 526 | 14 | 0.026 | - | Netalkar and Kumara[ |
| Karnataka | Someshwara WLS | EGF+AG | 63 | 8 | 0.126 | - | Netalkar and Kumara [ |
| Karnataka | Mookambika WLS | EGF+AG | 93 | 18 | 0.193 | - | Netalkar and Kumara[ |
| Karnataka | Bhadra TR | EGF+ MDF +DDF | 473 | Less detection | - | Could not estimate | Jathanna et al. [ |
| Karnataka | Sharavathi Valley WLS | EGF+AG | 186 | 31 | 0.167 | - | Kumara et al.[ |
| Karnataka | Aghanashini LTM-CR | EGF+AG | 481 | 100 | 0.208 | 12.40 | Bapureddy et al.[ |
| Tamil Nadu | Indira Gandhi WLS | EGF+ MDF+DDF+SCR+PLA | 185 | 12 | 0.066 | - | Kumar et al. [ |
| Tamil Nadu | Meghamalai WLS | EGF+ MDF +DDF+SCR+PLA | 204 | 18 | 0.088 | - | Kumara et al. [ |
| Tamil Nadu | Kalkad-Mundnthurai TR | EGF+ MDF +DDF+SCR | 353 | <5 | 0.011 | Could not estimate | Ramesh et al.[ |
NP: National Park; WLS: Wildlife Sanctuary; TR: Tiger Reserve; CR: Conservation Reserve
Population status of bonnet macaque at temples or tourist locations.
| State | No. of sampling | Present or no report of relocation (%) | Translocated but reappeared (%) | Totally eliminated or no recent sightings (%) | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Karnataka | 107 | 37 (34.58) | 19 (17.76) | 51 (47.66) | Kumara et al. [ |
| Tamil Nadu | 11 | 2 (18.18) | 4 (36.36) | 5 (45.45) | Current study |
| Kerala | 6 | 0 | 2 (33.33) | 4 (66.66) | Current study |
| Total | 124 | 39 (31.45) | 25 (20.16) | 60 (48.38) |
Population dynamics of bonnet macaque populations along different roadsides.
| Name of the road | Distance covered (km) | Density/km | No. of animals/ No. of groups | Annual decline rate (%) | Expected population after 10 years | Total population decline (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 | 2015 | 2003 | 2015 | |||||
| Mysore-Ramnagar | 91 | 1.85 | 0 | 168/8 | 0/0 | - | 0 | 100 |
| Mysore-Kanakapura | 98 | 0.47 | 0.31 | 46/3 | 30/3 | 2.89 | 15 | 35 |
| Mysore-Kollegal | 67 | 1.87 | 1.76 | 125/6 | 118/8 | 0.47 | 113 | 6 |
| Mysore-Hangala | 75 | 2.27 | 0.43 | 170/10 | 32/4 | 6.76 | 16 | 81 |
| Mysore-HD Kote | 70 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 43/4 | 7/1 | 6.97 | 3 | 84 |
| Chamundi Hill | 19 | 14 | 11 | 266/7 | 209/7 | 1.79 | 175 | 21 |
| Begur-Handpost | 44 | 1.61 | 0.25 | 71/4 | 11/1 | 7.04 | 5 | 84 |
| TOTAL | 464 | 1.92 | 0.88 | 889/42 | 407/24 | 4.52 | 256 | 54 |
#- Singh and Rao, 2004 [37]
*- Calculated using exponential decay rate formula.
Status of bonnet macaque along road network of Mysore.
| Sector | Distance covered (km) | No. of groups | No. of individuals | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1989 | 1998 | 2003 | 2009 | 2015 | 1989 | 1998 | 2003 | 2009 | 2015 | ||
| Mysore-Antharsanthe | 70 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 113 | 116 | 43 | 26 | 13 |
| Handpost_Begur | 44 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 62 | 48 | 71 | 27 | 11 |
| Mysore-Hangala | 75 | 11 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 4 | 192 | 157 | 170 | 132 | 35 |
| Nanjangud-Chamarajanagar | 39 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 50 | 21 | 0 | 0 |
| Chamarajanagar-Yelandur | 43 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 28 | 60 | 11 | 0 | 0 |
| Kollegala-T.Narsipuara | 67 | 9 | 8 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 257 | 169 | 125 | 102 | 118 |
| Mysore-Ramanagaram | 91 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 133 | 103 | 168 | 34 | 0 |
| Ramanagaram-Kanakapura | 28 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 12 | 16 | 19 | 14 |
| Mysore-Kanakapura | 98 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 166 | 95 | 46 | 111 | 30 |
| Mysore-Periyapatna-Nagarahole | 77 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 | 13 | 0 | 0 |
| Chamundi Hills Road | 19 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 210 | 206 | 266 | 246 | 210 |
| Total | 651 | 54 | 55 | 47 | 31 | 25 | 1207 | 1022 | 950 | 697 | 431 |
1D’souza and Singh [35];
2Sharma [36];
3Singh and Rao [37];
4Singh et al. [25]
Area covered (%) by each land use type along different roadside habitats.
| Name of the road | Barren area (%) | Urban area (%) | Vegetation (%) | Water body (%) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 | 2015 | Change | 2001 | 2015 | Change | 2001 | 2015 | Change | 2001 | 2015 | Change | |
| Mysore-Ramnagar | 35 | 32 | -29 | 21 | 52 | +60 | 44 | 16 | 64 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mysore-Kanakapura | 53 | 45 | -15 | 13 | 30 | +56 | 34 | 25 | -26 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mysore-Kollegal | 52 | 43 | -17 | 10 | 22 | +54 | 37 | 34 | -8 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Mysore-Hangala | 49 | 13 | -73 | 11 | 81 | +86 | 39 | 6 | -85 | 1 | 0 | -100 |
| Mysore-HD Kote | 58 | 14 | -15 | 13 | 77 | +83 | 29 | 9 | -69 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Chamundi Hill | 12 | 4 | -58 | 5 | 14 | +64 | 83 | 82 | +1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 47 | 27 | -48 | 13 | 55 | +76 | 39 | 18 | -54 | 1 | 0 | -100 |
*(+)—Increase, (-)–decrease
Fig 3Vegetation, urban area and percentage of annual population decline of macaques on the roadsides.
Fig 4Canopy contiguity and percentage of annual population decline on the roadsides.
Area covered (%) by each land use type around different roadside habitats.
| Name of the road | Agricultural land (%) | Urban area (%) | Vegetation (%) | Water body (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 | 2015 | 2001 | 2015 | 2001 | 2015 | 2001 | 2015 | |
| Mysore-Ramnagar | 93 | 93 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Mysore-Kanakapura | 92 | 96 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Mysore-Kollegal | 92 | 94 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 2 |
| Mysore-Hangala | 94 | 94 | 0 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 1 |
| Mysore-HD Kote | 91 | 93 | 1 | 6 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Chamundi Hill | 3 | 0 | 47 | 64 | 50 | 36 | 0 | 0 |
| Begur-Handpost | 90 | 95 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 3 | 4 |
| Total | 90 | 92 | 2 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
Fig 5Land use in areas around different road side habitats and distribution of macaque groups along roadsides a) 2001 b) 2015.