| Literature DB >> 30542104 |
Carly E Pettett1, Afra Al-Hajri2, Hayat Al-Jabiry2, David W Macdonald1, Nobuyuki Yamaguchi3.
Abstract
We investigated seasonal changes in the ecology and behaviour of the Ethiopian hedgehog (Paraechinus aethiopicus) in Qatar, particularly in respect to differences in behaviour between hedgehogs living in arid environments and hedgehogs in temperate mesic environments. These comparisons will allow us to explore behavioural adaptations to different environments across hedgehog taxa. We radio-tracked 30 hedgehogs in Qatar over two years, and measured home range size, habitat preference, travel speed, activity and body mass. Whilst we found no difference in body mass between males and females, male home range size was over twice as large as that for females. Unlike hedgehogs in Europe, males maintained large home ranges during the non-breeding season. This behaviour may be sustained by the low cost of maintaining a large home range; males travelled less far per hour during the non-breeding season. Habitat use was non-random; arid areas with human influence, including rubbish dumping sites, was the most selected habitat type compared with its availability. Dense scrub and/or trees was the most selected habitat for nesting. This study gives us greater understanding as to how hedgehog taxa are adapted to their environment and therefore how they may be conserved, for example, the recent increase of "lower" level human activities, including irrigated farms and food waste, in harsh arid environments may have influenced the space use by Ethiopian hedgehogs.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30542104 PMCID: PMC6290762 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-36117-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
The results of a series of linear models to test for seasonal, annual and sex differences in hedgehog home range size measured by 100% and 95% Minimum convex polygons (MCPs) and 50% Kernels.
| Variable | Df | F | P value | Effect size | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100% MCP | (Intercept) | 7.674 | 5.962, 9.376 | |||
| Sex | 1,26 | 17.578 | <0.0001*** | 4.213 | 2.249, 6.144† | |
| Season | 1,49 | 0.996 | 0.318 | −0.638 | −1.921, 0.584 | |
| Year 2011 | 2,55 | 3.781 | 0.151 | −0.309 | −1.827, 1.143 | |
| 2012 | −1.803 | −3.704, 0.081 | ||||
| 95% MCP | (Intercept) | 5.615 | 3.821, 7.376 | |||
| Sex | 1,24 | 11.760 | 0.0006** | 3.772 | 1.611, 5.894† | |
| Season | 1,44 | 0.260 | 0.610 | 0.296 | −0.893, 1.408 | |
| Year 2011 | 2,49 | 1.680 | 0.432 | −0.177 | −1.602, 1.159 | |
| 2012 | −1.128 | −2.999, 0.694 | ||||
| 50% Kernel | (Intercept) | 3.441 | 2.042, 4.798 | |||
| Sex | 1,24 | 3.429 | 0.064. | 1.644 | −0.108, 3.359† | |
| Season | 1,43 | 0.782 | 0.377 | −0.340 | −1.132, 0.399 | |
| Year 2011 | 2,47 | 3.528 | 0.171 | 0.616 | −0.352, 1.516 | |
| 2012 | 1.207 | −0.173, 2.503- |
Words in italics following categorical variables indicate the reference category.
***Significant at p < 0.001 level, **Significant at p < 0.01 level, *significant at p < 0.05.near significance.
†95% confidence interval of the effect size does not contain zero.
Response variables were square root transformed.
Females, breeding season and 2010 were the reference categories.
Figure 1Sexual and seasonal variation in home range size, calculated by Minimum Convex Polygons (MCPs), for 68 Ethiopian hedgehogs.
Figure 2Sex and seasonal variation in the distance travelled by a hedgehog in one hour.
Figure 3Left: seasonal and sex differences in the body mass of adult Ethiopian hedgehog. Right: annual differences in in the body mass of adult Ethiopian hedgehogs.
Figure 4The mean percentage of time hedgehogs were deemed to be active, displaying low activity and inactive. Activity was determined from an activity sensor attached to a radio-tag. Bars indicate 95% confidence intervals of the means. Left: Sexual variation in activity. Right: Seasonal variation in activity.
The ranking of habitats selected by radio-tracked hedgehogs at a 15km2 site in Qatar.
| Rank | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | p | λ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All | E2> | A>>> | B> | E1> | F> | D> | C | 0.002* | 0.041 |
| Males | E2> | A>>> | B> | E1> | F> | D> | C | 0.002* | 0.026 |
| Females | E2> | A>>> | B> | E1>>> | F> | D> | C | 0.004* | 0.040 |
| Breeding | E2> | A>>> | B> | E1> | F> | D>>> | C | 0.002* | 0.110 |
| Non-breeding | E2>>> | A>>> | E1>>> | B>>> | C>>> | D> | F | 0.002* | 0.045 |
| Nests | A> | E2>>> | F> | B>>> | C> | D>>> | E1 | 0.002* | 0.048 |
Habitats are ranked from most selected to least from left to right.
>>> indicates a statistically significant difference in hedgehog preference between habitat groups >indicates a non-significant difference.
Ranking was carried out following Aebischer, Robertson & Kenward 1993[36].
Figure 5The percentage of each habitat available hedgehogs at a 15km[2] study site in Qatar and the percentage of radio-tracking fixes in this habitat.
Figure 6Variation in the observed activity level of hedgehogs in seven habitats in Qatar (a) activity level recorded from activity sensor attached to a radio-tag and (b) activity level recorded from change of locations. Habitats were as follows (A) dense scrubs and/or trees (usually irrigated), (B) regularly irrigated area without scrubs or trees, (C) plantations (e.g. date palm plantation), (D) open field on farmland, E1: arid areas with less human influence, E2: arid areas with direct human influence (e.g. dumping site), (F) built area (e.g. occupied houses).
Figure 7Map of the study site (GoogleEarth Image Copyright 2018 DigitalGlobe): (1) The “Rubbish Mound” where a higher concentration of hedgehogs was found throughout the year probably due to year-round availability of food resources. (2) “Municipal Farm” where permanent grass fields attracted hedgehogs. (3) Rawdat Al-Faras Research Station where street lights across the farm increased the chance of locating hedgehogs. (4)Qatar University Farm where the field station was located.