Literature DB >> 31604995

Do conservation strategies that increase tiger populations have consequences for other wild carnivores like leopards?

Ujjwal Kumar1, Neha Awasthi1, Qamar Qureshi1, Yadvendradev Jhala2.   

Abstract

Most large carnivore populations are declining across their global range except in some well managed protected areas (PA's). Investments for conserving charismatic apex carnivores are often justified due to their umbrella effect on biodiversity. We evaluate population trends of two large sympatric carnivores, the tiger and leopard through spatially-explicit-capture-recapture models from camera trap data in Kanha PA, India, from 2011 to 2016. Our results show that the overall density (100 km-2) of tigers ranged between 4.82 ± 0.33 to 5.21 ± 0.55SE and of leopards between 6.63 ± 0.71 to 8.64 ± 0.75SE, with no detectable trends at the PA scale. When evaluated at the catchment scale, Banjar catchment that had higher prey density and higher conservation investments, recorded significant growth of both carnivores. While Halon catchment, that had lower prey and conservation investments, populations of both carnivores remained stable. Sex ratio of both carnivores was female biased. As is typical with large carnivores, movement parameter sigma (an index for range size), was larger for males than for females. However, sigma was surprisingly similar for the same genders in both carnivores. At home-range scale, leopards achieved high densities and positive growth rates in areas that had low, medium or declining tiger density. Our results suggest that umbrella-species conservation value of tigers is likely to be compromised at very high densities and therefore should not be artificially inflated through targeted management.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31604995      PMCID: PMC6789119          DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-51213-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


  10 in total

1.  The scaling of animal space use.

Authors:  Walter Jetz; Chris Carbone; Jenny Fulford; James H Brown
Journal:  Science       Date:  2004-10-08       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Bayesian inference in camera trapping studies for a class of spatial capture-recapture models.

Authors:  J Andrew Royle; K Ullas Karanth; Arjun M Gopalaswamy; N Samba Kumar
Journal:  Ecology       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 5.499

3.  Scaling of home range size: Body size, metabolic needs and ecology.

Authors:  M Reiss
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  1988-03       Impact factor: 17.712

4.  Population dynamics of Amur tigers (Panthera tigris altaica) in Sikhote-Alin Biosphere Zapovednik: 1966-2012.

Authors:  Dale G Miquelle; Evgeny N Smirnov; Olga Yu Zaumyslova; Svetlana V Soutyrina; Douglas H Johnson
Journal:  Integr Zool       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 2.654

5.  Assessing tiger population dynamics using photographic capture-recapture sampling.

Authors:  K Ullas Karanth; James D Nichols; N Samba Kumar; James E Hines
Journal:  Ecology       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 5.499

6.  A tiger cannot change its stripes: using a three-dimensional model to match images of living tigers and tiger skins.

Authors:  Lex Hiby; Phil Lovell; Narendra Patil; N Samba Kumar; Arjun M Gopalaswamy; K Ullas Karanth
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2009-03-11       Impact factor: 3.703

7.  Compensatory heterogeneity in spatially explicit capture-recapture data.

Authors:  M G Efford; G Mowat
Journal:  Ecology       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 5.499

8.  Spatially explicit maximum likelihood methods for capture-recapture studies.

Authors:  D L Borchers; M G Efford
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2007-10-26       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Trap configuration and spacing influences parameter estimates in spatial capture-recapture models.

Authors:  Catherine C Sun; Angela K Fuller; J Andrew Royle
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-05       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Big cats in our backyards: persistence of large carnivores in a human dominated landscape in India.

Authors:  Vidya Athreya; Morten Odden; John D C Linnell; Jagdish Krishnaswamy; Ullas Karanth
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-06       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total
  3 in total

1.  Dhole pack size variation: Assessing the effect of Prey availability and Apex predator.

Authors:  Aishwarya Bhandari; Pallavi Ghaskadbi; Parag Nigam; Bilal Habib
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-03-23       Impact factor: 2.912

2.  Long-term monitoring of margays (Leopardus wiedii): Implications for understanding low detection rates.

Authors:  Bart J Harmsen; Nicola Saville; Rebecca J Foster
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  The tide of tiger poaching in India is rising! An investigation of the intertwined facts with a focus on conservation.

Authors:  George Nittu; Thekke Thumbath Shameer; Nanjanad Kannan Nishanthini; Raveendranathanpillai Sanil
Journal:  GeoJournal       Date:  2022-04-13
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.