| Literature DB >> 31890215 |
Miguel de Guinea1, Alejandro Estrada2, K Anne-Isola Nekaris1, Sarie Van Belle3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although navigating along a network of routes might constrain animal movement flexibility, it may be an energetically efficient strategy. Routinely using the same route allows for visually monitoring of food resources, which might reduce the cognitive load and as such facilitate the process of movement decision-making. Similarly, locating routes in areas that avoid costly landscape attributes will enhance their overall energy balance. In this study we determined the benefits of route navigation in an energy minimiser arboreal primate, the black howler monkey (Alouatta pigra).Entities:
Keywords: Black howler monkey (Alouatta pigra); Cognitive load; Landscape; Navigation; Route selection; Route-based spatial map; Topological cognitive map
Year: 2019 PMID: 31890215 PMCID: PMC6918719 DOI: 10.1186/s40462-019-0187-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mov Ecol ISSN: 2051-3933 Impact factor: 3.600
Demographic and environmental summary of the study groups and areas: number of individuals present in each group during the study period; estimated home range size using Kernel 95% estimator; mean number of feeding trees (N FTs) visually detected from the route network till 20 m distance; elevation and slope range within each study group; and, area covered by canopy gaps in hectares and percentages for each study group
| Group ID | Group size | HR size (ha) | N FTs visually detected (mean ± SD) | Elevation range (m) (min - max) | Slope range (°) (min - max) | Gaps (ha) (% coverage) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balam | 3–4 | 10.3 | – | 170.5–260.0 | 0.6–39.4 | 0.3 (3%) |
| Motiepa | 6–8 | 7.1 | 161.8 ± 36.9 | 96.4–173.8 | 0.3–29.4 | 0.9 (12.9%) |
| Naha | 5–8 | 15.3 | 173.8 ± 35.5 | 65.0–190.4 | 0.2–45.2 | 1.8 (11.9%) |
| Pakal | 7–9 | 10.6 | 186.3 ± 38.8 | 152.6–212.8 | 0.6–29.4 | 0.3 (3%) |
| Unites | 4 | 8.6 | 102.8 ± 22.5 | 178.1–264.9 | 1.5–40.9 | 0.3 (3.3%) |
Fig. 1Home ranges (95% kernel density estimates) of five study groups of black howler monkeys at Palenque National Park (Naha: purple; Motiepa: red; Pakal: pink; Balam: brown; Unites: blue) overlaid on top of elevation contour lines (white lines). Within the home ranges of each study group, we show all recorded travel bouts (black continuous lines), as well as the frequency (green-red scale) that travel segments were used. The geographic distribution of Alouatta pigra is shown in the top right of the figure (data from IUCN [50])
Fig. 2Fitted linear regression of number of feeding trees (FTs) intercepted per metre travelled against frequency of use of route’s segments. The plot shows the four study groups that were included in this analysis. Note that route segments used once were travel bouts that never overlapped other travel bouts
Results of two GLMMs testing the influence of different landscape attributes (slope, presence of canopy gaps, elevation and FTs density) on the probability occurrence of a route segment used at least twice and four times within a certain quadrat. Group ID (N = 5) was included as random effect in the model. We compared the full model to a corresponding null model (with only random and control variables) using likelihood-ratio tests. All p-values < 0.05 are shown in bold for clarity
| Response variable | Probability of locating a route used at least twice | Probability of locating a route used at least four times | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full null model comparison | χ2 = 23.2, d.f. = 5, | χ2 = 18.8, d.f. = 5, | ||||||||
| Predictor variable | Est. | s.e. | CIlower | CIupper | Est. | s.e. | CIlower | CIupper | ||
| (Intercept) | −0.156 | 0.574 | −1.567 | 1.209 | a | − 3.126 | 0.298 | −6.359 | −2.531 | a |
| Slope | 0.139 | 0.104 | −0.128 | 0.481 | 0.182 | 0.390 | 0.139 | 0.006 | 0.752 | 0.058 |
| Presence of canopy gaps | −0.803 | 0.115 | −1.088 | −0.482 | −0.354 | 0.186 | −0.452 | 0.023 | 0.128 | |
| Elevation | 0.446 | 0.328 | −0.323 | 1.298 | 0.198 | 0.944 | 0.550 | −0.363 | 2.237 | 0.173 |
| FTs density | 0.896 | 0.213 | 0.372 | 1.390 | 0.967 | 0.246 | 0.401 | 1.533 | ||
| Elevation * FTs density | −0.280 | 0.210 | −0.783 | 0.340 | 0.273 | −0.439 | 0.140 | −0.809 | −0.374 | |
| Overlapping area b | 0.274 | 0.136 | −0.014 | 0.689 | 0.054 | −1.000 | 0.203 | −3.398 | −0.437 | |
| Location within the HR b | −0.538 | 0.442 | −1.609 | 0.518 | 0.255 | −0.724 | 0.499 | −1.414 | 0.838 | 0.190 |
| Autocorrelation term b | 2.487 | 0.072 | 2.347 | 2.632 | 2.943 | 0.100 | 1.636 | 3.252 | ||
aNot shown because of having no meaningful or very limited interpretation
bRepresent control predictors included in the model
Fig. 3Probability that black howler monkeys selected a quadrat to navigate at least in four different occasions in relation to the relative elevation within their home range and FTs density (proxy for visual access to FTs). The height of spheres represents the probability that a certain quadrat was chosen to navigate per combination of elevation and FTs density. Each surface (i.e., square) represents the expected probability of a quadrat to be chosen according to the model (conditional on all other predictors being set at their average value). Sphere size corresponds to the relative number of observations, with closed circles being above the model surface and open circles below