| Literature DB >> 35405796 |
Chloé Couturier1,2,3, Sarah Bortolamiol2, Sylvia Ortmann4, John-Paul Okimat2, Edward Asalu5, Sabrina Krief1,2.
Abstract
Frugivorous primates have developed several strategies to deal with wild fruit scarcity, such as modifying their activity budget or enlarging their diet. Agricultural expansion threatens primate habitats and populations (e.g., disease transmission, agrochemical exposure), but it also increases crop feeding opportunities. We aimed at understanding whether maize presence close to the natural habitat of chimpanzees, a threatened species, would lead to significant behavioral modifications. We monitored 20 chimpanzees over 37 months in Kibale National Park, Uganda, with maize gardens at the forest edge. Based on focal nest-to-nest data, we analyzed their diet, activity budget, and energy balance depending on wild fruit and maize availability. We found that the Sebitoli area is a highly nutritive habitat for chimpanzees, with large and caloric wild fruits available all year long. The chimpanzees opportunistically consume maize and exploit it by resting less during maize season. However, no significant variation was found in daily paths and energy expenditures according to maize availability. No behavioral or energy modification was observed regarding wild resources either. Despite the availability of nutritious domestic resources, chimpanzees still exploit wild fruits and do not limit their movements. Thus, their contribution to seed dispersal and forest regeneration in this area is not affected.Entities:
Keywords: Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii; Uganda; activity budget; anthropogenic habitat; crop feeding; energy balance
Year: 2022 PMID: 35405796 PMCID: PMC8996920 DOI: 10.3390/ani12070806
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 2.752
Figure 1Location of maize gardens between August 2017 and January 2019 (n = 72) at the edge of the home range of Sebitoli chimpanzee community, Kibale National Park, Uganda (sources: SCP, S. Bortolamiol, C. Couturier).
Ethogram of the behavior categories used in the evaluation of chimpanzees’ energy balance in Kibale National Park, Uganda.
| Category | Code | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Feeding | F | Ingestion of a food item (including wadging) |
| Resting | R | Prolonged motionless and inactive state, sit or laid down |
| Traveling | T | Locomotion on the ground from one point to another (excluding displaying and chasing) |
| Moving in trees | M | Locomotion in a tree, vertically or horizontally (including to forage or socialize) |
| Social activities | SA | Interaction with another individual or self-grooming |
| High social activities | HSA | Interaction involving locomotion or important body movements (copulating, displaying, chasing, playing) |
| Low social activities | LSA | Motionless interaction (including grooming, self-grooming, vocalizing, etc.) |
Energy concentration (kcal/gDM) in 13 fruits from Sebitoli and intersite variations across Uganda.
| Species | Part | Kibale National Park | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SBL 1 | KNP 2 | KWRA.1 3 | KWRA.2 4 | KWRA.3 5 | NGO 6 | Bulindi 7 | |||
| N | X (SD) | ||||||||
|
| RF | 3 | 4.23 (0.07) | - | - | - | - | - | - |
|
| RF | 2 | 4.42 (0.55) | - | - | - | 3.28 | - | - |
|
| RF | 3 | 4.75 (0.68) | 4.64 | 2.20 | 3.05 | 3.28 | 2.96 | 3.36 |
|
| RF | 5 | 4.60 (0.38) | 4.47 | - | - | - | - | - |
|
| RF | 2 | 4.23 (0.16) | 5.03 | - | 2.90 | - | - | 3.45 |
| URF | 1 | 5.10 (-) | - | 1.90 | 2.99 | - | - | - | |
|
| RF | 2 | 4.53 (0.08) | - | 2.40 | - | - | 2.83 | 3.56 |
|
| RF | 6 | 4.49 (0.05) | 4.37 | 1.30 | - | 2.93 | - | 3.23 |
| URF | - | 4.49 * | - | - | - | 2.56 | - | - | |
|
| RF | 24 | 4.53 (0.69) | 4.53 | - | 2.55 | 3.13 | 2.60 | 3.41 |
| URF | 5 | 4.41 (0.38) | - | - | - | 2.80 | - | - | |
|
| RF | - | 4.50 * | - | - | 2.93 | 3.03 | 2.89 | - |
| URF | 2 | 4.50 (0.09) | - | - | - | 2.78 | - | - | |
N: number of samples; X: mean energy gain in kcal/g of dry matter (DM); SD: standard deviation. Values for the different sites are from: 1 this study, 2 [84], 3 [85], 4 [86], 5 [87], 6 [88], and 7 [31]. SBL: Sebitoli; KNP: Kibale National Park (no site specified); KWRA: Kanyawara; NGO: Ngogo, all sites are located in Uganda; RF: ripe fruit; URF: unripe fruit; * missing values in our study (we took RF and URF values instead).
Figure 2Maize calendar, wild fruit availability, rainfall, and mean temperature between January 2016 and January 2019. The red line represents the mean monthly temperature, and the blue line is the total monthly rainfall (mm). Months with a yellow background correspond to months with edible maize at the PNK edges. Black and white bars represent the monthly wild ripe and unripe fruit availability (FAI), respectively. FAI data were missing for April 2016, as well as July and September 2017. Dotted line represents the limit between low (LFA) and high wild fruit availability (HFA).
Study design (number of FNNs) according to maize and wild fruit availability.
| All | Maize | No Maize | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HFA | LFA | na | HFA | LFA | na | ||
| All | 206 | 31 | 51 | 10 | 48 | 63 | 3 |
| 80% * | 112 | 30 | 29 | - | 14 | 33 | 6 |
Index of wild fruit availability. HFA: high fruit availability; LFA: low fruit availability for wild fruits; na: months with missing phenology data (n = 3); * only FNNs with at least 80% of the total feeding time covered by the 13 fruits used in nutritional analysis.
Results of the robust two-way ANOVA for ingestion rate, daily paths, energy expenditures, and energy balance.
| Response Variable | Dependent Variable |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ingestion rate | Maize | 0.002 | 0.965 |
| FAI | 2.011 | 0.163 | |
| Maize * FAI | 0.059 | 0.810 | |
| Daily length traveled (DLT) | Maize | 2.310 | 0.133 |
| FAI | 0.015 | 0.902 | |
| Maize * FAI | 0.002 | 0.968 | |
| Energy expenditure (TDEE) | Maize | 0.032 | 0.860 |
| FAI | 0.580 | 0.449 | |
| Maize * FAI | 3.974 | 0.050 | |
| Energy balance | Maize | 0.005 | 0.943 |
| FAI | 1.075 | 0.305 | |
| Maize * FAI | 0.549 | 0.462 |
Maize: maize availability, two levels: maize, non-maize; FAI: wild fruit availability, two levels: high (HFA), low (LFA), * defines the interaction between the variables.
Figure 3Budget of the main activities (a), daily paths (DLT) (b), energy expenditures (TDEE) (c), ingestion rate (d), and energy balance (e) of the Sebitoli community according to maize and wild fruit availability between January 2016 and January 2019. LFA: low wild fruit availability; HFA: high wild fruit availability; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.005; n.s.: not significant. Bars represent standard deviation.
Results of two-way MANOVA and two-way ANOVA for the activity budget.
| Two-Way MANOVA | Pillai’s Trace |
| n |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Response Variable | Dependent Variable | |||||
| Feed, rest, travel | Maize | 0.043 | 2.799 | 3 | 187 | 0.041 * |
| FAI | 0.005 | 0.307 | 3 | 187 | 0.820 | |
| Maize * FAI | 0.014 | 0.863 | 3 | 187 | 0.461 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |||||
| Feed | Maize | 66.3 | 0.500 | 1 | 189 | 0.480 |
| FAI | 44.8 | 0.338 | 1 | 189 | 0.562 | |
| Maize * FAI | 8.5 | 0.050 | 1 | 189 | 0.800 | |
| Rest | Maize | 1232 | 5.238 | 1 | 189 | 0.023 * |
| FAI | 185 | 0.786 | 1 | 189 | 0.376 | |
| Maize * FAI | 47 | 0.202 | 1 | 189 | 0.654 | |
| Travel | Maize | 2278 | 7.934 | 1 | 189 | 0.005 ** |
| FAI | 18 | 0.028 | 1 | 189 | 0.562 | |
| Maize * FAI | 473 | 1.649 | 1 | 189 | 0.800 | |
Maize: maize availability, two levels: maize, non-maize; FAI: wild fruit availability, two levels: high (HFA), low (LFA). After p-value, * indicates p-value < 0.05, ** indicates p-value < 0.01
Figure 4Activity budget of the Sebitoli community according to sex–age classes. AF: non-maternal females; MO: mothers; AM: adult males; YO: subadult males. Values represent the mean value of each activity per class.
Contribution of sex–age classes in daily paths, energy balance, and frugivory between January 2016 and January 2019, all seasons included.
| Sex-Age Class | All | 80% * | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ni | NFNN | DLT (m·h−1) | TDEE (kcal·h−1) | % Frugivory | Ni | NFNN | Ingestion Rate (kcal·min−1) | Energy Balance (kcal·h−1) | ||
| X (SD) | X (SD) | X (SD) | X (SD) | X (SD) | ||||||
| Females | AF | 3 | 9 | 175 (102) | 114 (5.4) | 85.1 (23.7) | 3 | 6 | 48.1 (20.1) | 314.3 (252.6) |
| MO | 5 | 36 | 155 (140) | 169 (20.6) | 85.5 (20.3) | 5 | 21 | 49.3 (15.9) | 479.1 (425.6) | |
| Males | AM | 9 | 147 | 299 (172) | 135 (10.6) | 84.1 (21.8) | 8 | 77 | 47.4 (27.9) | 460.3 (418) |
| YO | 3 | 14 | 241 (144) | 133 (8.9) | 79.6 (29.5) | 3 | 8 | 45.5 (18.7) | 426.1 (289.6) | |
| All | 20 | 206 | 264 (172) | 140 (19) | 84 (22.1) | 19 | 112 | 47.7 (24.9) | 453.5 (402.1) | |
AF: non-maternal adult females; MO: mothers; AM: adult males; YO: subadult males; Ni: number of individuals; NFNN: number of FNNs superior or equal to 6 h duration; DLT: daily length traveled; TDEE: total daily energy expenditures; X (SD): mean value (standard deviation); * only FNNs with at least 80% of the total feeding time covered by the 13 fruits used in nutritional analysis.
Verification of the main hypothesis and summary of the results from this study.
| Hypothesis: Opportunistic Maize Consumption by Chimpanzees | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maize | Wild Fruits | Rest | Travel/Daily Paths | Wild Frugivory and Intakes | Energy Expenditures | ||
| 1 | High/low | + | − | − | − | ||
| 0 | High/low | − | + | + | + | ||
|
| |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 1 | High/low * | 28.5 | 32.6 | 282.7 | 84.2 | 48.0 | 139.6 |
| ˄ | ˅ | = | = | = | = | ||
| 0 | High/low ** | 34.2 | 26.2 | 241.5 | 83.9 | 47.3 | 139.8 |
* For all categories, mean values during the maize season. ** For all categories, mean values during the non-maize season.