Refine your search
Collections
Co-Authors
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z All
Qureshi, Qamar
- Monitoring Spatial and Seasonal Abundance of Indian Wild Ass (Equus hemionus khur) in Little Rann of Kutch Landscape, Western India
Abstract Views :155 |
PDF Views:93
Authors
Affiliations
1 Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Post Box No.18, Dehradun – 248001, Uttarakhand, IN
2 Bombay Natural History Society, Hornbill House, Dr. Salim Ali Chawk, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Road, Mumbai - 400001, Maharashtra, IN
3 Zoological Survey of India, Dharamtala, Taltala, Kolkata-700016, West Bengal, IN
4 Van Chetna Kendra, Vastrapur, Ahmedabad – 380015, Gujarat, IN
1 Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Post Box No.18, Dehradun – 248001, Uttarakhand, IN
2 Bombay Natural History Society, Hornbill House, Dr. Salim Ali Chawk, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Road, Mumbai - 400001, Maharashtra, IN
3 Zoological Survey of India, Dharamtala, Taltala, Kolkata-700016, West Bengal, IN
4 Van Chetna Kendra, Vastrapur, Ahmedabad – 380015, Gujarat, IN
Source
Journal of Ecophysiology and Occupational Health, Vol 21, No 4 (2021), Pagination: 168-174Abstract
The present study was conducted in Little Rann of Kutch (LRK) landscape in the Gujarat state of western India. It is a vast saline mud-plain holding the last remaining source population of Indian wild ass (Equus hemionus khur) or Khur after its population from other parts of the world got locally extinct. Khur occupy fringes of the Sanctuary and bets (islands) having grassland and scrubland vegetation. Taking adequate and effective management decisions and monitoring would be difficult in absence of reliable information. Line transect sampling will ensure robust population estimate of Khur. By bridging this gap with adequate information, meaningful and effective management decisions can be taken. We have conducted line transect surveys using foot and vehicle transect following distance sampling in southern fringe as intensive study site. The density estimates (No./km2 ± SE) in southern fringe of LRK during two surveys were 5.76 ± 0.91, 6.08 ± 1.39 in winter and 2.29 ± 0.55 in summer from foot transect and 5.2 ± 0.73, 6.72 ± 1.12 in winter and 4.29 ± 0.87 in summer from vehicle transect, respectively. The study will help managers to evaluate long term monitoring method and make adaptive management decisions.
Keywords
Khur, Line Transect, Population Density, Semi-Arid Landscape, Surra.Full Text
References
- Robinson JG, Redford KH. Body size, diet and population density of Neotropical forest mammals. The American Naturalist. 1986; 128(5):665–80. https://doi.org/10.1086/284596
- Duncan P. Zebras, Asses and Horses: An action plan for the conservation of wild equids. IUCN:Gland, Switzerland; 1992. p. 36.
- Shah NV. Ecology of wild ass (Equus hemionus khur) in Little Rann of Kutch. [Ph.D.Diss]. M.S. University, Baroda, Gujarat. 1993.
- Moehlman PD. Equids--zebras, asses and horses: Status survey and conservation action plan. IUCN. 2000.
- Shah N, Qureshi Q. Social organization and determinants of spatial distribution of Khur (Equus hemionus khur). Exploration into the Biological Resources of Mongolia. Erforsch Biol Ress. Mongolei (Halle/Saale). 2007; 10:189–200.
- Ripple WJ, Newsome TM, Wolf C, Dirzo R, Everatt KT, Galetti M, Hayward MW, Kerley GI, Levi T, Lindsey PA, Macdonald DW. Collapse of the world’s largest herbivores. Science Advances. 2015; 1(4):1400103. PMid: 26601172 PMCid: PMC4640652. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1400103
- Schulz E, Kaiser TM. Historical distribution, habitat requirements and feeding ecology of the genus E quus (Perissodactyla). Mammal Review. 2013 Apr; 43(2):111–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2907.2012.00210.x
- Ahrestani FS, Heitkonig IM, Matsubayashi H, Prins H.H. Grazing and browsing by large herbivores in South and Southeast Asia. In The Ecology of Large Herbivores in South and Southeast Asia. Springer, Dordrecht. 2016. p. 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7570-0_4
- Crawley, MJ. Herbivory: The dynamics of animal-plant interactions. Blackwell: Osney Mead, Oxford;1983.
- Kortland A. Vegetation research and the “bulldozer” herbivores in tropical Africa. Sutton, S., Whitmore T.C. and 252. 1984. p. 205–26.
- Karanth KU, Sinquist ME. Population structure, density and biomass of large herbivores in tropical forests of Nagarhole of India. Journal of Tropical Ecology. 1992; 8:21–35. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266467400006040
- Ali S. The wild ass of Kutch. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc. 1946; 46:472–7.
- Gee EP. The Indian wild ass: A survey. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc 1963; 60:517–29.
- Singh HS. Status of Indian wild ass (Equus hemionus khur) in the Little Rann of Kutch. Zoos Print Journal. 2000 May; 5:253–6. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.15.5.253-6
- Caughley G, Gunn A. Dynamics of large herbivores in deserts: Kangaroos and caribou. Oikos. 1993 May 1: 47–55. https://doi.org/10.2307/3545094
- Illius AW, O’Connor TG. Resource heterogeneity and ungulate population dynamics. Oikos. 2000; 89:283–94. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.890209.x
- Krishna YC, Kumar A, Isvaran K. Wild ungulate decision - Making and the role of tiny refuges in human-dominated landscapes. PloS one. 2016 Mar 17; 11(3). PMid: 26985668 PMCid: PMC4795686. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151748
- Droege S. The North American Breeding Bird Survey. Pages 1-4 in JR Sauer and S Droege, (eds.) Survey designs and statistical methods for the estimation of avian population trends. U.S. Fish Wildlife Service Biology Report. 1990; 90(1).
- Pollock KH, Nichols JD, Simons TR, Farnsworth GL, Bailey LL, Sauer JR. Large scale wildlife monitoring studies: statistical methods for design and analysis. Environmetrics: The Official Journal of the International Environmetrics Society. 2002 Mar; 13(2):105–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/env.514
- Buckland ST, Anderson AR, Burnham KP, Laake JL. Distance sampling: Estimating abundance of biological populations. Champion and Hall, London. 1993. p. 446. PMCid: PMC1676856. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-1574-2
- Fewster RM, Southwell C, Borchers DL, Buckland ST, Pople AR. The influence of animal mobility on the assumption of uniform distances in aerial line-transect surveys. Wildlife Research. 2008 Jun 27; 35(4):275–88. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR07077
- Melville GJ, Tracey JP, Fleming PJ, Lukins BS. Aerial surveys of multiple species: Critical assumptions and sources of bias in distance and mark-recapture estimators. Wildlife Research. 2008 Jun 27; 35(4):310–48. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR07080
- Skogland T. The effects of density-dependent resource limitations on the demography of wild reindeer. The Journal of Animal Ecology. 1985 Jun 1: 359-74. https://doi.org/10.2307/4484
- Goyal SP, Sinha B, Shah N, Panwar HS. Sardar Sarovar Project - a conservation threat to the Indian wild ass (Equus hemionus khur). Biological Conservation. 1999; 88(2):277–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(98)00082-2
- Zaker N, Ketchemen L, Lutscher F. The effect of movement behavior on population density in patchy landscapes. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology. 2020; 82(1):1–24. PMid: 31919597. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-019-00680-3
- Shah N. Wild ass. Singh, HS, Patel, BH, Parvez R, Soni VC, Shah NV, Tatu K, Patel D. (eds.): Ecological study of wild ass sanctuary little rann of kutch. 1999.
- Mahar N, Mungi NA, Sutirtha L. Beyond nationality: Opportunity for trans-boundary wildlife conservation. DIALOGUE: Science, Scientists and Society. 2021; 4. https://doi.org/10.29195/DSSS.03.01.0029
- Prins HH. Competition between wildlife and livestock in Africa. In Wildlife conservation by sustainable use. Springer, Dordrecht. 2000. p. 51–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4012-6_5
- Kaczensky P, Lkhagvasuren B, Pereladova O, Hemami M, Bouskila A. Equus hemionus ssp. khur. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2016. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-.RLTS.T7963A3144616.en
- Johnsingh AJ, Manjrekar N. Mammals of South Asia, Volume II. University Press (India) Private Limited. 2015, Chapter 39, pp. 112-128.
- Density and Distribution of Principal Prey Species of Tigers and Leopards in Pench Tiger Reserve, Madhya Pradesh
Abstract Views :251 |
PDF Views:302
Authors
Affiliations
1 Department of Population Management, Capture and Rehabilitation, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun – 248001, Uttarakhand, IN
2 Ex-director, Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, Coimbatore – 641108, Tamil Nadu, IN
1 Department of Population Management, Capture and Rehabilitation, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun – 248001, Uttarakhand, IN
2 Ex-director, Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, Coimbatore – 641108, Tamil Nadu, IN
Source
Journal of Ecophysiology and Occupational Health, Vol 22, No 1 (2022), Pagination: 15-21Abstract
Conservation of large carnivores is dependent on a viable population of their principal prey species. Line transect based density estimation has been established as a robust method for monitoring prey population trend. Chital (Axis axis) and sambar (Rusa unicolor) are the major ungulates in Pench tiger reserve, Madhya Pradesh that are principal tiger and leopard prey. Estimated densities using line transect surveys were highest for chital in the study area with a range of 44–52 individuals per sq. km. from 2013–16. Sambar density remained stable ranging from 5–8 individuals per sq. km. over the three years (2013–16). Camera trap-based encounter rate was used to calculate the Relative Abundance Index of the principal prey species of tigers and leopards in the study area. Spatial distribution pattern using the Relative Abundance Index showed that 47.16% chital captures were congregated near the submergence area whereas 38.53% sambar captures were near rugged areas. Abundant resources and lack of competition from domestic livestock in the core zone contribute to such high estimates of prey population in the study area.
Keywords
Camera Trap Based Encounter Rate, Chital, Line-Transect Based Density, Relative Abundance Index, Sambar.Full Text
References
- McNaughton SJ. Grazing as an optimization process: Grassungulate relationships in the Serengeti. The American Naturalist. 1979; 113(5):691–703. https://doi.org/10.1086/283426
- Crawley MJ. Herbivory: The dynamics of animal-plant interactions. Blackwell Scientific Publications; 1983.
- Schaller GB. The deer and the tiger. A study of Wildlife in India. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago; 1967. p. 384.
- Karanth KU, Sunquist ME. Prey selection by tiger, leopard and dhole in tropical forests. Journal of Animal Ecology. 1995:439– 50. https://doi.org/10.2307/5647
- Biswas S, Sankar K. Prey abundance and food habit of tigers (Panthera tigris tigris) in Pench National Park, Madhya Pradesh, India. Journal of Zoology. 2002 Mar; 256(3):411–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952836902000456
- Wang W, Zhang L, Wang H, Li Z. Pattern formation of a predator-prey system with Ivlev-type functional response. Ecological Modelling. 2010; 221(2):131–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.09.011
- Jhala YV, Qureshi Q, Nayak AK. Status of tigers, copredators and prey in India, 2018. National Tiger Conservation Authority, Government of India, New Delhi, and Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun; 2020.
- Buckland ST, Rexstad EA, Marques TA, Oedekoven CS. Distance sampling: Methods and applications. New York, NY, USA: Springer; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19219-2
- Buckland ST, Thomas L, Marques FF, Strindberg S, Hedley SL, Pollard JH, et al. Distance sampling: Recent advances and future directions. Quantitative Methods for Current Environmental Issues. 2002:79–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-06579_4
- Roy M. Evaluating methods to monitor tiger abundance and its prey in Indian Sunderbans. [Ph.D. thesis]. Saurashtra University. Gujarat; 2019
- Kafley H, Lamichhane BR, Maharjan R, Thapaliya B, Bhattarai N, Khadka M, Gompper ME. Estimating prey abundance and distribution from camera trap data using binomial mixture models. European Journal of Wildlife Research. 2019; 65(5):1–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-019-1308-0
- Carter NH, Shrestha BK, Karki JB, Pradhan NM, Liu J. Coexistence between wildlife and humans at fine spatial scales. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2012; 109(38):15360–5. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1210490109. PMid:22949642. PMCid:PMC3458348
- Carbone C, Christie S, Conforti K, Coulson T, Franklin N, Ginsberg JR, et al. The use of photographic rates to estimate densities of tigers and other cryptic mammals. In Animal Conservation forum 2001 Feb (Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 75-79). Cambridge University Press; 2001. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1367943001001081
- Rowcliffe JM, Field J, Turvey ST, Carbone C. Estimating animal density using camera traps without the need for individual recognition. Journal of Applied Ecology. 2008; 45(4):1228–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01473.x
- Sankar K, Qureshi Q, Majumder A, Basu S. Ecology of tigers (Panthera tigris tigris) in Pench Tiger Reserve, Madhya Pradesh. Final report, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun; 2013. https://doi.org/10.2461/wbp.2012.8.4
- Sankar K, Qureshi Q, Chatterjee AB. Ecology of tigers (Panthera tigris tigris) in Pench Tiger Reserve, Madhya Pradesh, Phase - II. Final report, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun; 2017.
- Majumder A, Basu S, Sankar K, Qureshi Q, Jhala YV, Gopal R. Prey selection, food habits and temporal activity patterns of sympatric carnivores in Pench Tiger Reserve, Madhya Pradesh, Central India. Journal of Scientific Transactions in Environment and Technovation. 2012; 5:110–20.
- Schaller GB. The deer and the tiger. A study of wildlife in India. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago; 1967. p. 384.
- Dinerstein E. An ecological survey of the Royal Karnali-Bardia Wildlife Reserve, Nepal. Part I: vegetation, modifying factors, and successional relationships. Biological conservation; 1979. 15(2):127–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-3207(79)90055-7
- Karanth KU, Sunquist ME. Prey selection by tiger, leopard and dhole in tropical forests. Journal of Animal Ecology. 1995; 64:439–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/5647
- Sunquist ME, Karanth KU, Sunquist F. Ecology, behaviour and resilience of the tiger and its conservation needs. In: Seidensticker J, Christie S, Jackson P (eds). Riding the tiger; Tiger conservation in human dominated landscapes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999. p. 5–18.
- Karanth KU, Stith BM. Prey depletion as a critical deter- minant of tiger population viability. In: Seidensticker J, Christie S, Jackson P (eds). Riding the tiger: Tiger conservation in human dominated landscapes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 1999.
- Wikramanayake E, Dinerstein E, Seidensticker J, Lumpkin S, Pandav B, Shrestha M, et al. A landscape?based conservation strategy to double the wild tiger population. Conservation Letters. 2011; 4(3):219–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755263X.2010.00162.x
- Southwell C, Weaver K. Evaluation of analytical procedures for density estimation from line-transect data: Data grouping, data truncation and the unit of analysis. Wildlife Research. 1993; 20(4):433–43. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR9930433
- Burnham KP, Anderson DR. A practical information-theoretic approach. Model selection and multimodel inference. 2002; 2.
- Oliver MA, Webster R. Kriging: a method of interpolation for geographical information systems. International Journal of Geographical Information System. 1990; 4(3):313–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/02693799008941549
- Bagchi S, Goyal SP, Sankar K. Prey abundance and prey selection by tigers (Panthera tigris) in a semi-arid, dry deciduous forest in western India. Journal of Zoology. 2003; 260(3):285–90. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952836903003765
- Ramesh T, Sridharan N, Sankar K, Qureshi Q, Selvan KM, Gokulakkannan N, et al. Status of large carnivores and their prey in tropical rainforests of South-western Ghats, India. Tropical Ecology. 2012; 53(2):137–48.
- Eisenberg JF, Seidensticker J. Ungulates in southern Asia: A consideration of biomass estimates for selected habitats. Biological Conservation. 1976; 10(4):293–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-3207(76)90003-3
- Jhala YV, Qureshi Q, Gopal R. The status of tigers, copredators and prey in India 2014. National Tiger Conservation Authority, New Delhi and Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun. TR2015/021; 2015.
- Carbone C, Gittleman JL. A common rule for the scaling of carnivore density. Science. 2002; 295(5563):2273–6. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1067994. PMid:11910114
- Hatton IA, McCann KS, Fryxell JM, Davies TJ, Smerlak M, Sinclair AR, et al. The predator-prey power law: Biomass scaling across terrestrial and aquatic biomes. Science. 2015; 349(6252). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac6284. PMid:26339034