4.3 Article

Variation in Carbon Isotope Values Among Chimpanzee Foods at Ngogo, Kibale National Park and Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PRIMATOLOGY
Volume 78, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ajp.22540

Keywords

Pan troglodytes; stable isotope ecology; Kibale National Park; Bwindi Impenetrable National Park; Uganda

Categories

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [BCS-0925785]
  2. Purdue University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Stable isotope values in primate tissues can be used to reconstruct diet in the absence of direct observation. However, in order to make dietary inferences, one must first establish isotopic variability for potential food sources. In this study we examine stable carbon isotope (delta C-13) values for chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) food resources from two Ugandan forests: Ngogo (Kibale National Park), and Bwindi Impenetrable National Park. Mean delta C-13 values for plant samples are equivalent at both sites. Plant delta C-13 values are best explained by a multivariate linear model including plant part (leaves, pith, flowers, and fruit), vertical position within the canopy (canopy vs. ground), and taxon (R-2 = 0.6992). At both sites, leaves had the lowest delta C-13 values followed by pith and fruit. Canopy resources have comparable delta C-13 values at the two sites but ground resources have lower delta C-13 values at Ngogo than Bwindi (-30.7 vs. -28.6%). Consequently, isotopic differences between ground and canopy resources (4.2 vs. 2.2%), and among plant parts are more pronounced at Ngogo. These results demonstrate that underlying environmental differences between sites can produce variable delta C-13 signatures among primate food resources. In the absence of observation data or isotope values for local vegetation, caution must be taken when interpreting isotopic differences among geographically or temporally separated populations or species. (C) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available