4.5 Article

Spatiotemporal Variation in Bonobo (Pan paniscus) Habitat Use in a Forest-Savanna Mosaic

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRIMATOLOGY
Volume 41, Issue 6, Pages 775-799

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10764-020-00180-5

Keywords

Democratic Republic of the Congo; Forest fragmentation; Habitat use; Home range; Pan paniscus; Spatial analyses

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Understanding the ecological and behavioral variation of primates is central to improving conservation strategies. Studies of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) have shown marked behavioral variability across a wide range of habitats. By comparison, bonobos (Pan paniscus) occur mainly in continuous forest sites, and socioecological models explaining behavioral differences between the two species are based on the assumption that bonobo habitat is richer and more stable than chimpanzee habitats. The objective of this study was to assess bonobo ecology in a forest-savanna mosaic. We specifically explored 1) bonobo home range size, habitat use, and dietary composition; 2) forest fragmentation in a bonobo community's home range; and 3) seasonality of dietary diversity, habitat use, and spatial distribution. Using 2 years of observational data on location, habitat type, and dietary composition, we found that the bonobo community's home range size, density, and dietary diversity were similar to those observed in continuous forest sites. Bonobos used areas with lower forest fragmentation than the surrounding areas and preferentially spent time in forested habitats. During the dry season, bonobos consumed a lower diversity of fruit species, spent more time in sparse forest with Marantaceae understory, and were closer to the seasonal center of their home range than during the rainy season. Our results contribute to our understanding of behavioral variation in bonobos and suggest that forest-savanna mosaic is valuable to bonobo conservation.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available