4.5 Article

Extended application of a marked-nest census method to examine seasonal changes in habitat use by chimpanzees

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRIMATOLOGY
Volume 22, Issue 6, Pages 913-928

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1023/A:1012057403512

Keywords

chimpanzee; seasonality; habitat use; marked-nest census; Kalinzu Forest; Uganda

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Kalinzu Forest Reserve in Uganda comprises various types of vegetation, including mixed mature forest, Parinari-dominated mature,and secondary forest, and Musanga-dominated secondary, forest. We used a marked-nest census method to examine seasonal changes in chimpanzees' use of the different vegetation types. We made 10 parallel line-transects in the study, area; they were 5-km long and 500-m apart. During the first 3-4 walks along the transects, we marked all existing nests. We then conducted 10 main censuses of all transects at 15-day, intervals, over a total period of about 5 months. In each main census, we recorded all unmarked nests visible from the transects and marked them. When we saw a nest, we searched for neighboring nests of the same age class less than or equal to 30 m of each other, in order to estimate the size and position of nest groups. To improve the accuracy, of the estimation of nest density, in each census period, we excluded nests that consisted only of brown leaves and corrected the number of nests observed by allowing for the proportion of newly-built nests that would still have green leaves at the next main census. We estimated the population density of chimpanzees in the study area both by the number of individual nests and by, the number of nest groups; the two methods gave similar results. We found differences in number of chimpanzees that used different vegetation types in different fruiting seasons, and differences ire nest group, size related to the different fruiting seasons.

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