4.5 Article

Males are faster foragers than females: intersexual differences of foraging behaviour in the Apennine chamois

Journal

BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY AND SOCIOBIOLOGY
Volume 68, Issue 8, Pages 1335-1344

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00265-014-1744-5

Keywords

Foraging behaviour; Sexual size dimorphism; Bite rate; Ungulates; Chamois

Funding

  1. Abruzzo
  2. Lazio
  3. Abruzzo, Lazio and Molise National Park Agency

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Availability of food resources and individual characteristics can influence foraging behaviour, which can differ between males and females, leading to different patterns of food/habitat selection. In dimorphic species, females are usually more selective in food choice, show greater bite rates and spend more time foraging than males. We evaluated sexual differences in foraging behaviour in Apennine chamois Rupicapra pyrenaica ornata, during the warm season, before the rut. Both sexes selected nutritious vegetation patches and spent a comparable amount of time feeding. However, males had a significantly greater feeding intensity (bite rate) and a lower search effort for feeding (step rate), as well as they spent more time lying down than females. Females selected foraging sites closer to refuge areas than males. In chamois, sexual size dimorphism is seasonal, being negligible in winter-spring, but increasing to 30-40 % in autumn. Our results suggest that males enhance their energy and mass gain by increasing their food intake rate during the warm season, to face the costs of the mating season (November). Conversely, females seem to prioritize a fine-scale selection of vegetation and the protection of offspring. A great food intake rate of males in the warm season could have developed as a behavioural adaptation leading herbivores to the evolutionary transition from year-round monomorphism to permanent dimorphism, through seasonal dimorphism.

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