4.3 Article

Seasonal variation in the feeding ecology of the grey-cheeked mangabey (Lophocebus albigena) in Cameroon

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PRIMATOLOGY
卷 54, 期 2, 页码 91-105

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ajp.1015

关键词

mangabey; Lophocebus albigena; Cameroon; feeding ecology; seasonality; activity budget

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Seasonal fluctuations in resource abundance often cause primates to change their feeding behavior and ecology. The objective of this study was to examine the response of a largely frugivorous monkey, the grey-checked mangabey (Lophocebus albigena), to seasonal variations in fruit abundance. We used 15-min scan sampling to quantify feeding, activity, and habitat use by monkeys between February and December 1998 in the Dja Reserve, Cameroon. L. albigena were found to have omnivorous feeding habits, consuming the fruits, seeds, leaves, and flowers of 132 plant species. Although monkeys fed from many plant species, only five plant species accounted for 45% of all feeding records. The number of feeding observations on a plant species was significantly correlated with its fruit production. L. albigena responded to fruit-lean periods by shifting from a diet dominated by fruit to one dominated by seeds, flowers, and young leaves, This diet shift coincided with greater use of swamp habitat and higher dietary diversity. L. albigena spent the greatest percentage of scan samples feeding and traveling, but activities varied significantly over the day. Individuals spent a significantly higher percentage of scan samples feeding during the fruit-rich season than in the fruit-lean season. Comparing our results to those of studies in Gabon and Uganda, we found that L. albigena differ across regions in the number of plant species they consume and time spent feeding. These differences may be a result of variations in tree diversity or the strength of seasonal fluctuations in resource abundance among sites. Am. J. Primatol. 54:91-105, 2001. (C) 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据