Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 191, Issue 3, pp 531–540 | Cite as

Spatial partitioning by a subordinate carnivore is mediated by conspecific overlap

  • C. MarneweckEmail author
  • D. G. Marneweck
  • O. L. van Schalkwyk
  • G. Beverley
  • H. T. Davies-Mostert
  • D. M. Parker
Behavioral ecology – original research

Abstract

There are several hypotheses that could explain territory size in mammals, including the resource dispersion hypothesis (RDH), the intruder pressure hypothesis (IPH), and the intraguild predation hypothesis (IGPH). In this study, we tested predictions of these three hypotheses regarding territories of 19 packs of endangered African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus) over 2 years in the Kruger National Park, South Africa. If territory size was supported by the RDH, then we would observe (1) wild dog territories would be larger when resource patches were more dispersed, (2) pack sizes would be larger when resource patches were rich, and (3) pack size would not affect territory size. If supported by the IPH, then we would observe (4) larger territories would experience less intrusions, and (5) there would be an increase in territory overlap in areas of low resource dispersion. Finally, if supported by the IGPH, we would observe (6) territories would be larger in areas of higher lion (Panthera leo) density, as evidence of a spatial avoidance strategy. We found that the IGPH was fully supported (6), the IPH half supported (5), and the RDH partially supported (1 and 3), where we found spatial partitioning of wild dogs with lions, potentially mediated by resources and territory overlap with conspecifics. Ultimately, our results show that subordinate carnivores must balance a trade-off between dominant interspecific competitors and conspecifics to successfully coexist in areas with dominant carnivores.

Keywords

African wild dog Intraguild predation Intruder pressure Resource richness Resource dispersion Territory overlap Territory size 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank South African National Parks (SANParks) honorary rangers and the Endangered Wildlife Trust (EWT) for sponsoring the tracking collars, and the technical staff from SANParks Veterinary Wildlife Services, State Veterinary Services, and the EWT Carnivore Conservation Programme for assistance in collaring the wild dogs, and maintain active collars over the duration of this study. We also thank SANParks for the supporting data regarding lions and impalas.

Author contribution statement

CM and DGM originally formulated the idea, GB and OLS conducted field work, CM and OLS analysed the data; all authors contributed to writing the manuscript (CM, DGM, OLS, GB, HDM, DP).

Supplementary material

442_2019_4512_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.1 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 1107 kb)

References

  1. Abraham JO, Hempson GP, Staver AC (2019) Drought-response strategies of savanna herbivores. Ecol Evol 9:7047–7056PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baddeley A, Rubak E, Turner R (2015) Spatial point patterns: methodology and applications with R. Chapman and Hall/CRC Press, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balme GA, Pitman RT, Robinson HS, Miller JRB, Funston PJ, Hunter LTB (2017) Leopard distribution and abundance is unaffected by interference competition with lions. Behav Ecol 28:1348–1358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67:1–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bivand R, Rundel C (2018) rgeos: interface to geometry engine—Open Source (‘GEOS’), vol. R package version 0.4-2Google Scholar
  6. Bivand RS, Pebesma E, Gomez-Rubio V (2013) Applied spatial data analysis with R, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bryant JV, Zeng X, Hong X, Chatterjee HJ, Turvey ST (2017) Spatiotemporal requirements of the Hainan gibbon: does home range constrain recovery of the world’s rarest ape? Am J Primatol 79:e22617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buettner UK, Davies-Mostert HT, du Toit JT, Mills MGL (2007) Factors affecting juvenile survival in African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus) in Kruger National Park, South Africa. J Zool 272:10–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Calenge C (2006) The package adehabitat for the R software: tool for the analysis of space and habitat use by animals. Ecol Model 197:1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carbone C, Frame L, Frame G, Malcolm J, Fanshawe J, FitzGibbon C, Schaller G, Gordon IJ, Rowcliffe JM, Du Toit JT (2005) Feeding success of African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus) in the Serengeti: the effects of group size and kleptoparasitism. J Zool 266:153–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Courchamp F, Macdonald DW (2001) Crucial importance of pack size in the African wild dog Lycaon pictus. Anim Conserv 4:169–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cozzi G, Broekhuis F, McNutt JW, Turnbull LA, Macdonald DW (2012) Fear of the dark or dinner by moonlight? Reduced temporal partitioning among Africa’s large carnivores. Ecology 93:2590–2599PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Creel S, Creel NM (1995) Communal hunting and pack size in African wild dogs, Lycaon pictus. Anim Behav 50:1325–1339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Creel S, Creel NM (1996) Limitation of African wild dogs by competition with larger carnivores. Conserv Biol 10:526–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Creel S, Creel NM (1998) Six ecological factors that may limit African wild dogs, Lycaon pictus. Anim Conserv 1:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Creel S, Creel NM (2002) The African wild dog: behavior, ecology, and conservation. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  17. Darnell AM, Graf JA, Somers MJ, Slotow R, Szykman Gunther M (2014) Space use of African wild dogs in relation to other large carnivores. PLoS One 9:e98846PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Davies H (2000) The 1999/2000 Kruger National Park wild dog photographic survey. South African National Parks Board, unpublished report, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  19. Davies AB, Marneweck DG, Druce DJ, Asner GP (2016) Den site selection, pack composition, and reproductive success in endangered African wild dogs. Behav Ecol 27:1869–1879Google Scholar
  20. Dröge E, Creel S, Becker MS, M’soka J (2017) Spatial and temporal avoidance of risk within a large carnivore guild. Ecol Evol 7:189–199PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Dunham KM (1979) The feeding ecology of impala Aepyceros melampus in the Sengwa Wildlife Research Area, Rhodesia. M.Phil. thesis, University of Rhodesia, Salisbury, RhodesiaGoogle Scholar
  22. Dyer S (2012) Population size, demography and spatial ecology of cheetahs in the Timbavati Private Nature Reserve, South Africa. M.Sc. thesis, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  23. Ferreira SM, Funston PJ (2010) Estimating lion population variables: prey and disease effects in Kruger National Park, South Africa. Wildl Res 37:194–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Forssman KR, Marneweck C, O’Riain MJ, Davies-Mostert HT, Mills MGL (2018) Pup provisioning in the cooperatively breeding African wild dog, Lycaon pictus, is driven by pack size, social status, and age. Afr J Wildl Res 48:013005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Frame LH, Malcolm JR, Frame GW, Van Lawick H (1979) Social organization of African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus) on the Serengeti plains, Tanzania 1967–1978. Z Tierpsychol 50:225–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gannon WL, Sikes RS (2007) Guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists for the use of wild mammals in research. J Mammal 88:809–823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Getz WM, Fortmann-Roe S, Cross PC, Lyons AJ, Ryan SJ, Wilmers CC (2007) LoCoH: nonparameteric kernel methods for constructing home ranges and utilization distributions. PLoS One 2:e207PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Girman DJ, Mills MGL, Geffen E, Wayne RK (1997) A molecular genetic analysis of social structure, dispersal, and interpack relationships of the African wild dog (Lycaon pictus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 40:187–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gorman ML, Mills MG, Raath JP, Speakman JR (1998) High hunting costs make African wild dogs vulnerable to kleptoparasitism by hyaenas. Nature 391:479–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Groom RJ, Lannas K, Jackson CR (2017) The impact of lions on the demography and ecology of endangered African wild dogs. Anim Conserv 20:382–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hayward MW, Kerley GIH (2005) Prey preferences of the lion (Panthera leo). J Zool 267:309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hayward MW, Slotow R (2009) Temporal partitioning of activity in large African carnivores: tests of multiple hypotheses. S Afr J Wildl Res 39:109–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hayward MW, O’Brien J, Hofmeyr M, Kerley GIH (2006) Prey preferences of the African wild dog Lycaon pictus (Canidae: Carnivora): ecological requirements for conservation. J Mammal 87:1122–1131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hayward MW, Hayward GJ, Druce DJ, Kerley GIH (2009) Do fences constrain predator movements on an evolutionary scale? Home range, food intake and movement patterns of large predators reintroduced to Addo Elephant National Park, South Africa. Biodivers Conserv 18:887–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jackson CR, Power RJ, Groom RJ, Masenga EH, Mjingo EE, Fyumagwa RD, Roskaft E, Davies-Mostert H (2014) Heading for the hills: risk avoidance drives den site selection in African wild dogs. PLoS One 9:e99686PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jackson CR, Groom RJ, Jordan NR, McNutt JW (2017) The effect of relatedness and pack size on territory overlap in African wild dogs. Mov Ecol 5:10PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jordan NR, Buse C, Wilson AM, Golabek KA, Apps PJ, Lowe JC, Van der Weyde LK, McNutt JW (2017) Dynamics of direct inter-pack encounters in endangered African wild dogs. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 71:115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Karanth KU, Srivathsa A, Vasudev D, Puri M, Parameshwaran R, Kumar NS (2017) Spatio-temporal interactions facilitate large carnivore sympatry across a resource gradient. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 284:20161860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kemp LV, Mills MGL (2005) The 4th wild dog and 2nd cheetah photographic census in the greater Kruger region Spetember 2004–April 2005. Endangered Wildlife Trust, unpublished report, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  40. Kittle AM, Anderson M, Avgar T, Baker JA, Brown GS, Hagens J, Iwachewski E, Moffatt S, Mosser A, Patterson BR, Reid DEB, Rodgers AR, Shuter J, Street GM, Thompson ID, Vander Vennen LM, Fryxell JM (2015) Wolves adapt territory size, not pack size to local habitat quality. J Anim Ecol 84:1177–1186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kowalczyk R, Zalewski A, Bogumiła J (2006) Daily movement and territory use by badgers Meles meles in Białowieża Primeval Forest, Poland. Wildl Biol 12:385–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kruuk H, Parish T (1982) Factors affecting population density, group size and territory size of the European badger, Meles meles. J Zool Lond 196:31–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lonsinger RC, Gese EM, Bailey LL, Waits LP (2017) The roles of habitat and intraguild predation by coyotes on the spatial dynamics of kit foxes. Ecosphere 8:e01749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Loveridge AJ, Valeix M, Davidson Z, Murindagomo F, Fritz H, Macdonald DW (2009) Changes in home range size of African lions in relation to pride size and prey biomass in a semi-arid savanna. Ecography 32:953–962Google Scholar
  45. Macdonald DW (1983) The ecology of carnivore social behaviour. Nature 301:379–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Maher CR, Lott DF (1995) Definitions of territoriality used in the study of variation in vertebrate spacing systems. Anim Behav 49:1581–1597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Malcolm JR, Marten K (1982) Natural selection and the communal rearing of pups in African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 10:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Marneweck DG (2018) Behavioural ecology of the African wild dog in Hluhluwe-iMfolozi Park (unpublished data) Google Scholar
  49. Marneweck DG, Druce DJ, Somers MJ (2019) Food, family and female age affect reproduction and pup survival of African wild dogs. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 73:65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Marneweck C, Marneweck DG, van Schalkwyk OL, Beverley G, Davies-Mostert HT, Parker DM (this study) Google Scholar
  51. Marnewick K, Davies-Mostert HT (2012) Kruger National Park 2008/2009 5th wild dog and 3rd cheetah photographic census. Endangered Wildlife Trust and South African National Parks Board, unpublished report, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  52. Marnewick K, Ferreira SM, Grange S, Watermeyer J, Maputla N, Davies-Mostert HT (2014) Evaluating the status of and African wild dogs Lycaon pictus and cheetahs Acinonyx jubatus through tourist-based photographic surveys in the Kruger National Park. PLoS One 9:e86265PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mbizah MM, Joubert CJ, Joubert L, Groom RJ (2014) Implications of African wild dog (Lycaon pictus) denning on the density and distribution of a key prey species: addressing myths and misperceptions. Biodivers Conserv 23:1441–1451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mihoub J-B, Robert A, Le Gouar P, Sarrazin F (2011) Post-release dispersal in animal translocations: social attraction and the ‘‘vacuum effect’’. PLoS One 12:e27453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Miller DL (2017) Distance: distance sampling detection function and abundance estimation, vol. R package version 0.9.7Google Scholar
  56. Miller DL, Rexstad E, Burt L, Bravington MV, Hedley S (2019) dsm: density surface modelling of distance sampling data, vol. R package version 2.2.17Google Scholar
  57. Mills MGL, Gorman ML (1997) Factors affecting the density and distribution of wild dogs in the Kruger National Park. Conserv Biol 11:1397–1406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Myers JP, Connors PG, Pitelka FA (1979) Territory size in Wintering Sanderlings: the effects of prey abundance and intruder density. Auk 96:551–561Google Scholar
  59. Owen-Smith N (1988) Megaherbivores. The influence of very large body size on ecology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Parker MN (2010) Territoriality and scent marking behavior of African wild dogs in northern Botswana. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Montana, MontanaGoogle Scholar
  61. Peel M (2015) Ecological monitoring: association of private nature reserves (Timbavati, Umbabat, Klaserie and Balule)Google Scholar
  62. Polis GA, Myers CA (1989) The ecology and evolution of intraguild predation: potential competitors that eat each other. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 20:297–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. R Core Team (2019) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  64. Rasmussen GS, Gusset M, Courchamp F, Macdonald DW (2008) Achilles’ heel of sociality revealed by energetic poverty trap in cursorial hunters. Am Nat 172:508–518PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  65. Rasmussen GSA, Macdonald DW, Bennett N (2012) Masking of the zeitgeber: African wild dogs mitigate persecution by balancing time. J Zool 286:232–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Reich A (1981) The behavior and ecology of the African wild dog, Lycaon pictus, in the Kruger National Park. Ph.D. thesis, Yale University, Connecticut, USAGoogle Scholar
  67. SANParks (2015) Lion survey (unpublished data) Google Scholar
  68. SANParks (2016) Herbivore survey (unpublished data) Google Scholar
  69. SANParks (2017) Herbivore survey (unpublished data) Google Scholar
  70. Scull P, Palmer M, Frey F, Kraly E (2012) A comparison of two home range modeling methods using Ugandan mountain gorilla data. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 26:2111–2121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Spong G (2002) Space use in lions, Panthera leo, in the Selous Game Reserve: social and ecological factors. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:303–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Stamps JA (1990) The effect of contender pressure on territory size and overlap in seasonally territorial species. Am Nat 135:614–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Stamps JA, Buechner M (1985) The territorial defense hypothesis and the ecology of insular vertebrates. Q Rev Biol 60:155–181PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. St-Pierre C, Ouellet J-P, Crête M (2006) Do competitive intraguild interactions affect space and habitat use by small carnivores in a forested landscape? Ecography 29:487–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Swanson A, Caro T, Davies-Mostert H, Mills MG, Macdonald DW, Borner M, Masenga E, Packer C (2014) Cheetahs and wild dogs show contrasting patterns of suppression by lions. J Anim Ecol 83:1418–1427PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Tallents LA, Randall DA, Williams SD, Macdonald DW (2012) Territory quality determines social group composition in Ethiopian wolves Canis simensis. J Anim Ecol 81:24–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Tensen L, van Vuuren BJ, du Plessis C, Marneweck DG (2019) African wild dogs: genetic viability of translocated populations across South Africa. Biol Conserv 234:131–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Valeix M, Loveridge AJ, Macdonald DW (2012) Influence of prey dispersion on territory and group size of African lions: a test of the resource dispersion hypothesis. Ecology 93:2490–2496PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. van der Meer E, Mpofu J, Rasmussen GSA, Fritz H (2013) Characteristics of African wild dog natal dens selected under different interspecific predation pressures. Mammal Biol 78:336–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. van Heerden J, Mills MGL, van Vuuren MJ, Kelly PJ, Dreyer MJ (1995) An investigation into the health status and diseases of wild dogs in the Kruger National Park. J S Afr Vet Assoc 66:18–27PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Vanak AT, Fortin D, Thaker M, Ogden M, Owen C, Greatwood S, Slotow R (2013) Moving to stay in place: behavioral mechanisms for coexistence of African large carnivores. Ecology 94:2619–2631PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. WAG-SA (1998–2019) Wild Dog Advisory Group of South Africa meeting minutesGoogle Scholar
  83. Wilkinson I (1995) The 1994/1995 wild dog photographic survey. South African National Parks Board, unpublished report, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  84. Wilson RR, Shivik JA (2011) Contender pressure versus resource dispersion as predictors of territory size of coyotes (Canis latrans). Can J Zool 89:960–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Woodroffe R (2011) Ranging behaviour of African wild dog packs in a human-dominated landscape. J Zool 283:88–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Woodroffe R et al (2007) Rates and causes of mortality in Endangered African wild dogs Lycaon pictus: lessons for management and monitoring. Oryx 41:215–223.  https://doi.org/10.1017/s0030605307001809 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Yunger JA (2004) Movement and spatial organization of small mammals following vertebrate predator exclusion. Oecologia 139:647–654PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Biology and Environmental SciencesUniversity of MpumalangaMbombelaSouth Africa
  2. 2.Eugène Marais Chair of Wildlife Management, Mammal Research Institute, Department of Zoology and EntomologyUniversity of PretoriaPretoriaSouth Africa
  3. 3.Endangered Wildlife TrustJohannesburgSouth Africa
  4. 4.State Veterinarian, Department of Agriculture, Forestry and FisheriesGovernment of South AfricaSkukuzaSouth Africa
  5. 5.Wildlife and Reserve Management Research Group, Department of Zoology and EntomologyRhodes UniversityGrahamstownSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations