Advertisement

Journal of Arid Land

, Volume 10, Issue 6, pp 959–967 | Cite as

Activity patterns and resource partitioning: seven species at watering sites in the Altun Mountains, China

  • Yadong Xue
  • Jia Li
  • Guli Sagen
  • Yu Zhang
  • Yunchuan Dai
  • Diqiang LiEmail author
Article
  • 27 Downloads

Abstract

As part of a larger project to examine the richness and distribution of wildlife in Kumtag Desert area, we conducted camera trapping surveys during the period 2010–2012 at seven watering sites in an arid region of the Altun Mountains in western China. Information on activity patterns of the wild bactrian camel (Camelus ferus), kiang (Equus kiang), goitered gazelle (Gazella subgutturosa), argali (Ovis ammon), blue sheep (Pseudois nayaur), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), and wolf (Canis lupus) was obtained. We found that the wild camel, kiang, goitered gazelle, argali, and blue sheep were predominantly diurnal at watering sites, whereas red fox and wolf were nocturnal. Five herbivores partitioned the use of watering sites in a temporal manner to minimize the risk of predation by carnivores. The wild camel was the dominant herbivorous species at the watering sites. The kiang, goitered gazelle, argali, and blue sheep displayed adaptive water use by altering spatial or temporal patterns based on the presence or absence of wild camel, to minimize the risk of interspecific strife. These results are suggestive of the differences in activity patterns that might modulate water partitioning by different species, and provide insights for the development of conservation strategies for integrated species and decisions regarding water development in the Altun Mountains.

Keywords

camera trapping competition desert animal interaction watering site niche partitioning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by National Nonprofit Institute Research Grant of Chinese Academy of Forestry (CAFYBB2011003). We appreciate the work of YANG Hailong in his previous study on wild camels that provided very important information on sites for camera trapping. We thank Mamulihan MUHATI and DUAN Hailin for their help during fieldwork. We also thank the Administrative Bureau of Xinjiang Lop Nur Wild Camel National Nature Reserve and the Administrative Bureau of Gansu Annanba Wild Camel National Nature Reserve for their support of this study.

References

  1. Alderman J A, Krausman P R, Leopold B D. 1989. Diel activity of female desert bighorn sheep in western Arizona. Journal of Wildlife Management, 53(1): 264–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atwood T C, Gese E M. 2008. Coyotes and recolonizing wolves: social rank mediates risk-conditional behavior at ungulate carcasses. Animal Behavior, 75(3): 753–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atwood T C, Gese E M. 2010. The importance of resource selection and social behavior to partitioning of hostile space by sympatric canids. Journal of Mammalogy, 91(2): 490–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Atwood T C, Fry T L, Leland B R. 2011. Partitioning of anthropogenic watering sites by desert carnivores. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 75(7): 1609–1615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arias-Del R I, Hernández L, Laundré J W, et al. 2011. Do predator and prey foraging activity patterns match? A study of coyotes (Canis latrans), and lagomorphs (Lepus californicus and Sylvilagus audobonii). Journal of Arid Environments, 75(2): 112–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cain III J W, Krausman P R, Rosenstock S S, et al. 2006. Mechanisms of thermoregulation and water balance in desert ungulates. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 34(3): 570–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cain III J W, Krausman P R, Morgart J R, et al. 2008. Responses of desert bighorn sheep to removal of water sources. Wildlife Monograph, 171(1): 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. de Vos Jr J C, Miller W H. 2005. Habitat use and survival of Sonoran pronghorn in years with above-average precipitation. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 33(1): 35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Durant S M. 2000. Living with the enemy: avoidance of hyenas and lions by cheetahs in the Serengeti. Behavioral Ecology, 11(6): 624–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Edwards S, Gange A C, Wiesel I. 2015. Spatiotemporal resource partitioning of water sources by African carnivores on Namibian commercial farmlands. Journal of Zoology, 297(1): 22–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Edwards S, Gange A C, Wiesel I. 2016. An oasis in the desert: The potential of water sources as camera trap sites in arid environments for surveying a carnivore guild. Journal of Arid Environments, 124: 304–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Franck T, Marie-Claude H, Cédric V, et al. 2014. Use of camera traps for wildlife studies. A review. Biotechnologie Agronnmie Societe ET Environnement, 18(3): 446–454.Google Scholar
  13. Giotto N, Picot D, Maublanc M-L, et al. 2013. Effects of seasonal heat on the activity rhythm, habitat use, and space use of the beira antelope in southern Djibouti. Journal of Arid Environments, 89: 5–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ismail K, Kamal K, Plath M, et al. 2011. Effects of an exceptional drought on daily activity patterns, reproductive behaviour, and reproductive success of reintroduced Arabian oryx (Oryx leucoryx). Journal of Arid Environments, 75(2): 125–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Michalski F, Peres C A. 2007. Disturbance-mediated mammal persistence and abundance-area relationships in Amazonian forest fragments. Conservation Biology, 21(6): 1626–1640.Google Scholar
  16. Morgan E. 2004. Ecological significance of biological clocks. Biological Rhythm Research, 35(1–2): 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. O’Connell A F, Nichols J D, Karanth K U. 2011. Camera Traps in Animal Ecology: Methods and Analyses. Tokyo: Springer, 163–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rovero F, Zimmermann F, Berzi D, et al. 2013. “Which camera trap type and how many do I need?” A review of camera features and study designs for a range of wildlife research applications. Hystrix Italian Journal of Mammalogy, 24(2): 148–156.Google Scholar
  19. Sánchez-Rojas G, Gallina S. 2000. Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) density in a landscape element of the Chihuahuan Desert, Mexico. Journal of Arid Environments, 44(3): 357–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schoener T W. 1968. The Anolis lizards of Bimini: resource partitioning in a complex fauna. Ecology, 49(4): 704–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Soley F G, Alvarado-Díaz I. 2011. Prospective thinking in a mustelid? Eira barbara (Carnivora) cache unripe fruits to consume them once ripened. Naturwissenschaften, 98(8): 693–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tobler M W, Carrillo-Percastegui S E, Powell G. 2009. Habitat use, activity patterns and use of mineral licks by five species of ungulate in south-eastern Peru. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 25(3): 261–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Valeix M, Chamaillé-Jammes S, Fritz H. 2007. Interference competition and temporal niche shifts: elephants and herbivore communities at waterholes. Oecologia, 153(3): 739–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Valeix M, Fritz H, Loveridge A J, et al. 2009. Does the risk of encountering lions influence African herbivore behaviour at waterholes? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 63(10): 1483–1494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Vasconcelos R, Santos X, Carretero M A. 2012. High temperatures constrain microhabitat selection and activity patterns of the insular Cape Verde wall gecko. Journal of Arid Environments, 81: 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vidal M A, Pizarro-Araya J, Jerez V, et al. 2011. Daily activity and thermoregulation in predator-prey interaction during the Flowering Desert in Chile. Journal of Arid Environments, 75(9): 802–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vieira E M, Port D. 2007. Niche overlap and resource partitioning between two sympatric fox species in southern Brazil. Journal of Zoology, 272(1): 57–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Xue Y D, Liu F, Guo T Z, et al. 2014a. Using camera traps to survey wildlife at water sources on the northern slope of Altun Mountains, China. Acta Theriologica Sinica, 34(2): 164–171. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  29. Xue Y D, Liu F, Zhang Y G, et al. 2014b. Grouping behavior of wild camel (Camelus ferus) referred from video data of camera trap in Kumtag Desert. Biodiversity Science, 22 (6): 746–751. (in Chinese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yasuda M. 2004. Monitoring diversity and abundance of mammals with camera traps: a case study on Mount Tsukuba, central Japan. Mammal Study, 29(1): 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zeller D C. 1997. Home range and activity patterns of the coral trout Plectropomus leopardus (Serranidae). Marine Ecology Progress Series, 154: 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yadong Xue
    • 1
  • Jia Li
    • 1
  • Guli Sagen
    • 2
  • Yu Zhang
    • 1
  • Yunchuan Dai
    • 1
  • Diqiang Li
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Institute of Forest Ecology, Environment and ProtectionChinese Academy of ForestryBeijingChina
  2. 2.Administrative Bureau of Xinjiang Lop Nur Wild Camel National Nature ReserveUrumqiChina

Personalised recommendations