Quick Search:

is currently disabled due to reindexing of the ZORA database. Please use Advanced Search.
uzh logo
Browse by:
bullet
bullet
bullet
bullet

Zurich Open Repository and Archive 

Permanent URL to this publication: http://dx.doi.org/10.5167/uzh-4683

Grueter, C C; Li, D; van Schaik, C P; Ren, B; Long, Y; Wei, F (2008). Ranging of Rhinopithecus bieti in the Samage Forest, China. I. Characteristics of range use. International Journal of Primatology, 29(5):1121-1145.

[img] PDF - Registered users only
1MB

Abstract

We quantified the home range and explored the style of ranging of black-and-white snub-nosed monkeys (Rhinopithecus bieti) in the subtropical-temperate montane Samage Forest (part of Baimaxueshan Nature Reserve) in the vicinity of Gehuaqing. Over 14.5 mo, we took positional records of the study band via a GPS receiver at 30-min intervals, and found that they covered an area of 32 km2. Over a 10-yr period, the group even ranged in an area of 56 km2, which is among the largest home range estimates for any primate. The large home range was probably due to the combined effects of large group size (N > 400) and forest heterogeneity, with seasonally food-rich areas interspersed with less valuable areas. The subjects did not use their home range uniformly: 29% of the grid cells had more location records than
expected based on a uniform distribution, thus representing a core area, albeit a disjunct one. A continuous 1-mo group follow in the fall revealed that the band traveled on average 1.62 km/d and that days of concentrated use of a particular forest block were followed by more extensive marches. Neither climate nor human disturbance parameters correlate significantly with monthly estimates of the group’s home range size. Even though there is no significant correlation between temporal availability of plant phenophases and range size, our observations implicate temporal and spatial availability of food as a determinant of home range use of the focal group. Winter,spring, and summer home ranges are equally large: 18.2, 17.8, and 18.6 km, respectively. Home range decreased markedly in fall (9.3 km2), probably because the band obtained sufficient food resources (fruit) in a smaller area. The large winter range
is best attributed to the exploitation of dispersed clumped patches of mature fruits.

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:07 Faculty of Science > Anthropological Institute and Museum
DDC:300 Social sciences, sociology & anthropology
Language:English
Date:25 September 2008
Deposited On:27 Oct 2008 07:26
Last Modified:27 Nov 2013 23:52
Publisher:Springer
ISSN:0164-0291
Publisher DOI:10.1007/s10764-008-9299-9
Citations:Web of Science®. Times Cited: 17
Google Scholar™
Scopus®. Citation Count: 21

Users (please log in): suggest update or correction for this item

Repository Staff Only: item control page