Feeding behavior and aggression in wild Siberut macaques (Macaca siberu) living under low predation risk
Feeding behavior and aggression in wild Siberut macaques (Macaca siberu) living under low predation risk
复制标题
捕食风险低的野生西比鲁猕猴（Macaca siburu）的摄食行为和攻击性
DOI：
10.1002/ajp.22393
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
O. Schülke
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Christin Richter;P. Gras;K. Hodges;J. Ostner;O. Schülke
研究影响喂养竞争的因素对我们理解社会关系的多样性至关重要。社会生态模型在预测捕食风险是否直接影响捕食竞争以及哪些因素准确预测竞争方面存在差异。本文研究了西伯利亚猕猴（Macaca siberu）的取食竞争，这是西苏门答腊西伯利亚岛特有的物种。由于没有主要的捕食者（猫科动物、猛禽），西伯利亚猕猴被捕食的风险很低。因此，它们是测试低捕食风险会减少捕食竞争这一预测的合适对象。为了评估竞争潜力，我们量化了食物植物的大小、空间分布和密度，以及替代资源的可用性。我们使用改进的焦点树方法记录食物斑块的行为。按平均摄食组大小递减排序的食物斑块包括大树（占焦点植物观察的40%）、藤本植物/绞藤本植物（16%）、中等树木（9%）、小型（棕榈树）树木（20%）和藤本植物（15%）。大多数食物斑块呈块状，但相对于平均种群分布面积密度较低。因此，可替代食物的可用性很低。虽然食物斑块特征显示出较高的竞争潜力，但观察到的攻击率（0.13回合/小时）相对于其他灵长类动物较低。平均摄食组大小相对于总摄食组大小较小，摄食组大小与冠体积相匹配。基于空间和摄食行为，幼鱼的感知捕食风险较低。总之，这些结果表明，捕食风险可能会影响捕食竞争。社会因子和时间因子（斑块取食时间）能预测食物斑块的攻击频率，而生态因子（斑块和森林的果实丰度、替代资源）不能预测。总的来说，比较数据仍然相对缺乏，研究人员应该收集更多关于群体传播、亚分组、感知捕食风险和食物斑块攻击的数据，然后才能得出捕食风险在觅食竞争中的作用的最终结论。点。[j] .生物医学工程学报，2015。©2015 Wiley期刊公司
Investigating which factors influence feeding competition is crucial for our understanding of the diversity of social relationships. Socio‐ecological models differ in their predictions whether predation risk directly influences feeding competition and which factors exactly predict contest competition. We investigated feeding competition in Siberut macaques (Macaca siberu), a species endemic to Siberut Island (West Sumatra, Indonesia). Siberut macaques experience low predation risk, as major predators (felids, raptors) are absent. They are therefore appropriate subjects to test the prediction that low predation risk reduces feeding competition. To estimate contest potential, we quantified size, spatial distribution and density of food plants, and the availability of alternative resources. We recorded behavior in food patches using a modified focal tree method. Food patches, sorted by decreasing average feeding group size, included large trees (40% of focal plant observations), lianas/strangler (16%), medium trees (9%), small (palm) trees (20%), and rattan (15%). Most food patches were clumped but occurred at low densities relative to the area of average group spread. Thus, availability of alternative food patches was low. Although food patch characteristics indicate high contest potential, the observed aggression rate (0.13 bouts between adults/h) was low relative to other primates. Average feeding group size was small relative to total group size, and feeding group size matched crown volume. Perceived predation risk was low, based on spatial and feeding behavior of juveniles. Together, these results suggest that predation risk may influence feeding competition. Social and temporal factors (patch feeding time), but not ecological factors (fruit abundance in patch and forest, alternative resources) predicted aggression frequency in food patches. Overall, comparative data are still relatively scarce, and researchers should collect more data on group spread, sub‐grouping, perceived predation risk, and aggression in food patches before we can draw final conclusions about the role of predation risk for feeding competition. Am. J. Primatol. 77:741–752, 2015. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
影响因子：
2.4
作者：
L. Morrell;G. Ruxton;R. James
通讯作者：
L. Morrell;G. Ruxton;R. James