Human-elephant conflict poses a major threat to elephants in many parts of Asia, including Sri Lanka. We studied human-elephant conflict in two areas with contrasting scenarios of landuse and conflict, Kahalle and Yala. Kahalle was developed and settled under the Mahaweli irrigation project and the main agricultural practice was irrigated agriculture, with two annual growing seasons. The area was a mosaic of settlements, agriculture, and small forest patches with ill defined human-and elephant-use areas. Elephants ranged within the habitat mosaic year round, occupying remnant forest patches and raiding adjacent crops at night. In contrast, Yala was dominated by a large protected area complex, and the main agricultural methods were slash-andburn agriculture and rain-fed paddy cultivation. Human-and elephant-use areas were well defined and segregated. The protected area provided elephants with a refuge and food during the rainy season, when the single annual crop was grown. During the dry season, elephants moved into slashand-burn areas and utilized leftover crops and pioneer vegetation in fallow fields. The landuse pattern and agricultural practices in Yala facilitated co-existence, whereas that in Kahalle led to year round conflict. We suggest that areas managed according to traditional landuse practices should be part of an elephant conservation strategy, where people and elephants have to share resources.

Noninvasive genotyping has not gained wide application, due to the notion that it is unreliable, and also because remedial measures are time consuming and expensive. Of the wide variety of noninvasive DNA sources, dung is the most universal and most widely used in studies. We have developed collection, extraction, and amplification protocols that are inexpensive and provide a high level of success in amplifying both mitochondrial and nuclear DNA from dung. Here we demonstrate the reliability of genotyping from elephant dung using these protocols by comparing results from dung-extracted DNA to results from blood-extracted DNA. The level of error from dung extractions was only slightly higher than from blood extractions, and conducting two extractions from each sample and a single amplification from each extraction was sufficient to eliminate error. Di-, tri-, and tetranucleotide loci were equally reliable, and low DNA quantity and quality and PCR inhibitors were not a major problem in genotyping from dung. We discuss the possible causes of error in genotyping with particular reference to noninvasive samples and suggest methods of reducing such error.

The origin of Borneo's elephants is controversial. Two competing hypotheses argue that they are either indigenous, tracing back to the Pleistocene, or were introduced, descending from elephants imported in the 16th–18th centuries. Taxonomically, they have either been classified as a unique subspecies or placed under the Indian or Sumatran subspecies. If shown to be a unique indigenous population, this would extend the natural species range of the Asian elephant by 1300 km, and therefore Borneo elephants would have much greater conservation importance than if they were a feral population. We compared DNA of Borneo elephants to that of elephants from across the range of the Asian elephant, using a fragment of mitochondrial DNA, including part of the hypervariable d-loop, and five autosomal microsatellite loci. We find that Borneo's elephants are genetically distinct, with molecular divergence indicative of a Pleistocene colonisation of Borneo and subsequent isolation. We reject the hypothesis that Borneo's elephants were introduced. The genetic divergence of Borneo elephants warrants their recognition as a separate evolutionary significant unit. Thus, interbreeding Borneo elephants with those from other populations would be contraindicated in ex situ conservation, and their genetic distinctiveness makes them one of the highest priority populations for Asian elephant conservation.

We studied the ranging patterns of 10 elephants in and around the Yala protected area complex, southern Sri Lanka, using VHF radio telemetry. All tracked elephants displayed similar ranging patterns. The observed home ranges were small (mean=115.2±64.0 km2) relative to reported home ranges in India, possibly in response to high habitat productivity and abundant perennial water sources. Elephants showed high fidelity to their ranges. Home ranges had relatively large core areas, suggesting intensive use of habitat. No geographically distinct seasonal ranges or migratory behavior was observed. Home range overlap was high, and territoriality was absent. Male musth ranges were considerably larger than non-musth ranges and may signify mate searching. Most elephants ranged both in and outside protected areas, suggesting that resources outside protected areas were important for their survival. Thus, translocating and restricting elephants to protected areas will be detrimental to their survival, as it limits resource access. The ranging patterns of Asian elephants suggest that conservation of the species requires their management both in and outside protected areas. Original investigation Ranging behavior of the Asian elephant in Sri Lanka AbstractWe studied the ranging patterns of ten elephants in and around the Yala protected area complex, southern Sri Lanka, using VHF radio telemetry. All tracked elephants displayed similar ranging patterns. The observed home ranges were small (mean = 115.2±64.0 km 2 ) relative to reported home ranges in India, possibly in response to high habitat productivity and abundant perennial water sources. Elephants showed high fidelity to their ranges. Home ranges had relatively large core areas, suggesting intensive use of habitat. No geographically distinct seasonal ranges or migratory behavior was observed. Home range overlap was high, and territoriality was absent.Male musth ranges were considerably larger than non-musth ranges and may signify mate searching. Most elephants ranged both in and outside protected areas, suggesting that resources outside protected areas were important for their survival.Thus, translocating and restricting elephants to protected areas will be detrimental to their survival, as it limits resource access. The ranging patterns of Asian elephants suggest that conservation of the species requires their management both in and outside protected areas.

No abstract

Digestive physiology and movement patterns of animal dispersers determine deposition patterns for endozoochorously dispersed seeds. We combined data from feeding trials, germination tests, and GPS telemetry of Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) to (1) describe the spatial scale at which Asian elephants disperse seeds; (2) assess whether seasonal differences in diet composition and ranging behavior translate into differences in seed shadows; and (3) evaluate whether scale and seasonal patterns vary between two ecologically distinct areas: Sri Lanka's dry monsoon forests and Myanmar's (Burma) mixed‐deciduous forests. The combination of seed retention times (mean 39.5 h, maximum 114 h) and elephant displacement rates (average 1988 m in 116 hours) resulted in 50% of seeds dispersed over 1.2 km (mean 1222–2105 m, maximum 5772 m). Shifts in diet composition did not affect gut retention time and germination of ingested seeds. Elephant displacements were slightly longer, with stronger seasonal variation in Myanmar. As a consequence, seed dispersal curves varied seasonally with longer distances during the dry season in Myanmar but not in Sri Lanka. Seasonal and geographic variation in seed dispersal curves was the result of variation in elephant movement patterns, rather than the effect of diet changes on the fate of ingested seeds.

Human-elephant conflict (HEC) threatens the survival of endangered Asian elephants (Elephas maximus). Translocating “problem-elephants” is an important HEC mitigation and elephant conservation strategy across elephant range, with hundreds translocated annually. In the first comprehensive assessment of elephant translocation, we monitored 16 translocations in Sri Lanka with GPS collars. All translocated elephants were released into national parks. Two were killed within the parks where they were released, while all the others left those parks. Translocated elephants showed variable responses: “homers” returned to the capture site, “wanderers” ranged widely, and “settlers” established home ranges in new areas soon after release. Translocation caused wider propagation and intensification of HEC, and increased elephant mortality. We conclude that translocation defeats both HEC mitigation and elephant conservation goals.

No abstract