The endangered snow leopard is a large felid that is distributed over 1.83 million km2 globally. Throughout its range it relies on a limited number of prey species in some of the most inhospitable landscapes on the planet where high rates of human persecution exist for both predator and prey. We reviewed 14 published and 11 unpublished studies pertaining to snow leopard diet throughout its range. We calculated prey consumption in terms of frequency of occurrence and biomass consumed based on 1696 analysed scats from throughout the snow leopard's range. Prey biomass consumed was calculated based on the Ackerman's linear correction factor. We identified four distinct physiographic and snow leopard prey type zones, using cluster analysis that had unique prey assemblages and had key prey characteristics which supported snow leopard occurrence there. Levin's index showed the snow leopard had a specialized dietary niche breadth. The main prey of the snow leopard were Siberian ibex (Capra sibrica), blue sheep (Pseudois nayaur), Himalayan tahr (Hemitragus jemlahicus), argali (Ovis ammon) and marmots (Marmota spp). The significantly preferred prey species of snow leopard weighed 55±5 kg, while the preferred prey weight range of snow leopard was 36–76 kg with a significant preference for Siberian ibex and blue sheep. Our meta-analysis identified critical dietary resources for snow leopards throughout their distribution and illustrates the importance of understanding regional variation in species ecology; particularly prey species that have global implications for conservation.

No abstract

Of the sub-species of Holarctic wolf, the Woolly wolf (Canis lupus chanco) is uniquely adapted to atmospheric hypoxia and widely distributed across the Himalaya, Qinghai Tibetan Plateau (QTP) and Mongolia. Taxonomic ambiguity still exists for this sub-species because of complex evolutionary history anduse of limited wild samples across its range in Himalaya. We document for the first time population genetic structure and taxonomic affinity of the wolves across western and eastern Himalayan regions from samples collected from the wild (n = 19) using mitochondrial control region (225bp). We found two haplotypes in our data, one widely distributed in the Himalaya that was shared with QTP and the other confined to Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand in the western Himalaya, India. After combining our data withpublished sequences (n = 83), we observed 15 haplotypes. Some of these were shared among different locations from India to QTP and a few were private to geographic locations. A phylogenetic tree indicated that Woolly wolves from India, Nepal, QTP and Mongolia are basal to other wolves with shallow divergence (K2P; 0.000-0.044) and high bootstrap values. Demographic analyses based on mismatch distribution and Bayesian skyline plots (BSP) suggested a stable population over a long time (~million years) with signs of recent declines. Regional dominance of private haplotypes across its distribution range may indicate allopatric divergence. This may be due to differences in habitat characteristics, availability of different wild prey species and differential deglaciation within the range of the Woolly wolf during historic time. Presence of basal and shallow divergence within-clade along with unique ecological requirements and adaptation to hypoxia, the Woolly wolf of Himalaya, QTP, and Mongolian regions may be considered as a distinct an Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU). Identifying management units (MUs) is needed within its distribution range using harmonized multiple genetic data for effective conservation planning.

Perpetual darkness, high humidity with almost constant geophysical factors are some of the abiotic factors which make the cave ecosystem unique. For any species a high degree of adaptation is always needed to thrive in such an ecosystem. Mammals in general have never adapted to cave life but they can play a major role in the cave ecosystem. Structurally, the Dandak cave has two distinct chambers that are completely different from each other in several geophysical factors. Thus both the cave chambers offer two distinct types of ecological niche. In the present study we found that both chambers of this cave were dominated by mammals all year round. Additionally, the group of mammals using the outer chamber completely differs from the group using the inner one. Possible geophysical factors responsible for such differences are discussed.

Geographical isolation can often lead to speciation, and two disconnected populations of the same species living in drastically different bioclimatic regions provide an opportunity to understand the process of speciation. The Woolly wolf is found in the cold-arid, Trans-Himalayan landscape, while the Indian wolf inhabits the semi-arid grasslands of Central India. Both the lineages of wolves from India have generated scientific debate on their taxonomic status in recent years. In this study, we collected data and reviewed published literature to document the ecological and behavioral differences between the Woolly wolf and the Indian wolf. Most studies have used genetic data; hence we discuss variation in spatial ecology, habitat preferences, vocalization, diet diversity and cranial measurements of these two subspecies. The spatial ecology of two lineages was compared from the data on three Woolly and ten Indian wolves tagged with GPS collars. The telemetry data shows that there has been no difference in the day-night movement of Woolly wolves, whereas Indian wolves show significant high displacement during the night. The BBMM method indicated that Woolly wolf home ranges were three times larger than the Indian wolf. The Woolly wolf diet is comprised of 20 different types of food items, whereas the Indian wolf diet consists of 17 types. The Woolly and Indian wolf largely depend upon domestic prey base, i.e., 48.44 and 40.34%, respectively. We found no differences in the howling parameters of these subspecies. Moreover, the Woolly wolf skull was significantly longer and broader than the Indian wolf. Wolves of India are ancient and diverged from the main clade about 200,000–1,000,000 years ago. Their genetic and ecological evolution in different bioclimatic zones has resulted in considerable differences as distinct subspecies. The present study is a step in understanding ecological differences between two important, genetically unique subspecies of wolves.