Toward accurate and precise estimates of lion density

Elliot, Nicholas B.; Gopalaswamy, Arjun M.

doi:10.1111/cobi.12878

Cited by 64 publications

(116 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

112

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, recent research has shown that lion numbers do not negatively influence cheetah numbers (Swanson et al., 2014), which is likely because cheetahs adjust their spatiotemporal patterns on a fine scale to avoid immediate risks of these larger, more dominant carnivores (Broekhuis et al., 2013; Vanak et al., 2013). We found that cheetahs preferred areas dominated by semiclosed habitat which could explain why cheetahs preferred the wildlife areas despite the very high lion densities (Elliot & Gopalaswamy, 2017). Semiclosed habitat provides concealment, thereby minimizing the possibility of being detected by other predators.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…Under the competition‐avoidance hypothesis we expected that cheetahs would prefer areas outside the wildlife areas to avoid competition with other predators, especially lions as they occur at very high densities inside the wildlife areas (Elliot & Gopalaswamy, 2017). However, our results show a strong preference for wildlife areas and an avoidance of human presence.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Various studies on carnivores in human‐dominated landscapes have shown a strong avoidance of humans (e.g., Elliot et al., 2014), however, it is possible that cheetahs may prefer human‐dominated areas as it is believed that they do well in areas where competitors, particularly lions ( Panthera leo ) and spotted hyaenas ( Crocuta crocuta ), have been eradicated (Marker, Dickman, Mills, & Macdonald, 2003). Under a competition‐avoidance hypothesis we would expect cheetahs in the Maasai Mara to prefer areas outside the wildlife areas as the densities of competitors, especially lions, are high inside the wildlife areas (Elliot & Gopalaswamy, 2017). Alternatively, if the human disturbance outside the wildlife areas is high, then cheetahs are likely to select for wildlife areas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Living on the edge: Multiscale habitat selection by cheetahs in a human‐wildlife landscape

Klaassen

Broekhuis

2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals select habitats that will ultimately optimize their fitness through access to favorable resources, such as food, mates, and breeding sites. However, access to these resources may be limited by bottom‐up effects, such as availability, and top‐down effects, such as risk avoidance and competition, including that with humans. Competition between wildlife and people over resources, specifically over space, has played a significant role in the worldwide decrease in large carnivores. The goal of this study was to determine the habitat selection of cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) in a human‐wildlife landscape at multiple spatial scales. Cheetahs are a wide‐ranging, large carnivore, whose significant decline is largely attributed to habitat loss and fragmentation. It is believed that 77% of the global cheetah population ranges outside protected areas, yet little is known about cheetahs’ resource use in areas where they co‐occur with people. The selection, or avoidance, of three anthropogenic variables (human footprint density, distance to main roads and wildlife areas) and five environmental variables (open habitat, semiclosed habitat, edge density, patch density and slope), at multiple spatial scales, was determined by analyzing collar data from six cheetahs. Cheetahs selected variables at different scales; anthropogenic variables were selected at broader scales (720–1440 m) than environmental variables (90–180 m), suggesting that anthropogenic pressures affect habitat selection at a home‐range level, whilst environmental variables influence site‐level habitat selection. Cheetah presence was best explained by human presence, wildlife areas, semiclosed habitat, edge density and slope. Cheetahs showed avoidance for humans and steep slopes and selected for wildlife areas and areas with high proportions of semiclosed habitat and edge density. Understanding a species’ resource requirements, and how these might be affected by humans, is crucial for conservation. Using a multiscale approach, we provide new insights into the habitat selection of a large carnivore living in a human‐wildlife landscape.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Living on the edge: Multiscale habitat selection by cheetahs in a human‐wildlife landscape

Klaassen

Broekhuis

2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Maasai Mara has a relatively high density of cheetahs with around 1.28–1.34 adults per 100 km 2 (Broekhuis & Gopalaswamy, 2016) which is why, along with the Serengeti National Park, it is an important stronghold for the global cheetah population (Durant et al., 2017). Other predators that occur at high densities in the Maasai Mara are lions, with a density of 17 individuals (>1 year) per 100 km 2 (Elliot & Gopalaswamy, 2017), and spotted hyaenas, with clan sizes in the Maasai Mara National Reserve ranging from 22 to 126 individuals (Green et al., 2018). …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Maasai Mara in Kenya is an ideal place to conduct this study as the habitat is heterogeneous, ranging from wide open grasslands to Vachellia woodland and riverine forests (Oindo, Skidmore, & De Salvo, 2003). The Maasai Mara also has high densities of cheetahs (Broekhuis & Gopalaswamy, 2016) and other predators, including lions (Elliot & Gopalaswamy, 2017) and spotted hyaenas (Green, Johnson‐Ulrich, Couraud, & Holekamp, 2018), which vary spatially. Partly because of these high densities of predators, the Maasai Mara is a popular tourist destination.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural and anthropogenic drivers of cub recruitment in a large carnivore

Broekhuis

2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recruitment is a critical parameter governing population dynamics and influences population persistence. Understanding the drivers of recruitment is therefore important for conservation, especially for long‐lived mammals such as large carnivores, which have low reproductive rates, rendering them prone to extinction. Using cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) as a model species, I investigated the variation in cub recruitment in relation to habitat and the abundance of tourists and predators. Per litter, female cheetahs on average raised 1.71 ± 1.35 cubs to independence, but this varied depending on the presence of open habitat and the abundance of tourists, both of which had a negative effect on cub recruitment. More specifically, female cheetahs that were mostly found in open habitats on average raised 1.69 ± 0.14 cubs per litter to independence compared to 3.04 ± 0.26 cubs in denser habitat. Similarly, female cheetahs that were exposed to high tourist abundance on average raised 0.21 ± 0.72 cubs to independence compared to 2.32 ± 0.11 cubs in low tourism areas. Neither lion nor spotted hyaena abundance had an impact on the number of cubs that were recruited. Based on these findings, I recommend that the importance of a heterogeneous environment should be taken into consideration in habitat management, restoration efforts, and reintroduction programs. In addition, tourist quotas should be put in place in high visitation areas and strict wildlife viewing guidelines, such as number of vehicles, tourist behavior, time spent, and distance to a sighting, should be enforced. Cub recruitment is an important component of species persistence and incorporating these findings could aid conservation efforts for species that are increasingly under threat.

show abstract

Challenges and opportunities in population monitoring of cheetahs

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Population monitoring is key to wildlife conservation and management but is challenging at the 18 spatial and temporal extents necessary for understanding changes. Non-invasive survey methods 19 and spatial capture-recapture (SCR) models have revolutionized wildlife monitoring by providing the means to more easily acquire data at large scales and the framework to generate spatially-explicit predictions, respectively. Despite the opportunities for improved monitoring, 22 challenges can remain in the study design and model fitting phases of an SCR approach. Here, we used a search-encounter design with multi-session SCR models to collect spatially-indexed photographs and estimate the changes in density of cheetahs between 2005 and 2013-2016 in the Masai Mara National Reserve (MMNR) in southwestern Kenya. Our SCR models of cheetah encounters suggested little change in cheetah density from 2005 to 2013-2016, though there was some evidence that density fluctuated annually in the MMNR. The sampling period length (5 vs.10 months) and timing (early, late, full year) over which spatial encounters were included in the modeling did not substantially alter inferences about density when sample sizes were adequate (>20 spatially distinct encounters). We estimated an average cheetah density of ~1.2 31 cheetahs/100 km 2 , consistent with the impression that the MMNR provides important habitat for cheetahs in Africa. During most years and seasonal periods, the spatial distribution of vegetation greenness (a proxy for ungulate habitat quality) accounted for important variation in encounter rates. The search-encounter design used here could be applied to other regions for the purposes of cheetah monitoring. While snap-shot estimates of population size across time are useful for wildlife monitoring, open population models could identify the mechanisms behind changes and further facilitate better conservation and management decision making..

show abstract

Toward accurate and precise estimates of lion density

Cited by 64 publications

References 46 publications

Living on the edge: Multiscale habitat selection by cheetahs in a human‐wildlife landscape

Living on the edge: Multiscale habitat selection by cheetahs in a human‐wildlife landscape

Natural and anthropogenic drivers of cub recruitment in a large carnivore

Challenges and opportunities in population monitoring of cheetahs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About