Cheetah marking trees: Distribution, visitation and behaviour

Kusler, Anna; Jordan, Neil R.; McNutt, J. Weldon; Broekhuis, Femke

doi:10.1111/aje.12602

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, females spent a relatively long time at the site, the same as dominant males, spending double the amount of time sniffing as opposed to scent‐marking, showing the importance of gaining information on other individuals using the site. We did record females scent‐marking often at the sites, a behaviour that was absent in previous studies that utilized photographs instead of videos (Kusler et al., 2019). We did not record females vocalizing at scent‐marking sites, although they have been noted to do this in captivity while in oestrus (Wielebnowski & Brown, 1998), suggesting that maybe this behaviour may have occurred away from the scent‐marking site.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, they visited the sites more often than dominant males in response to a male or themselves being the previous visit, highlighting the importance of gathering information on the other cheetahs present in the area. They could possibly be using the scent‐marking sites to learn when the dominant male is in the area and avoid interactions (Eaton, 1970; Gosling, 1982; Kusler et al., 2019). Although we did not note any subordinate males visiting the scent‐marking sites to challenge the current dominant male, this has been noted elsewhere (Wachter et al., 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies on cheetah scent‐marking behaviour assessed the use of scent‐marking sites for obtaining population estimates (Marker, Fabiano, & Nghikembua, 2008; Marnewick et al., 2006; Marnewick, Funston, & Karanth, 2008). Additionally, there was one short study (<35 days) on a single male coalition that explored visitation rates across this coalition's home range (Kusler, Jordan, McNutt, & Broekhuis, 2019). These studies found a strong bias towards males visiting the sites; in Marnewick et al.’s (2006) study seven different males and no females visited their scent‐marking site.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cheetah behaviour at scent‐marking sites indicates differential use by sex and social rank

Cornhill

Kerley

2020

Ethology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scent‐marking is an important form of communication for solitary species, as the information remains for the receiver after the sender has left the area. Individuals of different demographic or dominance classes (ranks) need to provide different information to conspecifics. Therefore, the use of scent‐marking sites is of particular value for solitary species, but their functional role may vary between demographic classes. Using camera traps, we video‐recorded the behaviour of cheetahs at scent‐marking sites, assessing how individuals of different sex and social rank use the sites for different roles. We tested hypotheses that these sites are for territorial marking, reproductive signalling and information gathering. We found that females visit the sites infrequently, apparently to signal oestrous events, while males visit the sites frequently for territorial marking and information gathering. Among males, dominant individuals scent‐marked the most and reacted to female visitation by vocalizing. In contrast, subordinate males, although also visiting the sites, were not recorded scent‐marking nor vocalizing. These differences in the functional use of scent‐marking sites among sex and social rank support the hypotheses that cheetahs use these scent‐marking sites for both territorial and reproductive signalling, as well as to gather information.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cheetah behaviour at scent‐marking sites indicates differential use by sex and social rank

Cornhill

Kerley

2020

Ethology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Here we investigate interactions between male cheetahs using location data collected with GPS collars by investigating 1) static interactions by quantifying spatial overlap and visits to marking posts to determine the frequency of indirect interactions to try and understand the role that marking posts play in cheetah ecology, 2) dynamic interactions by quantifying the proximity between different individuals and 3) the outcomes of possible interactions in terms of movement behaviour and mortalities. Based on previous research we predict that males will overlap spatially but that there will be little overlap of the core areas [29]. We also predict that marking posts are frequently visited by both individuals in a dyad, i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Marking posts are used by male cheetahs to communicate their presence to conspecifics. Using the methods described by [29], we located marking posts based on a cluster analysis using data from the GPS collars and opportunistically when conducting fieldwork. For each dyad, we determined how many marking posts were found within the 99% kernel overlap.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using GPS collars to investigate the frequency and behavioural outcomes of intraspecific interactions among carnivores: A case study of male cheetahs in the Maasai Mara, Kenya

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intraspecific interactions between individuals or groups of individuals of the same species are an important component of population dynamics. Interactions can be static, such as spatial overlap, or dynamic based on the interactions of movements, and can be mediated through communication, such as the deployment of scent marks. Interactions and their behavioural outcomes can be difficult to determine, especially for species that live at low densities. With the use of GPS collars we quantify both static and dynamic interactions between male cheetahs ( Acinonyx jubatus ) and the behavioural outcomes. The 99% home-ranges of males overlapped significantly while there was little overlap of the 50% home-ranges. Despite this overlap, male cheetahs rarely came into close proximity of one another, possibly because presence was communicated through frequent visits to marking posts. The minimum distance between individuals in a dyad ranged from 89m to 196m but the average proximity between individuals ranged from 17,145 ± 6,865m to 26,367 ± 11,288m. Possible interactions took place more frequently at night than by day and occurred mostly in the 50% home-range of one individual of a dyad or where cores of both individuals overlapped. After a possible encounter male cheetahs stayed in close proximity to each other for up to 6 hours, which could be the result of a territory defence strategy or the presence of a receptive female. We believe that one of the encounters between a singleton and a 5-male coalition resulted in the death of the singleton. Our results give new insights into cheetah interactions, which could help our understanding of ecological processes such as disease transmission.

show abstract

Comparing daily, circalunar and seasonal activity patterns of cheetah Acinonyx jubatus in response to livestock presence in Botswana

Kral,

Rios Tubio,

Broekhuis

et al. 2024

Wildlife Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animal activity patterns vary on a daily, circalunar and seasonal scale in response to abiotic (e.g. light availability and temperature) and biotic factors (e.g. predation and competition). In the presence of humans and their livestock, carnivores, for example, have been found to become more nocturnal. The aim of this paper is to compare daily, circalunar and seasonal activity patterns of cheetah Acinonyx jubatus in the western Kalahari of Botswana between areas where there is no livestock present (i.e. game farms with a relatively low risk of cheetah mortality) and areas where livestock is present (i.e. cattle farms with a higher risk of cheetah mortality). Using two years of camera trap data, we recorded 88% of cheetah observations on game farms and 12% on cattle farms. Our results showed that cheetahs were more nocturnal in the absence of cattle and more crepuscular on cattle farms compared to game farms. Overall, cheetah activity on cattle farms showed a peak in activity after inferred cattle activity and before human activity during the day, specifically during the dry season. We recommend management strategies on a local scale such as temporal zoning of grazing activities during the different seasons or keeping cattle in an enclosure at night. This study sheds new light on our understanding of the impact of land use on free‐ranging carnivores in the face of livestock expansion on the African continent.

show abstract

Cheetah marking trees: Distribution, visitation and behaviour

Cited by 11 publications

References 17 publications

Cheetah behaviour at scent‐marking sites indicates differential use by sex and social rank

Cheetah behaviour at scent‐marking sites indicates differential use by sex and social rank

Using GPS collars to investigate the frequency and behavioural outcomes of intraspecific interactions among carnivores: A case study of male cheetahs in the Maasai Mara, Kenya

Comparing daily, circalunar and seasonal activity patterns of cheetah Acinonyx jubatus in response to livestock presence in Botswana

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About