Long-term Site Fidelity and Individual Home Range Shifts in Lophocebus albigena

Abstract

We investigated long-term site fidelity of gray-cheeked mangabey (Lophocebus albigena) groups in Kibale National Park, Uganda. Concurrently, we monitored shifts in home range by individual females and subadult and adult males. We documented home range stability by calculating the area of overlap in successive years, and by recording the drift of each group’s monthly centroid from its initial location. Home ranges remained stable for 3 of our 4 groups (overlap over 10 yr >60%). Core areas were more labile, but group centroids drifted an average of only 530 m over the entire decade. Deviations from site fidelity were associated with dispersal or group fission. During natal dispersal, subadult males expanded their home ranges over many months, settling ≤4 home ranges away. Adult males, in contrast, typically dispersed within a few days to an adjacent group in an area of home range overlap. Adult males made solitary forays, but nearly always into areas used by their current group or by a group to which they had previously belonged. After secondary dispersal, they expanded their ranging in the company of their new group, apparently without prior solitary exploration of the new area. Some females also participated in home range shifts. Females shifted home ranges only within social groups, in association with temporary or permanent group splits. Our observations raise the possibility that male mangabeys use a finder-joiner mechanism when moving into new home ranges during secondary dispersal. Similarly, females might learn new resource locations from male immigrants before or during group fission.

Long‐term home range use in white‐handed gibbons (Hylobates lar) in Khao Yai National Park, Thailand

“…Recent studies examining home range stability within primates have focused on the role of resource distribution [Asensio et al, 2012;Ramos-Fernandez et al, 2013;Wallace, 2006] and individual knowledge of the home range [Brockelman, 2009;Janmaat et al, 2009]. For many of these studies, observers have found that primates shift their home range activities in response to changing ecological conditions, demonstrating considerable differences in areas of short-term use while maintaining fairly high stability in long-term home range size and location [Janmaat et al, 2009;Ramos-Fernandez et al, 2013].…”

“…For many of these studies, observers have found that primates shift their home range activities in response to changing ecological conditions, demonstrating considerable differences in areas of short-term use while maintaining fairly high stability in long-term home range size and location [Janmaat et al, 2009;Ramos-Fernandez et al, 2013]. Furthermore, it has been argued that home range stability may be maintained due not only to the predictability of food resources but also the benefits of spatial information in general, including knowledge of efficient travel routes, safe escape routes, and relationships with neighboring conspecifics [Bartlett, 2002;Fuentes, 2000;Janmaat et al, 2009;Wallace, 2006].…”

Ranging and site fidelity in northern pigtailed macaques (Macaca leonina) over different temporal scales

“…Several studies have examined the overlapping areas between pairs of successive periods (e.g., months, years) to investigate site fidelity [e.g., Asensio et al, 2012b;Janmaat et al, 2009;Young et al, 2006;Young et al, 2008]. RamosFernandez et al [2013] proposed an estimate of site fidelity based on the recurrent use of particular areas across all (not just successive) periods.…”

“…Several studies have measured site fidelity across multiple taxa [Asensio et al, 2012b;Burdett et al, 2007;Cords, 1987;Easley & Kinzey, 1986;Hellickson et al, 2008;Janmaat et al, 2009;Kitchen et al, 2000;Switzer, 1993]. Some authors consider that strong site fidelity reflects spatial stability in the location of resources for an animal over time whereas weak fidelity is the result of temporal shifts in the spatial distribution of resources [Doncaster & Macdonald, 1991;Kie et al, 2010;Rivrud et al, 2010].…”

“…For example, Spencer et al [1990] found in cotton rats (Sigmodon hispidus) that body mass correlated with the size of the weekly home range area, but not with the size of the daily home range area. Fidelity over large temporal scales (e.g., across years) should be greater in comparison to smaller scales because animals have many opportunities to revisit familiar areas in the long term [Janmaat et al, 2009]. The use of different temporal scales provides valuable information about the spatial requirements of a species during particular periods [Asensio et al, 2009;Chapman, 1988;Kie et al, 2010;Rivrud et al, 2010].…”