Mammal indicator species for protected areas and managed forests in a landscape conservation area of northern India

Abstract

There is a realization that managed forests and other natural areas in the landscape matrix can and must make significant contributions to biodiversity conservation. Often, however, there are no consistent baseline vegetation or wildlife data for assessing the status of biodiversity elements across protected and managed areas for conservation planning, nor is there a rapid and efficient means to acquire those data. We used a unified vegetation classification and simple animal sampling design to describe the patterns of abundance of selected mammals as indicator, or characteristic, species in different vegetation types and protected areas vs. managed forest units in the Terai Conservation Area (TCA) in northern Uttar Pradesh state, India. We quantified the relative abundance of 15 mammals of conservation concern from dung counts in vegetation sampling plots within 122 sample patches in 13 vegetation types and 4 management units. Assemblages of species differed both among vegetation types and among management units. Species assemblages in the two protected areas differed strongly from those in two managed forests. Grasslands in protected areas were the most species diverse among vegetation types and had several indicator species. Protected forests were dominated by chital (Axis axis) and nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus) in a second species group. A third species group in open grasslands and savannas in managed forests was characterized by cattle (Bos taurus) and Indian hare (Lepus nigricollis). Protected areas clearly are the core conservation area of the TCA for their relatively high habitat value and species diversity, and their protected status minimizes human disturbance. Impacts of human use are high in managed forests, indicating their compromised value for biodiversity conservation. Our simple assessment methodology gives managers a simple way to assess the status of important mammals across landscape conservation units.

Understanding population dynamics of feral horses in the Tuan and Toolara State Forest for successful long-term population management

“…Forest management influences habitat selection, which may influence the number and distribution of species, and population size of each species (Hansson 1994;Mathur et al 2011). Partial thinning of the forest canopy can enhance diversity of undergrowth vegetation stimulating the expansion of microorganisms, insects and wildlife (Kuiters et al 1996).…”

“…Accurate information on vegetation utilisation is fundamental to the understanding of foraging behaviour of wild herbivores (Salter and Hudson 1982b;Gordon 1995;Mueller et al 2008;Mathur et al 2011). In areas with few resources, feral horses (Turner et al 1993;Hampson et al 2011 Visual observation of wild and feral herbivores is commonly used to characterise population abundance and distribution (Crane et al 1997;Linklater et al 2001;.…”

“…Dung counts are not influenced to the same degree by the difficulties associated with seasonal and diurnal variation in animal visual detection and the technique may also provide information on habitat use, and population distribution and size (Bennett et al 1940;Putman 1984;Chapman et al 1985;Lamoot et al 2004;Acevedo et al 2008;Mathur et al 2011). In some herbivore species, faecal shape and size can be used to identify the population sex and age structure, while in other species faecal chemistry permits assessment of animal dietary quality (Bubenik 1982;Sinclair et al 1982;Coe and Carr 1983;Maccracken and van Ballenberghe 1987;Pegard et al 2009).…”

Population Estimate, Habitat-Use and Activity Patterns of the Honey Badger in a Dry-Deciduous Forest of Central India

“…Owing to these limitations, so far there is only one study estimating population density in India (Gupta et al, 2012). In the Indian subcontinent, the species has been reported from diverse habitats like scrub and dry deciduous forest (Gubbi et al, 2014), and dry grassland (Mathur et al, 2011) and it shares its range with other carnivores of different body sizes and ecology (Do Linh San et al, 2016;Ramesh et al, 2017). However, niche segregation and interspecies' interactions are poorly understood.…”

Dinâmica da vegetação arbórea na borda de remanescentes florestais e sua relação com características da paisagem no norte do Estado do Paraná

“…As consequências negativas da fragmentação florestal promoveram o interesse sobre as bordas e a ecologia de paisagens nas ciências da conservação (HARPER et al, 2005;NASSAUER, 2006;MACDONALD, 2011;MATHUR et al, 2011). Sua compreensão compõe uma ferramenta em potencial para o planejamento ambiental, útil ao direcionamento do manejo e de estratégias conservacionistas em paisagens fragmentadas (HARPER et al, 2005;PENA et al 2010;REYERS et al, 2012).…”