No respect for apex carnivores: Distribution and activity patterns of honey badgers in the Serengeti

Abstract

Honey badgers are cryptic carnivores that occur at low densities and range across large areas. The processes behind site-level honey badger abundance and detection rates are poorly understood, and there are conflicting results about their avoidance of larger carnivores from different regions. We used data from 224 camera traps set up in the Serengeti National Park, Tanzania to evaluate patterns in detection rates, spatial distribution, and activity patterns of honey badgers. Our top models showed that the relative abundance of larger carnivores (e.g., African lions, Panthera leo, and spotted hyenas, Crocuta crocuta) was important, but surprisingly was positively related to honey badger distribution. These results suggest that honey badgers were not avoiding larger carnivores, but were instead potentially seeking out similar habitats and niches. We also found no temporal avoidance of larger carnivores. Honey badgers exhibited seasonal variation in activity patterns, being active at all times during the wet season with peaks during crepuscular hours, but having a strong nocturnal peak during the dry season. Our detection rates of honey badgers at individual camera traps were low (3,402 trap nights/detection), but our study shows that with adequate effort camera traps can be used successfully as a research tool for this elusive mustelid.

Terrestrial mammal community richness and temporal overlap between tigers and other carnivores in Bukit Barisan Selatan National Park, Sumatra

“…We defined a detection event as any series of photos triggered by a human or wildlife species. To avoid pseudo-replication, we considered consecutive photo captures of the same species within 30' to be the same event (Rovero and Zimmermann, 2016;Allen et al, 2018). We calculated the number of independent events for each species and relative abundance (RAB) as: RAB = events / trap nights x 1,000 and then report the mean annual RAB (0 RAB) for each species.…”

“…Camera trapping is frequently used to monitor wildlife, providing a wealth of information on the spatial and temporal activity of species in the local community (Swanson et al, 2015;Rich et al, 2016;Allen et al, 2019). Temporal patterns are important aspects of niche partitioning among sympatric carnivores (Romero-Munoz et al, 2010;Karanth et al 2017;Herrera et al, 2018), with subordinate carnivores often adjusting their temporal activity to avoid overlap with dominant carnivores (Foster et al, 2013;Lynam et al, 2013;Wang et al, 2015), but not always (Balme et al, 2017;Allen et al, 2018). Determining temporal patterns and overlap among species is a way to inform our understanding of cryptic species and their interactions (e.g., Van Schaik and Griffiths, 1996;Linkie and Ridout, 2011;O'Brien et al, 2003).…”

Ecological Relationships in the Serengeti National Park

“…The original data set is arranged as rows of unique images with columns of additional information for each image including the presence of a species, which I then set up to examine the relative abundance of predators and prey in the SNP. I defined an "event", based on Allen et al (2018), as any time a species was seen and removed all triggers/images following the initial event for a 30min period (Allen et al 2019). Removing all images for a 30 minute period flowing the initial event, reduced the possibility of having the same animal count multiple times in a short time frame (Allen et al 2019).…”

“…Removing all images for a 30 minute period flowing the initial event, reduced the possibility of having the same animal count multiple times in a short time frame (Allen et al 2019). Following Allen et al (2018), I then determined the number of events per camera and divided by the number of events per total trap-nights for each camera and calculated the number of events per 100 trap-nights of each camera using the formula:…”

“…The use of camera traps in animal ecology has transformed the field by allowing a greater quantity of detailed observations with limited human interference, leading to significant discoveries in ecological relationships and population dynamics between species (O'Connell et al 2010). Camera traps allow for a nonintrusive approach to viewing and studying animal behavior for even the most cryptic species, such as Himalayan snow leopards (Panthera uncia) (O'Connell et al 2010) or honey badgers (Mellivora capensis) (Allen et al 2018) which are nearly impossible to see or document. One of largest camera trap studies published to date is from the Serengeti National Park (SNP) in Tanzania, East Africa (Swanson et al 2015), which deployed 225 camera traps over 1,125km 2 and obtained over 1.2 million pictures across 99,241 camera trap days (Swanson et al 2015), and are continuing to collect data.…”