Occurrence of Three Felids across a Network of Protected Areas in Thailand: Prey, Intraguild, and Habitat Associations

Clouded Leopard, Leopard, and Tiger are threatened felids in Southeast Asia, but little is known about the factors in! uencing their distributions. Using logistic regression, we assessed how habitat variables, prey detection patterns, and presence of intraguild predators affect the occurrence of these felids across 13 protected areas within Thailand. Our analysis is based on data from 1108 camera-trap locations (47,613 trap-nights). Clouded Leopard and Leopard are associated with habitat where Red Muntjac and Eurasian Wild Pig were most likely to be present. Tiger are associated with habitat with a higher likelihood for the presence of Gaur, Eurasian Wild Pig, and Sambar. Clouded Leopard and Tiger were both weakly associated with areas with mature evergreen forest. Besides availability of prey, associations with potential competitors also appear to in! uence the distribution of these felids, although the strength of these effects requires further investigation. Occurrence rates for Clouded Leopard were no different in protected areas with Leopard versus without Leopards. Leopard had similar occurrence rates regardless of the presence of Tiger, but Leopards were less likely to be detected at the same camera-trap points with the larger felid. Our results suggest that the two most commonly photographed prey species in the study areas serve as key prey species, Eurasian Wild Pig for all three carnivores and Red Muntjac for Leopard and Clouded Leopard.

[1]  T. Caro,et al.  Interspecific competition and predation in American carnivore families , 2008 .

[2]  Maria D. Tchakerian,et al.  Landscape Modeling for Forest Restoration Planning and Assessment: Lessons from the Southern Appalachian Mountains , 2008, Journal of Forestry.

[3]  R. Jeo,et al.  Managing the matrix for large carnivores: a novel approach and perspective from cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) habitat suitability modelling , 2006 .

[4]  J. Terborgh,et al.  Ecological Meltdown in Predator-Free Forest Fragments , 2001, Science.

[5]  J. Seidensticker.  On the Ecological Separation between Tigers and Leopards , 1976 .

[6]  Peter K. Kitanidis,et al.  Introduction to geostatistics , 1997 .

[7]  T. Caro,et al.  Top Predators as Conservation Tools: Ecological Rationale, Assumptions, and Efficacy , 2008 .

[8]  A. Lynam.  Securing a future for wild Indochinese tigers: Transforming tiger vacuums into tiger source sites. , 2010, Integrative zoology.

[9]  Margaret F. Kinnaird,et al.  Crouching tigers, hidden prey: Sumatran tiger and prey populations in a tropical forest landscape , 2003 .

[10]  Achara Simcharoen,et al.  Home range size and daytime habitat selection of leopards in Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary, Thailand , 2008 .

[11]  D. Marshall,et al.  Reevaluating suitable habitat for reintroductions: lessons learnt from the eastern barred bandicoot recovery program , 2010 .

[12]  E. Wikramanayake,et al.  A landscape‐based conservation strategy to double the wild tiger population , 2011 .

[13]  F. Palomares,et al.  Landscape evaluation in conservation: molecular sampling and habitat modeling for the Iberian lynx. , 2006, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[14]  W. Ripple,et al.  Large predators and trophic cascades in terrestrial ecosystems of the western United States , 2009 .

[15]  M. Sunquist,et al.  Coexistence of jaguar (Panthera onca) and puma (Puma concolor) in a mosaic landscape in the Venezuelan llanos , 2003 .

[16]  G. Kerley,et al.  Prey preferences of the leopard (Panthera pardus) , 2006 .

[17]  G. Polis,et al.  THE ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION OF INTRAGUILD PREDATION: Potential Competitors That Eat Each Other , 1989 .

[18]  J. Nichols,et al.  Tigers and their prey: Predicting carnivore densities from prey abundance. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  Christopher N. Johnson,et al.  Rarity of a top predator triggers continent-wide collapse of mammal prey: dingoes and marsupials in Australia , 2007, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[20]  A. Rabinowitz,et al.  The clouded leopard in Malaysian Borneo , 1987, Oryx.

[21]  G. Gale,et al.  Human disturbance affects habitat use and behaviour of Asiatic leopard Panthera pardus in Kaeng Krachan National Park, Thailand , 2007, Oryx.

[22]  J. Downing,et al.  CRC Handbook of Mammalian Body Masses , 1995 .

[23]  Wanlop Chutipong,et al.  Population recovery patterns of Southeast Asian ungulates after poaching , 2010 .

[24]  E. Grinspoon,et al.  A comparison of the enforcement of access restrictions between Xishuangbanna Nature Reserve (China) and Khao Yai National Park (Thailand) , 1997, Environmental Conservation.

[25]  Rebecca J. Foster,et al.  Differential Use of Trails by Forest Mammals and the Implications for Camera‐Trap Studies: A Case Study from Belize , 2010 .

[26]  P. Wegge,et al.  Do tigers displace leopards? If so, why? , 2010, Ecological Research.

[27]  John Bell,et al.  A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models , 1997, Environmental Conservation.

[28]  D. Garshelis,et al.  The Shared Preference Niche of Sympatric Asiatic Black Bears and Sun Bears in a Tropical Forest Mosaic , 2011, PloS one.

[29]  D. Wilcove,et al.  Persistence of Large Mammal Faunas as Indicators of Global Human Impacts , 2007 .

[30]  A. Johnsingh.  Prey selection in three large sympatric carnivores in Bandipur , 1992 .

[31]  S. Buskirk,et al.  Diet, Morphology, and Interspecific Killing in Carnivora , 2006, The American Naturalist.

[32]  J. Andrew Royle,et al.  ESTIMATING SITE OCCUPANCY RATES WHEN DETECTION PROBABILITIES ARE LESS THAN ONE , 2002, Ecology.

[33]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model selection and multimodel inference : a practical information-theoretic approach , 2003 .

[34]  P. Leimgruber,et al.  Using Relative Abundance Indices from Camera-Trapping to Test Wildlife Conservation Hypotheses – An Example from Khao Yai National Park, Thailand , 2011 .

[35]  K. U. Karanth,et al.  prey selection by tiger, leopard and dhole in tropical forests , 1995 .

[36]  R. Real,et al.  AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models , 2008 .

[37]  H. Possingham,et al.  IMPROVING PRECISION AND REDUCING BIAS IN BIOLOGICAL SURVEYS: ESTIMATING FALSE‐NEGATIVE ERROR RATES , 2003 .

[38]  K. U. Karanth,et al.  Carnivore conservation at the crossroads , 2009, Oryx.

[39]  D. H. Reed,et al.  Improving the viability of large-mammal populations by using habitat and landscape models to focus conservation planning , 2010 .

[40]  P. Wegge,et al.  Predator–prey relationships and responses of ungulates and their predators to the establishment of protected areas: A case study of tigers, leopards and their prey in Bardia National Park, Nepal , 2009 .

[41]  N. Silvy,et al.  ECOLOGY OF THREE SYMPATRIC FELIDS IN A MIXED EVERGREEN FOREST IN NORTH-CENTRAL THAILAND , 2005 .

[42]  Kathy MacKinnon,et al.  Bringing the Tiger Back from the Brink—The Six Percent Solution , 2010, PLoS biology.

[43]  T. Caro,et al.  Interspecific Killing among Mammalian Carnivores , 1999, The American Naturalist.

[44]  J. Nichols,et al.  ESTIMATION OF TIGER DENSITIES IN INDIA USING PHOTOGRAPHIC CAPTURES AND RECAPTURES , 1998 .

[45]  Christopher N. Johnson,et al.  Predator interactions, mesopredator release and biodiversity conservation. , 2009, Ecology letters.

[46]  C. Niemitz,et al.  Habitat selection models for European wildcat conservation , 2008 .

[47]  Fernando Hiraldo,et al.  Intraguild predation in raptor assemblages: A review , 2008 .

[48]  B. Sacks,et al.  Resource utilization and interspecific relations of sympatric bobcats and coyotes , 2001 .