Volume 31 Issue 5
Sep.  2010
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents

Cyril C GRUETER, LI Da-Yong, FENG Shun-Kai, REN Bao-Ping. Niche partitioning between sympatric rhesus macaques and Yunnan snub-nosed monkeys at Baimaxueshan Nature Reserve, China. Zoological Research, 2010, 31(5): 516-522. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1141.2010.05516
Citation: Cyril C GRUETER, LI Da-Yong, FENG Shun-Kai, REN Bao-Ping. Niche partitioning between sympatric rhesus macaques and Yunnan snub-nosed monkeys at Baimaxueshan Nature Reserve, China. Zoological Research, 2010, 31(5): 516-522. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1141.2010.05516

Niche partitioning between sympatric rhesus macaques and Yunnan snub-nosed monkeys at Baimaxueshan Nature Reserve, China

doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1141.2010.05516
More Information
  • Author Bio:

    Cyril C GRUETER,current address: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Department of Primatology, Deutscher Platz 6, 04103 Leipzig, Germany;

  • Corresponding author: Cyril C GRUETER
  • Received Date: 2010-03-29
  • Rev Recd Date: 2010-08-19
  • Publish Date: 2010-10-22
  • Here we provide a preliminary assessment of dietary and habitat requirements of two sympatric primate taxa, a “simple-stomached” and “complex-stomached” species (Rhinopithecus bieti Colobinae vs. Macaca mulatta Cercopithecinae), as a basis for illuminating how the two coexist. Of ca. 22 plant food species consumed by the macaques, at least 16 were also eaten by the snub-nosed monkeys. Both species showed a preference for fruits. While the snub-nosed monkeys did not utilize any resources associated with human communities, rhesus macaques did occasionally raid agricultural crops. The mean elevation of the snub-nosed monkey group was 3,218 m, while the mean elevation of the macaque group was 2,995 m. Macaques were also spotted on meadows whereas snub-nosed monkeys evidently avoided these. For both species, mixed deciduous broadleaf/conifer forest was the most frequently used ecotype, but whereas evergreen broadleaf forest (Cyclobalanopsis community) accounted for only 3% of the location records of the snub-nosed monkeys, it accounted for 36% of the location records of the macaques. Groups of the two species usually kept a considerable spatial distance from one another (mean 2.4 km). One close encounter and confrontation between groups of the two species resulted in the macaque group moving away. Our findings suggest that the coexistence of the two taxa is facilitated via differential macrohabitat use and spatial avoidance. Although divergent habitat-use strategies may reflect interspecific competition, they may also merely reflect different physiological or ecological requirements.
  • 加载中
  • [1] Ben-David M, Bowyer R, Faro J. 1995. Niche separation by mink and river otters: Coexistence in a marine environment[J]. Oikos, 75: 41-48.Bennett EL, Davies AG. 1994. The ecology of Asian colobines[M] // Davies AG, Oates JF. Colobine Monkeys: Their Ecology, Behaviour and Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 129-171.Brandon-Jones D, Eudey AA, Geissmann T, Groves CP, Melnick DJ, Morales JC, Shekelle M, Stewart CB. 2004. Asian primate classification[J]. Int J Primat, 25: 97-164.Churchfield S, Sheftel B. 1994. Food niche overlap and ecological separation in a multispecies community of shrews in the Siberian taiga[J]. J Zool, 234: 105-124.Davies AG. 1991. Seed-eating by red leaf monkeys (Presbytis rubicunda) in dipterocarp forest of northern Borneo[J]. Int J Primat, 12: 119-144.Ding W, Zhao QK. 2004. Rhinopithecus bieti at Tacheng, Yunnan: Diet and daytime activities[J]. Int J Primat, 25: 583-598.Dueser RD, Shugart HH. 1978. Microhabitats in a forest-floor small mammal fauna[J]. Ecology, 60: 108-118.Emmons LH. 1980. Ecology and resource partitioning among nine species of African rainforest squirrels[J]. Ecol Monogr, 50: 31-54.Fooden J. 2000. Systematic review of the rhesus macaque Macaca mulatta (Zimmermann, 1780) [J]. Fieldian Zool, 96: 1-179.Gautier-Hion A. 1978. Food niches and coexistence in sympatric primates in Gabon [M]// Chivers D, Herbert J. Recent Advances in Primatology. New York: Academic Press, 269-286.Goldstein SJ, Richard AF. 1989. Ecology of rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) in northwest Pakistan [J]. Int J Primat, 10:531-567. Grueter CC, Li D, Ren B, Wei F, Xiang Z, van Schaik CP. 2009a. Fallback foods of temperate-living primates: A case study on snub-nosed monkeys[J]. Am J Phys Anthrop, 140: 700-715.Grueter CC, Li D, Ren B, Wei F, van Schaik CP. 2009b. Dietary profile of Rhinopithecus bieti and its socioecological implications
    [J]. Int J Primat, 30: 601-624.Hutchinson G. 1959. Homage to Santa Rosalia: why are there so many species? [J] Am Nat, 93:145-159.Kirkpatrick RC. 1996. Ecology and Behavior of the Yunnan Snub-Nosed Langur (Rhinopithecus bieti, Colobinae)
    [D]. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Davis.Li D, Grueter CC, Ren B, Zhou Q, Li M, Peng Z, Wei F. 2007. Characteristics of night-time sleeping places selected by golden monkeys (Rhinopithecus bieti) in the Samage Forest, Baima Snow Mountain Nature Reserve, China [J]. Integr Zool, 1: 141-152.Li D, Grueter CC, Ren B, Long Y, Li M, Peng Z, Wei F. 2008. Ranging of Rhinopithecus bieti in the Samage Forest, China. II. Use of land cover types and altitudes[J]. Int J Primat, 29: 1147-1173.Li ZX, Ma SL, Hua CH, Wang YX, 1982. The distribution and habit of the Yunnan golden monkey, Rhinopithecus bieti
    [J]. J Hum Evol, 11: 633-638.Lindburg DG. 1971. The rhesus monkey in north India: An ecological and behavioral study[M]// Rosenblum LA. Primate Behavior: Developments in Field and Laboratory Research: Volume 2. New York: Academic Press, 1-106.MacKinnon J, MacKinnon KC. 1980. Niche differentiation in a primate community[M]// Chivers DJ. Malayan Forest Primates. New York: Plenum Press, 167-190.Maitz WE, Dickman CR. 2001. Competition and habitat use in two species of native Australian Rattus[J]. Oecologia, 128: 526-538.Ménard N. 1985. Le régime alimentaire de Macaca sylvanus dan différent habitats d'Algérie: I-régime en chênaie décidue
    [J]. Rev Ecol: Terre Vie, 40: 451-466.Namgail T, Fox JL, Veer Bhatnagar Y. 2004. Habitat segregation between sympatric Tibetan argali Ovis ammon hodgsoni and blue sheep Pseudois nayaur in the Indian Trans-Himalaya [J]. J Zool, 262: 57-63.Oates JF. 1994. The natural history of African colobines[M]//Davies AG, Oates JF. Colobine Monkeys: Their Ecology, Behaviour and Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 75-128.Payne JB. 1980. Competitors[M]//Chivers DJ. Malayan Forest Primates. New York: Plenum Press, 261-277.Porter LM. 2001. Dietary differences among sympatric Callitrichinae in Northern Bolivia: Callimico goeldii, Saguinus fuscicollis and S. labiatus[J]. Int J Primat, 22: 961-992.Richard AF, Goldstein SJ, Dewar RE. 1989. Weed macaques: the evolutionary implications of macaques feeding ecology[J]. Int J Primat, 10: 569-594.Rodman PS. 1991. Structural differentiation in microhabitats of sympatric Macaca fascicularis and M. nemestrina in East Kalimantan, Indonesia[J]. Int J Primat, 12: 357-375.Sachot S, Perrin N, Neet C. 2003. Winter habitat selection by two sympatric forest grouses in western Switzerland: implications for conservation[J]. Biol Conserv, 112: 373-382.Schoener TW. 1974. Resource partitioning in ecological communities[J]. Science, 185: 27-39.Southwick CH, Siddiqi MF. 1977. Population dynamics of rhesus monkeys in northern India
    [M]//Bourne GH. Primate Conservation. New York: Academic Press, 339-362.Tan CL. 1999. Group composition, home range size, and diet of three sympatric bamboo lemur species (genus Hapalemur) in Ranomafana National Park, Madagascar [J]. Int J Primat, 20:547-566.Teas J. 1978. Behavioral Ecology of Rhesus Monkeys (Macaca mulatta) in Kathmandu, Nepal [D]. Ph.D. thesis, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.Teas J, Richie T, Taylor H, Southwick C. 1980. Population patterns and behavioral ecology of rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) in Nepal [M]//Lindburg D. The Macaques: Studies in Ecology, Behavior and Evolution. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 247-262.Ungar PS. 1996. Feeding height and niche separation in sympatric Sumatran monkeys and apes [J]. Folia Primat, 67: 163-168.Ustinov S. 1969. On the feeding of Moschus moschiferus L. and its adaptations to conditions for food searches
    [J]. Zool Zh, 48:1558-1563.Walter G. 1991. What is resource partitioning? [J]. J Theoret Biol, 150: 137-143.Wei FW, Feng ZJ, Wang ZW, Hu J. 2000. Habitat use and separation between the giant panda and the red panda [J]. J Mamm, 80: 448-455.Xiang Z-F, Huo S, Xiao W, Quan R-C, Grueter CC. 2007. Diet and feeding behavior of Rhinopithecus bieti at Xiaochangdu, Tibet: Adaptations to a marginal environment [J]. Am J Primat, 69: 1141-1158.Yeager CP. 1989. Feeding ecology of the proboscis monkey (Nasalis larvatus)  [J]. Int J Primat, 10: 497-530.Yeager CP. 1996. Feeding ecology of the long-tailed macaque (Macaca fascicularis) in Kalimantan Tengah, Indonesia [J]. Int J Primat, 17: 51-62.
     
  • 加载中
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Article Metrics

Article views(2095) PDF downloads(1728) Cited by()

Related
Proportional views

Niche partitioning between sympatric rhesus macaques and Yunnan snub-nosed monkeys at Baimaxueshan Nature Reserve, China

doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1141.2010.05516
  • Author Bio:

  • Corresponding author: Cyril C GRUETER

Abstract: Here we provide a preliminary assessment of dietary and habitat requirements of two sympatric primate taxa, a “simple-stomached” and “complex-stomached” species (Rhinopithecus bieti Colobinae vs. Macaca mulatta Cercopithecinae), as a basis for illuminating how the two coexist. Of ca. 22 plant food species consumed by the macaques, at least 16 were also eaten by the snub-nosed monkeys. Both species showed a preference for fruits. While the snub-nosed monkeys did not utilize any resources associated with human communities, rhesus macaques did occasionally raid agricultural crops. The mean elevation of the snub-nosed monkey group was 3,218 m, while the mean elevation of the macaque group was 2,995 m. Macaques were also spotted on meadows whereas snub-nosed monkeys evidently avoided these. For both species, mixed deciduous broadleaf/conifer forest was the most frequently used ecotype, but whereas evergreen broadleaf forest (Cyclobalanopsis community) accounted for only 3% of the location records of the snub-nosed monkeys, it accounted for 36% of the location records of the macaques. Groups of the two species usually kept a considerable spatial distance from one another (mean 2.4 km). One close encounter and confrontation between groups of the two species resulted in the macaque group moving away. Our findings suggest that the coexistence of the two taxa is facilitated via differential macrohabitat use and spatial avoidance. Although divergent habitat-use strategies may reflect interspecific competition, they may also merely reflect different physiological or ecological requirements.

Cyril C GRUETER, LI Da-Yong, FENG Shun-Kai, REN Bao-Ping. Niche partitioning between sympatric rhesus macaques and Yunnan snub-nosed monkeys at Baimaxueshan Nature Reserve, China. Zoological Research, 2010, 31(5): 516-522. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1141.2010.05516
Citation: Cyril C GRUETER, LI Da-Yong, FENG Shun-Kai, REN Bao-Ping. Niche partitioning between sympatric rhesus macaques and Yunnan snub-nosed monkeys at Baimaxueshan Nature Reserve, China. Zoological Research, 2010, 31(5): 516-522. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1141.2010.05516
Reference (7)

Catalog

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return