Grouping dynamics of the northernmost population of blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra) in Krishnasaar Conservation Area, Nepal
Abstract
Blackbuck, Antilope cervicapra, are group-living grazers found in a wide range of habitats, from dry grasslands to open forests. Krishnasaar Conservation Area (KrCA) in Bardia, Nepal is home to the northernmost population of blackbuck. This population lives in close proximity to humans. As a population in an extreme of the species’ range and experiencing direct and indirect human influences, KrCA is suitable to study less explored facets of herbivore ecology and behavior. One such less explored behavior of herbivores is their grouping (herding) behavior. Grouping is commonly seen as an anti-predator response and could also be used in the context of anthropogenic threat. In this study we investigated herding behavior of blackbuck and ecological and anthropogenic factors that might influence the herding. To record the grouping behavior of blackbuck in the different habitat types, we used scan sampling methods for groups. A group was defined by including all individuals that are within 50 m of another individual. The influence of ecological and anthropogenic factors on herding pattern was assessed through simple regression modelling. We scanned animals for 89 hours and each hour had seven observations. The mean group size was 20.56 ±1.97 (mean ± SE). More than two-thirds of animals observed were female. We found larger herd sizes in the morning compared with herd sizes in the afternoon and evening. Our observations also showed that mixed herds were significantly larger in size than male-only, and female-only herds in both core and settlement zones. Our modelling of covariates predicted group type to be the single most influential factor influencing herd size. As herding behavior of animals reflect associated risk and resource factors, the finding of this work can be helpful in managing this isolated threatened population of blackbuck.
References
Altmann J. 1974. Observational study of behavior: Sampling methods. Behaviour, 49(3–4):227–266. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4533591
Arockianathan S. and Balasundaram R. 2018. Population status, habitat selection and people’s perception on Pavo cristatus (Aves: Phasianidae) in Sigur Plateau, the Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu, India. Nature Conservation Research, 3(1):80–87. https://doi.org/10.24189/ncr.2018.010
Aureli F., Schaffner C.M., Boesch C., Bearder S.K., Call J., Chapman C.A., et al. 2008. Fission-fusion dynamics: New research frameworks. Current Anthropology, 49(4):627–654. https://doi.org/10.1086/586708
Beauchamp G. 2003. Group-size effects on vigilance: A search for mechanisms. Behavioural Processes, 63(3):111–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-6357(03)00002-0
Bharucha E. and Asher K. 1993. Behaviour patterns of the blackbuck (Antelope cervicapra) under suboptimal habitat conditions. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 90(3):371–393.
Bist, B.S., Ghimire, P., Poudyal, L.P., Pokharel, C.P., Sharma, P. and Pathak, K. 2021. From extinction to recovery: The case of blackbuck Antilope cervicapra from Nepal. Mammal Research, 66(3):519–523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13364-021-00576-5
Bode N.W., Faria J.J., Franks D.W., Krause J. and Wood A.J. 2010. How perceived threat increases synchronization in collectively moving animal groups. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 277(1697):3065–3070. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.0855
Bonar M., Lewis K.P., Webber Q.M., Dobbin M., Laforge M.P. and Vander Wal E. 2020. Geometry of the ideal free distribution: Individual behavioural variation and annual reproductive success in aggregations of a social ungulate. Ecology Letters, 23(9):1360–1369. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13563
Bond M.L., Lee D.E., Ozgul A. and König B. (2019). Fission–fusion dynamics of a megaherbivore are driven by ecological, anthropogenic, temporal, and social factors. Oecologia, 191:335–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-019-04485-y
Burger J. and Gochfeld M. 1992. Effect of group size on vigilance while drinking in the coati, Nasua narica in Costa Rica. Animal Behaviour, 44(6):1053–1057. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(05)80317-3
Burnham K.P. and Anderson D.R. 1998. Practical use of the information-theoretic approach (75-117). Springer New York.
Caro T.M. 2005. Antipredator defenses in birds and mammals. University of Chicago Press.
Chand G.B. 1999. Status and distribution of blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra) population at Khairapur, Bardiya, Nepal. M.Sc. Dissertation submitted to Central Department of Zoology, TU Kirtipur.
Clutton-Brock T.H., Guinness, F.E. and Albon, S.D. 1982. Red deer: Behavior and ecology of two sexes. University of Chicago press.
Creel S. and Creel N.M. 2002. The African wild dog: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation, 65. Princeton University Press.
Debata S. 2017. Population size, herd structure and sex ratio of the Blackbuck Antilope cervicapra (Mammalia: Cetartiodactyla: Bovidae) in a human dominated area in Odisha, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa, 9(11):10953–10955.
Delu V., Singh D., Dookia S., Priya Godara A. and Karwasra V. 2023. An insight into population structure and seasonal herd pattern of blackbuck Antilope cervicapra (Linnaeus, 1758) (Mammalia: Artiodactyla: Bovidae) in semi-arid region of western Haryana, India Tropical Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42965-023-00312-x
Eisenberg J.F. 1981. The mammalian radiations: An analysis of trends in evolution, adaptation, and behavior. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, xx + 610 pp.
Geist V. and Walther F. 1974. Behaviour of ungulates and its relation to management. Symposium on the Behavior of Ungulates and Its Relation to Management (1971: Calgary, Alta.). International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources.
Hamilton W.D. 1971. Geometry for the selfish herd. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 31(2):295–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(71)90189-5
Holekamp K.E., Smith J.E., Strelioff C.C., Van Horn R.C. and Watts H.E. 2012. Society, demography and genetic structure in the spotted hyena. Molecular Ecology, 21(3):613–632. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05240.x
Isvaran K. 2005. Female grouping best predicts lekking in blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 57:283–294.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-004-0844-z
Isvaran K. 2005. Variation in male mating behaviour within ungulate populations: patterns and processes. Current Science, 89(7):1192–1199. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24110971
Isvaran K. 2007. Intraspecific variation in group size in the blackbuck antelope: The roles of habitat structure and forage at different spatial scales. Oecologia, 154(2):435–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-007-0840-x
IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group. 2017. Antilope cervicapra. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (e.T1681A50181949). http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017-2.RLTS.T1681A50181949.en
Jarman P. 1974. The social organisation of antelope in relation to their ecology. Behaviour, 48(1–4):215–267. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853974X00345
Jha R.R. and Isvaran K. 2022. Antelope space‐use and behavior indicate multilevel responses to varying anthropogenic influences in a highly human‐dominated landscape. Ecology and Evolution, 12(10):e9372. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9372
Khanal L. 2006. Population Status, General Behaviour and Conservation Practices of Blackbuck [Antilope cervicapra Linneaus, 1758] at Khairapur, Bardia; Nepal. M.Sc. Thesis, Central Department of Zoology, Tribhuvan University.
Krishnasaar Conservation Area. 2017. Krishnasaar conservation area management plan (2074/75–2078/79). Government of Nepal, Ministry of Forests and Environment, Department of National Parks and Wildlife Convervation.
Lima S.L. and Dill L.M. 1990. Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: A review and prospectus. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 68(4):619–640. https://doi.org/10.1139/z90-092
Lingle S. 2001. Anti‐predator strategies and grouping patterns in white‐tailed deer and mule deer. Ethology, 107(4):295–314. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0310.2001.00664.x
Makin D.F., Chamaillé-Jammes S. and Shrader A.M. 2017. Herbivores employ a suite of antipredator behaviours to minimize risk from ambush and cursorial predators. Animal Behaviour, 127:225–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2017.03.024
Mungall E.C. 1978. The Indian blackbuck antelope: A Texas view. Texas Agricultural Experiment, Texas, USA.
Nair S.S. 1976. A population survey and observations on the behaviour of the blackbuck in the Point Calimere Sanctuary, Tamil Nadu. The journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 79:304–309. https://biostor.org/reference/148499
Pays O. and Jarman P.J. 2008. Does sex affect both individual and collective vigilance in social mammalian herbivores: The case of the eastern grey kangaroo? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 62:57–767. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-007-0501-4
Rai D. 2019. Crowding, group size and population structure of the blackbuck Antilope cervicapra (Linnaeus, 1758) (Mammalia: Cetartiodactyla: Bovidae) in the semi-arid habitat of Haryana, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa, 11(9):14194–14203. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3210-6227
Ranjithsinh M.K. 1989. The Indian blackbuck. Natraj Publishers.
Riipi M., Alatalo R.V., LindstroÈm L., and Mappes J. 2001. Multiple benefits of gregariousness cover detectability costs in aposematic aggregations. Nature, 413(6855):512–514. https://doi.org/10.1038/35097061
Schmitt M.H., Stears K., Wilmers C.C. and Shrader A.M. 2014. Determining the relative importance of dilution and detection for zebra foraging in mixed-species herds. Animal Behaviour, 96:151–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.08.012
Sharma G. 2019. Population Status, Habitat Preferences and Crop Depredation by Blackbuck (Antilope Cervicapra, Linneaus 1758) in Blackbuck Conservation Area (BCA), Nepal. Department of Zoology.
Thaker M., Vanak A.T., Owen C.R., Ogden M.B. and Slotow R. 2010. Group dynamics of zebra and wildebeest in a woodland savanna: Effects of predation risk and habitat density. PloS ONE, 5(9): e12758. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0012758
The Nepalese Journal of Zoology has a licensing policy that permits distribution, remixing, adaption, and build upon your work under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 License. Authors retain the copyright of the contents published in NJZ and need to grant the right of first publication to the journal. It also allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., on their website) prior to and during the submission process (e.g., as a preprint), as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of the published work. However, authors need to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements with NJZ for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in an institutional book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
