Journal of Threatened Taxa |
www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2021 | 13(8): 18975–18985
ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893
(Print)
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.5784.13.8.18975-18985
#5784 | Received 18 February 2020 | Final
received 20 June 2021 | Finally accepted 05 July 2021
Group size, crowding, and age
class composition of the threatened Sambar Rusa
unicolor (Kerr, 1792) (Mammalia: Cetartiodactyla:
Cervidae) in the semi-arid regions of northeastern Rajasthan, India
Deepak Rai 1 &
Kalpana 2
1,2 Animal Behaviour and Wildlife
Conservation Laboratory, Department of Zoology, Kurukshetra University, Thanesar, Kurukshetra, Haryana 136119, India.
1 drbkuk@gmail.com (corresponding
author), 2 kpoonia138@gmail.com
Editor: L.A.K. Singh, Bhubaneswar,
Odisha, India. Date of publication: 26 July
2021 (online & print)
Citation: Rai, D. & Kalpana (2021). Group size, crowding, and age
class composition of the threatened Sambar Rusa
unicolor (Kerr, 1792) (Mammalia: Cetartiodactyla:
Cervidae) in the semi-arid regions of northeastern Rajasthan, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 13(8): 18975–18985. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.5784.13.8.18975-18985
Copyright: © Rai & Kalpana 2021. Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and
distribution of this article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the
author(s) and the source of publication.
Funding: UGC-CSIR SRF.
Competing interests: The authors
declare no competing interests.
Author details: Dr. Deepak Rai is an Associate Professor in
Department of Zoology, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, Haryana, India. His
field of research includes ornithology, animal ecology and wildlife
conservation. Ms. Kalpana is a
research scholar and pursuing her PhD from Department of Zoology, Kurukshetra
University, Kurukshetra.
Author contributions: Deepak Rai and Kalpana conceived
and designed the study. Kalpana collected the field data and prepare rough
draft of the manuscript.Deepak Rai guided the
research, analyzed the data and wrote the final draft of the manuscript.
Acknowledgements: The authors are highly grateful
to the Department of Zoology, Kurukshetra University Kurukshetra for providing
research facilities to carry out this research work. We are thankful to the University
Grants Commission, New Delhi for providing Junior Research Fellowship and
Senior Research Fellowship during the research period.
Abstract: Grouping characteristics and
population growth dynamics of Sambar were studied in Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation
Reserve (BJCR) and Bairasar Johad
(BJ) in Rajasthan, India from July 2018 to June 2019. Following the scan
sampling method, a total of 117 sightings of Sambar (N= 488 individuals) were
recorded in BJCR, and 106 in BJ (N= 389 individuals), during 24 fortnightly
visits. The data revealed that besides solitary sightings of Sambar, groups
ranging from 2–11 and 2–12 individuals were observed in BJCR and BJ,
respectively. The overall mean group size and mean crowding of Sambar were
4.2±0.2 S.E. and 5.3 respectively in BJCR, and 3.7±0.2 S.E. and 5.0
respectively in BJ. The sex ratio was skewed towards females. The overall adult
male: adult female: fawn ratio was 74.4: 100: 47.1 (N= 488 individuals) in BJCR
while the ratio was 92.6: 100: 41.1 (N= 389 individuals) in BJ. As far as the
social organization of Sambar is concerned, six types of herds were recorded in
the present study. It is urged that
sambar populations outside protected area also need simultaneous strategies for
conservation attention.
Keywords: Population structure, sex ratio,
ungulates.
Introduction
Group size and population
structure are basic aspects of mammal population monitoring and effective conservation
planning (Bagchi et al. 2008; Debata
& Swain 2019). Group size varies widely between and within species
(Barrette 1991; Ramesh et al. 2012a) and the group size of ungulates is a
reflection of resource distribution, habitat structure, home range, mating
systems, intraspecific competition, and predation risk (Pulliam & Caraco 1984; Lagory 1986; Raman
1997; Simcharoen et al. 2014). For example, many
ungulates show large group sizes when food resources are adequate, but when
food is in limited supply they fragment into smaller groups (Karanth & Sunquist 1992; Bagchi et al. 2003; Ramesh et al. 2012b). Ungulates also
tend to assemble in larger groups in open habitats, but not in dense scrubland.
Thus observed group sizes indicate a balance between the benefits of group
living, such as better foraging efficiency and safety from predators, and the
costs, such as competition for food resources (Krebs et al. 1972).
Ungulates show a fission-fusion
system of fluid group formation where individuals are free to leave or join a
given group (Barrette 1991; Raman 1997). Depending on the various ecological
factors involved, two measures of group size are commonly used: mean group size
and typical group size. Mean group size is measured from an outsider’s point of
view, while typical group size is assessed from the perspective of group
members (i.e., as crowding; Jarman 1974; Reiczigel et al. 2005; Reiczigel
et al. 2008). The age structure of a population is represented in terms of the
distribution of number of individuals from each age class which corresponds to
fecundity, mortality, reproductive status and population increase of a
particular species (Clutton-Brock et al. 1980). The
reproductive potential of a species can be calculated from sex ratio of that
species (Ramesh et al. 2012a,b).
Sambar Rusa
unicolor (Kerr, 1792) is the largest deer species in southern and southeastern Asia. In the Indian subcontinent, the species
is widely distributed and occurs in 208 protected areas (Sankar
& Goyal 2004; Timmins et al. 2015). Sexes of Rusa
unicolor are distinguished by size (males 225–320 kg; females <180 kg),
the presence or absence of antlers (present only in males), and body coloration
(generally lighter color of females and young than
the males) (Jain et al. 2018). The males have longer hair on the upper
surface of the neck and back. The wild population of this species is under
stress due to loss of its natural habitats, anthropogenic activities such as
hunting, poaching, urban expansion and agriculture expansion (Chatterjee et al.
2014). The Sambar is listed as ‘Vulnerable’ as per the IUCN Red List (2008) due
to an estimated decline of 30%–50% population over the past three generation
(Timmins et al. 2015) and it is also listed in Schedule III of the Indian
Wildlife Protection Act (IWPA) 1972.
Various ecological and behavioral aspects including group size as well as density
of Sambar were studied in Kanha National Park
(Schaller 1967; Poruse 1996), Bandipur
National Park (Johnsingh 1983), Mundanthurai
(Johnsingh & Sankar
1991), Nagarhole National Park (Karanth
& Sunquist 1992), Mudumalai
(Verman & Sukumar 1993, Ramesh et al. 2012a),
Corbett National Park (Pant et al. 1999), Periyar
Tiger Reserve (Harikumar et al. 1999), Pench Tiger Reserve (Biswas & Sankar
2002), Ranthambore Tiger Reserve (Bagchi
et al. 2003), and Sariska National Park (Chatterjee
et al. 2014). But few studies have been conducted on Sambar in northeastern Rajasthan. Hence the present study was
conducted to obtain information on group size including crowding, population
structure, variation in social organization and other ecological aspects with
respect to Sambar, which will be helpful in planning effective conservation
strategies for this threatened species.
Materials
and methods
Study areas
The present study was carried out
in two selected study sites, namely, Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation Reserve (BJCR),
district Jhunjhunu and Bairasar Johad
(BJ), village Bairasar Bara, district Churu of state
Rajasthan from July 2018 to June 2019.
Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation
Reserve, Jhunjhunu (BJCR)
The area lies
between 28.158° N & 75.416° E alongside the Jhunjhunu-Chirawa
state highway, and covers an area of 1,047 ha (Figure 1). As far as the floral
diversity of the area is concerned, 440 plant species were identified (Dev
& Singh 2016). In this study area, Sambar coexists with other mammals
including Nilgai Boselophus tragocamelus, Chinkara Gazella
bennettii, Desert Fox Vulpes vulpes, and the wildcat Felis
silvestris, and around 95 bird species (Shekhawat & Bhatnagar 2014).
Bairasar Johad
(BJ), village Bairasar Bara
Bairasar Johad,
village Bairasar Bara (28.88°N & 75.641°E) is
part of tehsil Rajgarh of district Churu (Rajasthan)
and is bordered by the Rajgarh-Jhunjhunu state
highway (Figure 2). This region covers an area of about 14.72 ha. Dominant wild
fauna found in the study area include Nilgai, Chinkara, and Sambar (Dev &
Singh 2016).
Both the study sites are situated
in the shekhawati region of India’s Thar desert.
Climatic conditions are semi-arid, and there are three distinct seasons: summer
(March to June), monsoon (July to October), and winter (November to February).
Summers are very hot (up to 50°C) and winters cold (0°C) (Dev & Singh
2016). Annual rainfall varies 300–400 mm. Major soil types are sand, sandy loam
and salt affected black soil. The study areas were divided into three major
habitats: fallow land, scrubby forest, and agricultural fields. The vegetation
of this semi-arid region falls under the category of tropical desert thorn
species predominantly of xerophytes (Dev & Singh 2016).
Data collection and analysis
To obtain information on group
size, population structure and herd composition of Sambar, 24 fortnightly
visits were conducted from July 2018 to June 2019 in accordance with Chopra &
Rai (2009) and Rai & Jyoti (2019). Data collection was done using the scan
sampling method (Altmann 1974) from random observation points. The time of
observation was divided into three diurnal phases: morning (0630–1100), noon
(1100–1500), and evening (1500–1800). The observations were made in different
phases during different visits on a periodic basis.
On each sighting of Sambar, the
following information was recorded: sex, age class, group size as well as
number of groups. A group was defined following Schaller (1967) as a number of
the individuals in different age classes exhibiting cohesive activity (movement
in the same direction) and close proximity to each other (less than 30 m
apart).
Age class composition was based
on earlier studies (Schaller 1967) and recorded individuals were categorized
as: adult male (>1 feet antlers), sub-adult male (spike and <1 feet
antlers), adult female (morphological characters), sub-adult female (height of
individuals above the adult female belly and morphological characters), and
fawn (size equal and less to the height of mother’s belly).
Groups of Sambar were categorized
as: (i) lone territorial male/female; (ii) unimale-unifemale group consisting of one adult male &
one adult female; (iii) female group consisting of adult female(s), sub-adult
female(s), & fawn(s); (iv) bachelor group consisting of adult male(s) &
sub-adult male(s); (v) harem consisting of one adult male, adult female(s),
sub-adult female(s), & fawn(s); and (vi) mixed group consisting of adult(s)
& sub-adult(s) of both sexes and fawn(s) (Image 1).
The ratio of adult male: adult
female: fawn was calculated. Mean crowding and mean group size was calculated
by using the program Flocker1.0 (Reiczigel & Rozsa 2006; Reiczigel et al.
2008) and obtained data was also cross checked by using the following formulae
as per Jarman (1982) who used typical group size instead
of mean crowding.
where,
xi= number of individuals in
the ith group/sighting
n= number of groups
N= total number of individuals
Statistical analysis of the data
was done by using Mann-Whitney test (U) to determine the significant
differences in mean group size of Sambar between two seasons and Kruskal Wallis
test (K) between all the three seasons using SPSS 16.0 packages.
Results
and Discussion
During the field surveys from
July 2018 to June 2019 in Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation Reserve, 117 sightings of
Sambar comprising 488 individuals were recorded varying from a minimum of one
to a maximum of 11 individuals per group sighting during 24 fortnightly visits
(Figure 3). Similarly, in Bairasar Johad, a total of 106 sightings of Sambar comprising of 389
individuals were observed with group size varying of 1–12 individuals per group
sighting (Figure 4). As far as the variation in number of group sightings per
periodic visit was concerned, a minimum of three to a maximum of six group
sightings were made during the visits.
The overall mean group size observed was 4.17±0.20 S.E. and mean
crowding was 5.34 in Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation Reserve. Similarly, the overall
mean group size and mean crowding value was 3.67±0.21 S.E. and 5.04,
respectively, in Bairasar Johad
(Table 1). The highest mean group size was observed during summer season and
the lowest mean group size was observed during monsoon season in both of the
study sites. The highest mean crowding was recorded during the summer season in
Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation Reserve while in Bairasar Johad the highest mean crowding was recorded in winter
season. It probably coincides with scarcity of food resources in the study
areas during summer and winter seasons. Lowest value of mean crowding was
observed in monsoon season when group size of Sambar increased due to adult
male joining female group during breeding season. Therefore, variation in group
size was lower in monsoon season. Earlier, similar observations on group size
have been observed by Bagchi et al. (2008).
Mann Whitney U test and Kruskal
Wallis test results revealed that the group size of sambar were not
significantly different between the two seasons and three seasons in both study
sites (p >0.05 in all cases) due to frequent observation of group size range
of 1–5 individuals. The mean group size was in accordance with the previous
studies conducted in different parts of India (Table 2). Sambar were most
frequently observed in groups of 2–5 individuals, followed by 6–10, while the
lowest numbers of sightings were for groups of more than 12 individuals (Table
1). Largest group sightings of 11 individuals and 12 individuals were recorded
in fallow land in Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation Reserve and Bairasar
Johad, respectively, as solitary animals were more
vulnerable to predators in open areas than in the forested habitat due to more
time spent in alertness than foraging activity (Estes 1974; Barrette 1991). In
contrast, smaller groups were recorded in scrubby forest areas, possibly due to
difficulties in maintaining contacts with others owing to low visibility, as
reported by Lagory (1986). The obtained results were
in accordance with Schaller (1967) and Ramesh et al. (2009), which revealed
that size of the group is correlated with habitat openness, i.e., open or
fallow land. Forage abundance also influenced group size, as the largest groups
were observed in winter in both study sites owing to more clumped distribution
of food. Conversely, when food is evenly dispersed and locally sparse, large
groups breaks up into smaller foraging units (Jarman
1974). According to previous studies, predation has been proposed as a factor
influencing grouping behavior in Sambar, but our
study area did not have any large carnivores except for a few feral dogs that
posed threats to fawns (Khan et al. 1995; Raman 1997).
For population studies the mean
group size is useful when population is normally distributed because mean group
size is an observed-centered measurement that gives
equal weightage to all groups but in clumped distribution of population,
crowding phenomenon is more useful because crowding is a more animal-centered index of group size which gives the measures of
the group size that the average individual finds itself in (Reiczigel
et al. 2005). Similar studies based on crowding phenomenon had been reported
for Sambar in Mudumalai Tiger Reserve, Western Ghats
(Ramesh et al. 2012a) and some mega herbivores including Gaur Bos Gaurus, Elephant Elephas maximus, and Chital Axis
axis (Bagchi et al.
2008; Debata & Swain 2019).
Data regarding the population
structure of Sambar revealed that, of the 488 individual sightings of Sambar
recorded in Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation Reserve (July 2018 to June 2019), 18.5%
were adult males, 18.7% sub-adult males, 24.8% adult females, 26.4% sub-adult
females, and 11.7% fawns. Similarly, in Bairasar Johad, of 389 individual sightings, 22.6% were adult males,
19.3% sub-adult males, 24.4% adult females, 23.7% sub-adult females, and 10.0%
fawns (Figure 5; Table 3).
Newborn fawns were also observed
throughout the year, with a peak fawning period from March to June in both
study sites. The overall adult male: adult female: fawn ratio was 74.4: 100:
47.1 (N= 488 individuals) in Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation Reserve, while in Bairasar Johad the ratio was
92.6: 100: 41 (N= 389 individuals) (Table 4). A sex ratio skewed towards
females was recorded in both study areas, which may be due to the illegal
hunting of adult males. The absence of predators in the study area may also
have made males more susceptible to mortality from intra-male competition. A
Sambar sex ratio skewed towards females was also reported in Nagarahole and Mudumalai national
parks by Karanth & Sunquist
(1992) and Ramesh et al. (2012a), respectively, and a similar imbalance
was detected in other species, including
Gaur, Elephant, Chital, and Blackbuck (Ramesh et al. 2012a,b; Rai & Jyoti
2019).
Singh (1995) mentioned that a
single dominant male tiger breeds with 2–3 females in its territory at 2–4
years gap for each tigress. Further, the male doesn’t participate in parental
care and better males in the hierarchy wait to replace him in the population,
and therefore, survival of an equal or higher proportion of males in a tiger
population is an ecological burden. On this account, certain biological
characteristics related to sex ratio of wildlife may be comparable among
herbivore and carnivore populations, where male of the species displays
dominance hierarchy and has the most prominent role only to sire the progeny
with one or more females, seasonally or at longer intervals.
The observed seasonal variation in the number
of newly born fawns in this study was considered to be an index of the breeding
cycle. Maximum numbers of newly born fawns were observed during the summer,
which indicates that the peak rutting season was in winter (November to
December) when all male Sambar were carrying hard antlers. Antler cycles are convenient
indicators of the reproductive status of male deer (Sankar
& Goyal 2004). In Sambar the development of hard antlers in males, sore
patch, territoriality wallowing and courtship behavior
may indicate their rutting period.
As far as the type of herd is
concerned, along with 19 lone territorial males, 36 mixed herds, 15 bachelor
herds, 20 harem herds, 21 female herds, and six unimale-unifemale
pairs were recorded in Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation Reserve. While in Bairasar Johad, along with 20
lone territorial males, 30 mixed herds, 16 bachelor herds, 15 harem herds, 17
female herds, and eight unimale-unifemale pairs were
observed (Figure 6). Seasonal variations in the herd sighting of Sambar, range
of number of individuals seen/sighting and the mean number of individuals seen/sighting±S.E. was also calculated in Bir Jhunjhunu
Conservation Reserve and Bairasar Johad
(Table 5). Variation in herd size in relation to social behavior
and rutting behavior indicates that aggregation
during rutting season facilitates social interaction and breeding
opportunities. Based on the seasonal variation in habitat utilization and
forage abundance, the obtained results of crowding revealed the clumped
distribution of Sambar in both the study areas. Therefore, based on the changed
distribution pattern of Sambar, evaluation of effectiveness as well as revision
of conservation strategies are needed for long term survival of Sambar
populations in unprotected and protected areas.
Table 1. Seasonal grouping
patterns of Sambar in Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation Reserve (BJCR) and Bairasar Johad (BJ) Rajasthan
from July 2018 to June 2019.
|
Season |
NG |
LGO |
NA |
MC |
MeC |
MGS±S.E. |
MeGS |
Group size
(% of Groups) |
||||||
|
1 |
2–5 |
6–10 |
>10 |
|||||||||||
|
Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation
Reserve |
||||||||||||||
|
Monsoon,
2018 (July to
October) |
39 |
8 |
149 |
4.88 |
5.00 |
3.82±0.32 |
4.00 |
17.95 |
58.97 |
23.08 |
0 |
|||
|
Winter, 2018-2019 (November to February) |
40 |
11 |
160 |
5.38 |
5.00 |
4.00±37 |
4.00 |
17.5 |
60.00 |
20.00 |
2.50 |
|||
|
Summer, 2019 (March to June) |
38 |
9 |
179 |
5.70 |
6.00 |
4.71±0.35 |
5.00 |
13.16 |
44.74 |
42.10 |
0 |
|||
|
Annual (2018-2019) |
117 |
11 |
488 |
5.34 |
5.00 |
4.71±0.20 |
4.00 |
16.24 |
54.70 |
28.20 |
0.85 |
|||
|
Bairasar Johad, village Bairasar Bara |
||||||||||||||
|
Monsoon, 2018 (July to October) |
35 |
7 |
123 |
4.46 |
5.00 |
3.51±0.31 |
4.00 |
20.00 |
65.71 |
14.28 |
0 |
|||
|
Winter, 2018-19 (November to February) |
37 |
12 |
141 |
5.84 |
6.00 |
3.81±0.46 |
3.00 |
21.62 |
54.05 |
18.92 |
5.40 |
|||
|
Summer, 2019 (March to June) |
34 |
8 |
125 |
4.71 |
4.00 |
3.68±0.33 |
3.50 |
14.70 |
64.70 |
20.59 |
0 |
|||
|
Annual (2018-2019) |
106 |
12 |
389 |
5.04 |
5.00 |
3.67±0.21 |
3.00 |
17.87 |
61.32 |
18.92 |
1.89 |
|||
NG—Number of
groups | NA—Number of animals | LGO—Largest group observed | MC—Mean crowding |
MeC—Median crowding | MGS—Mean group size | MeGS—Median group size | SE—Standard error.
Table 2. Mean Group size and Sex
ratio of Sambar Rusa unicolor from
different protected areas of India.
|
Study site |
Mean group
size |
Adult male:
Adult female |
Source |
|
Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation Reserve |
4.71 |
0.9: 1 |
Present Study |
|
Bairasar Johad |
3.67 |
0.7: 1 |
Present Study |
|
Bandipur National Park |
- |
0.3: 1 |
Johnsingh 1983 |
|
Nagarahole National Park |
1.7 |
0.4: 1 |
Karanth & Sunquist 1992 |
|
Gir National Park |
- |
0.5: 1 |
Khan et al. 1995 |
|
Pench Tiger Reserve |
1.7 |
- |
Biswas & Sankar 2004 |
|
Sariska National Park |
4.00 |
0.1: 1 |
Chatterjee et al. 2014 |
|
Ranthambhor National Park |
3.7 |
- |
Bagchi et al. 2004 |
|
Mudumalai National Park |
3.6 |
0.4: 1 |
Ramesh et al. 2012a |
Table 3. Age
structure of Sambar in Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation Reserve (BJCR) and Bairasar Johad (BJ) Rajasthan
from July 2018 to June 2019.
|
Season(s) |
AM |
SAM |
AF |
SAF |
FW |
Total |
|||||
|
No. |
% |
No. |
% |
No. |
% |
No. |
% |
No. |
% |
||
|
Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation
Reserve, Jhunjhunu |
|||||||||||
|
Monsoon, 2018 (July–October) |
29 |
19.46 |
33 |
22.15 |
32 |
21.48 |
40 |
26.84 |
15 |
10.07 |
149 |
|
Winter, 2018–19 (November–February) |
25 |
15.62 |
24 |
15.00 |
46 |
28.75 |
45 |
28.12 |
20 |
12.50 |
160 |
|
Summer, 2019 (March–June) |
36 |
20.11 |
34 |
18.99 |
43 |
24.02 |
44 |
24.58 |
22 |
12.29 |
179 |
|
Annual data |
90 |
18.44 |
91 |
18.65 |
121 |
24.79 |
129 |
26.43 |
57 |
11.68 |
488 |
|
Bairasar Johad, village Bairasar Bara |
|||||||||||
|
Monsoon, 2018 (July–October) |
27 |
22.50 |
27 |
22.50 |
29 |
23.58 |
30 |
24.39 |
10 |
8.13 |
123 |
|
Winter, 2018–19 (November–February) |
33 |
23.40 |
28 |
19.86 |
36 |
25.53 |
30 |
21.28 |
14 |
9.93 |
141 |
|
Summer, 2019 (March–June) |
28 |
22.40 |
20 |
16.00 |
30 |
24.00 |
32 |
25.6 |
15 |
12.00 |
125 |
|
Annual data |
88 |
22.62 |
75 |
19.28 |
95 |
24.42 |
92 |
23.65 |
39 |
10.02 |
389 |
Table 4. Sex ratio of Sambar in
Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation Reserve (BJCR) and Bairasar
Johad (BJ) Rajasthan from July 2018 to June 2019.
|
Season(s) |
Adult male |
Adult
female |
Fawn |
Number of
individuals classified |
|
Bir Jhunjhunu
Conservation Reserve, Jhunjhunu |
||||
|
Monsoon, 2018 (July–October) |
90.62 |
100 |
46.87 |
76 |
|
Winter, 2018–19 (November–February) |
54.35 |
100 |
43.48 |
91 |
|
Summer, 2019 (March–June) |
83.72 |
100 |
51.16 |
101 |
|
Overall Annual |
74.38 |
100 |
47.10 |
268 |
|
Bairasar Johad, village Bairasar Bara |
||||
|
Monsoon, 2018 (July–October) |
93.10 |
100 |
34.48 |
66 |
|
Winter, 2018–19 (November–February) |
91.66 |
100 |
37.83 |
83 |
|
Summer, 2019 (March–June) |
93.33 |
100 |
50.00 |
73 |
|
Overall Annual |
92.63 |
100 |
41.05 |
222 |
Table 5. Seasonal variations in
the herd sighting of Sambar, range of number of individuals seen/sighting and
the mean number of individuals seen/ sighting±S.E. in
Bir Jhunjhunu Conservation Reserve (BJCR) and Bairasar
Johad (BJ) from July 2018 to June 2019.
|
Season |
Type of
Herds seen |
Total
sightings (N) |
Range of
group size seen/sighting |
Mean group
size seen/sighting±S.E. |
||||
|
Bir
Jhunjhunu |
Bairasar Johad |
Bir
Jhunjhunu |
Bairasar Johad |
Bir
Jhunjhunu |
Bairasar Johad |
|||
|
Monsoon, 2018
(July–October) |
||||||||
|
|
LTM/LTF |
7 |
7 |
1 |
1 |
1±0 |
1±0 |
|
|
|
MxH |
13 |
11 |
2 to 8 |
3 to 7 |
5.46±0.47 |
4.54±0.38 |
|
|
|
BH |
6 |
4 |
2 to 4 |
2 to 4 |
3.50±0.56 |
3.00±0.57 |
|
|
|
HH |
5 |
5 |
4 to 5 |
3 to 6 |
4.40±0.24 |
4.80±0.58 |
|
|
|
FH |
7 |
6 |
2 to 6 |
2 to 7 |
4.00±0.63 |
4.33±0.71 |
|
|
|
UF-UM |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2±0 |
2±0 |
|
|
Winter, 2018–2019 (November–February) |
||||||||
|
|
LTM/LTF |
7 |
8 |
1 |
1 |
1±0 |
1±0 |
|
|
|
MxH |
10 |
8 |
3 to 9 |
3 to 12 |
5.80±0.64 |
6.50±1.00 |
|
|
|
BH |
4 |
7 |
2 to 5 |
2 to 5 |
3.50±0.64 |
3.00±0.43 |
|
|
|
HH |
6 |
5 |
5 to 11 |
4 to 11 |
5.66±1.11 |
7.00±1.14 |
|
|
|
FH |
10 |
5 |
2 to 6 |
2 to 5 |
4.10±0.40 |
3.40±0.50 |
|
|
|
UF-UM |
3 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
2±0 |
2±0 |
|
|
Summer, 2019 (March–June) |
||||||||
|
|
LTM/LTF |
5 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
1±0 |
1±0 |
|
|
|
MxH |
13 |
11 |
3 to 9 |
4 to 8 |
6.61±0.34 |
5.54±0.43 |
|
|
|
BH |
5 |
5 |
2 to 5 |
2 to 4 |
4.20±0.58 |
2.60±0.40 |
|
|
|
HH |
9 |
6 |
3 to 7 |
3 to 5 |
5.11±0.42 |
3.75±0.47 |
|
|
|
FH |
4 |
4 |
2 to 4 |
2 to 7 |
4.25±0.62 |
3.85±0.63 |
|
|
|
UF-UM |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2±0 |
2±0 |
|
|
Annual (2018–19) |
117 |
106 |
1 to 11 |
1 to 12 |
4.17±0.20 |
3.66±0.21 |
||
LTM—Lone territorial male/female
|UM-UF—Unimale-Unifemale | MxH—Mixed
herd | BH—Bachelor herd | HH—Harem herd | FH—Female herd.
For
figures & images - - click here
References
Altmann, J.
(1974).
Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. Behaviour
49: 227–265. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853974X00534
Bagchi, S., S.P. Goyal & K. Sankar (2003). Habitat separation among ungulates in dry tropical
forests of Ranthambhore national park,
Rajasthan. Tropical Ecology 44(2): 175–182.
Bagchi, S., S.P. Goyal & K. Sankar (2008). Social organisation and population structure of
ungulates in a dry tropical forest in western India (Mammalia, Artiodactyla). Mammalia 72: 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1515/MAMM.2008.008
Barrette, C.
(1991). The size of
Axis deer fluid groups in Wilpattu National Park, Sri
Lanka. Mammalia 55: 207–220. https://doi.org/10.1515/mamm.1991.55.2.207
Biswas S.
& K. Sankar (2002). Prey abundance and food habit of
tigers (Panthera tigris
tigris) in Pench
National Park, Madhya Pradesh, India. Journal of Zoology 256: 411–420. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952836902000456
Chatterjee,
D., K. Sankar, Q. Qureshi, P.K. Malik & P. Nigam
(2014). Ranging
pattern and habitat use of sambar (Rusa
unicolor) in Sariska Tiger Reserve, Rajasthan,
Western India. DSG Newsletter 26: 60–71.
Chopra, G.
& D. Rai (2009). A study on the ecology of Nilgai (Boselaphus
tragocamelus Pallas) and its status as an
unconventional pest of agriculture in and around Beer-Sonty
reserve forest, Haryana, India. Journal of Applied and Natural Science 1(2):
245–249. https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v1i2.81
Clutton-Brock, Τ.Η., S.D. Albon & Ρ.Η. Harvey (1980). Antlers, body size and breeding
group size in Cervidae. Nature 285: 565–567.
Debata, S. & K.K. Swain (2019). Group size and population
structure of vulnerable Gaur in an isolated tropical deciduous forest of
eastern India. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences 89(1):
89–94. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.2658.9.11.10953-10955
Dev, K. &
P. Singh (2016). Mammalian
diversity of Shekhawati region in arid zone of Thar
Desert, India. International Journal of Biological Sciences 3: 16–22.
Estes, R.D.
(1974). Social
organization of the African bovids, pp. 166–205. In: Geist, V. & F. Walther
(eds.). The Behaviour of Ungulates and its Relation to Management -
Volume I. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural
Resources, Morges, Switzerland, 940pp.
Harikumar, G., B. Thomas, K.J. Joseph
& V.J. Zacharias (1999). Population dynamics of Sambar Cervus
unicolor, in Periyar Tiger Reserve. Indian
Forester 125(10): 995–1003.
IUCN (2008). IUCN Red List of threatened
species. Version 2008. www.iucnredlist.org.
Jain, P., A. Bhasin, G. Talukdar & B. Habib (2018). Distribution and population
status of Sambar Rusa unicolor
(Mammalia: Cetartiodactyla: Cervidae)
from Aravalli landscape with a note on its first record from Aravalli Hills of
Haryana, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 10(10):
12357–12362. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.4011.10.10.12357-12362
Jarman, Ρ.J. (1974). The social organisation of
antelope in relation to their ecology. Behaviour 48: 216–267. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853974X00345
Johnsingh, A.J.Τ. (1983). Large mammalian prey-predators
in Bandipur. Journal of the Bombay Natural History
Society 80: 1–57.
Johnsingh, A.J.Τ. & Κ. Sankar (1991). Food plants of chital, sambar and cattle on Mundanthurai Plateau, Tamil Nadu, South India. Mammalia
55: 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1515/mamm.1991.55.1.57
Karanth, K.U. & M.E. Sunquist (1992). Population structure, density
and biomass of large herbivores in the tropical forests of Nagarahole,
India. Journal of Tropical Ecology 8:
21–35. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266467400006040
Khan, J.A.,
R. Chellam & A.J.Τ. Johnsingh
(1995). Group size
and age-sex composition of three major ungulate species in Gir
Lion Sanctuary, Gujarat, India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History
Society 92: 295–302.
Kerr, R.
(1792). The animal
kingdom, or zoological system of the celebrated Sir Charles Linnaeus; Class I.
Mammalia; containing a complete systematic description, arrangement, and
nomenclature, of all the known species and varieties of the Mammalia, or
animals which give suck to their young; being a translation of that part of the
Systema Naturae, as lately
published, with great improvements, by Professor Gmelin
of Goettingen. J. Murray & R. faulder,
London, UK.
Krebs, J.R.,
M.H. MacRoberts & J.M. Cullen (1972). Flocking and feeding in the
Great tit Parus major- an experimental
study. Ibis 114: 507–530. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.1972.tb00852.x
Lagory, K.E. (1986). Habitat, group size, and the
behaviour of white-tailed deer. Behaviour 98: 168–179. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853986X00955
Pant, A.,
S.G. Chavan, P.S. Roy & K.K. Das (1999). Habitat analysis for sambar in
Corbett National Park using remote sensing and GIS. Journal of Indian
Society Remote Sensing 27(3): 133–139.
Poruse, M.C. (1996). Wildlife Habitat Analysis for
Sambar in Kanha National Park Using Remote Sensing. Journal
of Indian Society Remote Sensing 17(14): 919–935.
Pulliam, H.R.
& T. Caraco (1984). Living in groups: is there an
optimal group size? pp. 122–148. In: Krebs, J.R. & N.B. Dviers
(eds.). Behavioral Ecology: An Evolutionary
Approach. 2nd Edition. Blackwell Scientific Publication, Oxford,
493pp.
Rai, D. &
Jyoti (2019). Crowding,
Group size and Population structure of Blackbuck, Antilopecervicapra
(Linnaeus, 1758) in semi-arid habitat of Haryana, India. Journal of
Threatened Taxa 11(9): 14194–14203. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.4788.11.9.14194-14203
Rai, D. &
Kalpana (2019). Opinion
survey on the ecology of Sambar, Rusa
unicolor (Artiodactyla, Cervidae)
and its status with respect to crop damage in districts Jhunjhunu and Churu,
Rajasthan (India). Journal of Applied and Natural Science 11(2):
468–477. https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v11i2.2092
Raman, T.R.S.
(1997). Factors
influencing seasonal and monthly changes in the group size of chital or axis
deer in southern India. Journal of bioscience 22: 203–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02704733
Ramesh, T.,
V. Snehalatha, K. Sankar
& Q. Qureshi (2009). Food habits and prey selection of tiger and leopard in Mudumalai Tiger Reserve, Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of
Scientific Transactions Environment and Technovation 2:
170–181.
Ramesh, T.,
K. Sankar, B. Qureshi & R. Kalle
(2012a). Group size,
sex and age composition of Chital (Axis axis) and Sambar (Rusa unicolor) in a deciduous habitat of
Western Ghats. Mammalian Biology 77: 53–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2011.09.003
Ramesh, T.,
K. Sankar, B. Qureshi & R. Kalle
(2012b). Group size
and population structure of megaherbivores (Gaur Bos gaurus
and Asian Elephant Elephas maximus) in a deciduous habitat of Western
Ghats, India. Mammal Study 37: 47–54. https://doi.org/10.3106/041.037.0106
Reiczigel, J., Z. Lang, L. Rozsa & B. Tothmeresz (2005). Properties of crowding indices
and statistical tools to analyze crowding data. Journal
of Parasitology 91: 245–252. https://doi.org/10.1645/GE-281R1
Reiczigel, J. & L. Rozsa
(2006). Flocker 1.0. Available at www.behav.org/flocker/ Accessed
on 20 September 2018.
Reiczigel, J., Z. Lang, L. Rozsa & B. Tothmeresz (2008). Measures of sociality: two
different views of group size. Animal Behaviour 75: 715–721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.05.020
Sankar, K. & S.P. Goyal (2004). Ungulates of India. ENVIS
Bulletin: Wildlife and Protected Areas 7(1): 163–170.
Schaller,
G.B. (1967). The Deer and
the Tiger: A Study of Wildlife in India. The University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, USA, 384pp.
Shekhawat, D.S & C. Bhatnagar (2014). Guild, status, and diversity of
avian fauna in the Jhunjhunu district, Rajasthan, India. Journal of
Asia-Pacific Biodiversity 7(3): 262–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japb.2014.06.001
Simcharoen, A., T. Savini,
G.A. Gale, E. Roche, V. Chimchome & J.L. Smith
(2014). Ecological
factors that influence Sambar (Rusa
unicolor) distribution and abundance in western Thailand: implications for
tiger conservation. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 62: 100–106.
Singh, L.A.K.
(1995).
Sex-identification technique and sex-ratio in tiger: doubts and clarifications.
Indian Forester 21(10): 885–894.
Timmins,
R.J., R. Steinmetz, B.H. Sagar, K.N. Samba, J.W.
Duckworth, I.M. Anwarul & B.P.L. Chan (2015). Rusa unicolor. The IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-2.RLTS.T41790A22156247.en
Varman, K.S.
& R. Sukumar (1993). Ecology of sambar in Mudumalai Sanctuary,
southern India, pp. 273–284. In: ‘Deer of China: biology and management:
proceedings of the International Symposium on Deer of China’. Elsevier, New York.