Comparative Feeding Ecology of Two Chimpanzee Communities in Kibale National Park (Uganda)
Potts, Kevin B.
Watts, David P.
MetadataShow full item record
CitationPotts, Kevin B., David P. Watts. and Richard W. Wrangham. 2011. Comparative feeding ecology of two chimpanzee communities in Kibale National Park (Uganda). International Journal of Primatology 32(3): 669-690.
AbstractSeveral recent studies have documented considerable intraspecific and intrapopulation ecological variation in primates. However, we generally lack an understanding of how such variability may be linked to concomitant demographic variation among groups and/or populations of the same species, particularly in regards to large-bodied and wide-ranging species with high ecological flexibility, such as chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). We compared the feeding ecology of chimpanzees inhabiting two sites in Kibale National Park, Uganda that differ three-fold in chimpanzee density and support notably different plant communities. Chimpanzees at Ngogo, a site with the largest known chimpanzee community and unusually high chimpanzee density, spent a significantly lower percentage of time resting (and pregnant and lactating females spent more time feeding), incorporated higher percentages of ripe fruit in their diet, had lower dietary diversity values, and had shorter and less variable average patch residency times than did their counterparts at the nearby Kanyawara site, which supports a relatively low density of chimpanzees. Additionally, feeding party size was significantly and positively related to feeding patch size at Ngogo, but not at Kanyawara. Together these findings aid in explaining the noted disparity in chimpanzee community size and density between Ngogo and Kanyawara by suggesting that the diet of Ngogo chimpanzees is of higher overall quality than that of Kanyawara chimpanzees. They also highlight the potentially profound influence of even small-scale habitat heterogeneity on the ecology of primates. Researchers must take such influences into account when attempting to draw conclusions about species- or population-level characteristics.
Citable link to this pagehttp://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:5344188
- FAS Scholarly Articles