4.5 Article

Population Density Estimates of the Critically Endangered Yellow-tailed Woolly Monkeys (Oreonax flavicauda) at La Esperanza, Northeastern Peru

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRIMATOLOGY
卷 32, 期 4, 页码 878-888

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10764-011-9507-x

关键词

Conservation; Density estimates; Lagothrix flavicauda; Line-transect methods

类别

资金

  1. Primate Conservation Inc
  2. Primate Society of Great Britain
  3. Apenheul Primate Conservation Trust
  4. Born Free Foundation
  5. Idea Wild
  6. International Primate Protection League
  7. La Vallee des Singes
  8. Restore UK
  9. Monkey Sanctuary Trust/Wild futures

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The critically endangered yellow tailed woolly monkeys (Oreonax flavicauda, Humboldt 1812) are endemic to the cloud forests of northeastern Peru. We surveyed populations of Oreonax flavicauda in the Centro Poblado La Esperanza, Amazonas department between May 2008 and March 2009. We conducted census work in an area comprising disturbed primary cloud forest interspersed with pasture lying between 3 protected areas, all of which are known to contain populations of Oreonax flavicauda. We used standardized line transect methodology to census an area of ca. 700 ha. We also recorded group size and composition. We compared the results of transect width estimation, Krebs' method, and an ad libitum total group count. We calculated individual densities of 8.27/km(2) and 9.26/kmA(2), and group densities of 0.93/km(2) and 1.04/kmA(2) using Krebs' method and transect width estimation, respectively. Average group size was 8.9, with 1-3 adult males, 1-6 adult females, and 0-6 juveniles and infants. The results from our transect surveys coincided well with our estimated total group count. Our results are similar to those from previous studies, although differences in methodologies and site-specific environmental factors make comparison difficult, and suggest that Oreonax flavicauda is able to survive in disturbed habitat when hunting pressure is low.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据