Forest Fragmentation Leads to Behavioral Changes in the Bearded Saki,

Chiropotes satanas chiropotes

Sarah Boyle 1 & Wilson Spironello 2

1 Arizona State University, USA 2 Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, Brazil

sarahannboyle@gmail.com1

2

Amazonia forest: Largest rainforest

Deforestation: Global problem• 13 million ha/yr lost (FAO 2007)

Amazon: Largest rainforest• 2.4 million ha/yr lost in Brazilian Amazon

(Laurance et al. 2004)

3

Ric

hard

Bie

rreg

aard

, Jr.

Biological Dynamics of Forest Fragments Project

4

5

Biological Dynamics of Forest Fragments Project (BDFFP) - Study Site

6

Forest fragments – Isolation 1980-90

7

Study Areas

8

Seasons

9

Primate behaviour and ecology research at BDFFP

Bearded Saki MonkeyL

uiz

Cla

udio

Mar

igo/

WR

PC

Arc

hive

s

• Not much known

• Defies convention:• Large home range• Large group size• Highly frugivorous

• Seeds (ripe, unripe)

10

Research Question

• How does forest fragmentation affect the behavioral ecology of the northern bearded saki monkey?

• Group size• Matrix use• Activity budget• Diet• Spatial patterns

Luiz Claudio Marigo/WRPC Archives

11

Primate Census

• 1980-2006• Rylands and Keuroghlian (1988)

• Schwarzkopf and Rylands (1989)

• Gilbert (2003)

• Boyle (2008)

• Line transects

12

Data Collection 2003-2006

• Track for 3 days/cycle

• Group scan samples• GPS location

• Group size/composition

• Behavior

• Diet

13

Present Absent

100 ha

10 ha

1 ha

Distribution 2003-2006

14

Distribution 2003-2006

Present Absent

100 ha

10 ha

1 ha

NOT ISOLATED

15

Home Range

• Continuous forest: 300-600 ha

• Permanent residents of fragments: 3% of “normal” home range

vs.430 ha 10 ha

16

Group Size

F(3,3)= 35.75, P = 0.0076

Density

F(3,3)= 43.80, P = 0.0056

17

Activity Budget

18

Diet

X Diet vs. Forest size

Seeds 83%

Fruit 17%

Continuous Forest

100-ha Fragments

10-ha Fragments

19

Diet

• 244 species

• 2% consumed in all sites

• 60% consumed at only one site

• Trees with fruit (phenological surveys)

• 36% species never consumed

20

Distance TraveledF(3,3) = 155.13, P < 0.001

F(3,3)= 431.78, P < 0.001

F(3,3)= 52.20, P = 0.0043

21

Distance

N

10-ha fragmentDistance: 3.09 km

8 ha = total area used

Continuous forestDistance: 4.07 km

96 ha = total area used22

Revisits

F(3,3)= 103.34, P = 0.001623

• Can reside in small patches • But small, high-density groups

• No births in small fragments during study

• Avoid low-growth matrix

• Diet differences • Nutritional differences?

• Spatial patterns vary• Home range, distance traveled, circular routes

Overview of Findings

24

Future Directions

• Monitor population

(movement, births)

• Analysis of use of

secondary forest

R. Bierregaard, Jr.

• Nutritional analyses of diet

• Continued examination of factors predicting vulnerability to fragmentation

25

Acknowledgements

Funding

Arizona State University Biological Dynamics of Forest Fragments Project Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia Smithsonian Tropical Research InstituteFulbright/IIEProviding Educational Opportunities (PEO)Margot Marsh Biodiversity FoundationOrganization for Tropical StudiesNational Science FoundationPrimate Conservation, Inc.American Society of PrimatologistsIDEA WILD

Waldete Castro LourençoLívia Rodrigues da SilvaAlaercio Marajo dos RéisOsmaildo Ferreria da SilvaLucas da Silva MergulhãoAlexandro Elias dos Santos Regina LuizãoCharles Zartman