Western Kentucky UniversityTopSCHOLAR®Honors College Capstone Experience/ThesisProjects Honors College at WKU

9-1-2016

The Effects of Drought on Diets of Apex Predatorsin the South African Lowveld Inferred by FecalHair AnalysisShelby WadeWestern Kentucky University, shelby.wade662@topper.wku.edu

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses

Part of the Animal Sciences Commons, Biology Commons, and the Desert Ecology Commons

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by TopSCHOLAR®. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors College Capstone Experience/Thesis Projects by an authorized administrator of TopSCHOLAR®. For more information, please contact topscholar@wku.edu.

Recommended CitationWade, Shelby, "The Effects of Drought on Diets of Apex Predators in the South African Lowveld Inferred by Fecal Hair Analysis"(2016). Honors College Capstone Experience/Thesis Projects. Paper 669.http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses/669

THE EFFECTS OF DROUGHT ON DIETS OF APEX PREDATORS IN THE SOUTH

AFRICAN LOWVELD INFERRED BY FECAL HAIR ANALYSIS

A Capstone Experience/Thesis Project

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

the Degree Bachelor of Science with

Honors College Graduate Distinction at Western Kentucky University

By:

Shelby K. Wade

*****

Western Kentucky University

2017

CE/T Committee:

Dr. Michael Stokes, Advisor Approved by

Dr. John Andersland _______________________

Advisor

Dr. Karen Furgal, DPT Department of Biology

Copyright by

Shelby K. Wade

2016

ii

ABSTRACT

To properly manage offtake quotas and conservation efforts, Balule Nature

Reserve (South Africa) instituted a study in 2014 to determine prey species selection by

megapredators. In 2015, Balule Nature Reserve received about 190 mm less rainfall

between the months of January and June than in 2014 (116 mm less than average). This

study compares the diets of lions and hyaenas between 2014 and 2015. Prey species

consumed were determined by fecal analysis, and results were compared to prey

availability. Sixteen, 1 km2 plots were chosen from the 400 km2 Reserve. Between June

and August 2015, we walked three, 1 km transects in each plot, collecting 87 fecal

samples. Hairs from each sample were selected for microscopic analysis via multiple

subsampling methods and the hairs identified. As a reference, we developed a pictorial

atlas of hairs from 17 mammalian game species showing cuticular scale and medullary

patterns visible with scanning electron and light microscopes. Diet composition and

Jacob’s Selectivity Index were calculated for both predator species. Impala were less

represented as prey than expected, and zebra, nyala, bushbuck, and duiker were more

represented as prey than expected relative to their populations.

Keywords: Apex Predators, South Africa, Balule Nature Reserve, Diet Composition,

Fecal Analysis, Pictorial Atlas

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank all of the volunteers at Transfrontier Africa for their encouragement and

support. We also thank Limpopo Taxidermy, the Louisville Zoo, and the Thomas M.

Baker Collection for supplying hairs used for this project. Dr. John Andersland directs

the electron microscopy facility and ensured best results. Funding for the project was

provided by the Honors College and FUSE program at WKU.

iv

VITA

December 12, 1994 .................................................................. Born—Louisville, Kentucky

May 25, 2013 ............................................. Central Hardin High School, Cecilia, Kentucky

April 2014 ...................................................... .Employee at All Creatures Animal Hospital

Summer 2015 .........................................................................Study Abroad in South Africa

PUBLICATIONS

None

FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Biochemistry

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………ii

Acknowledgments………………………………………………………………………..iii

Vita………………………………………………………………………………………..iv

List of Figures…………………………………………………………………………….vi

List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………..xi

Chapters:

1. An SEM image reference guide to hairs of seventeen species of large African

mammals…………………………………………………………………………..1

2. Diets of two apex predators in a period of drought in the Balule Nature Reserve,

Hoedspruit, South Africa………………………………………………………...33

Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………..68

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1.1 SEM image of impala (Aepyceros melampus) guard hair………………………...7

1.2 SEM image of impala (Aepyceros melampus) guard hair...………………………8

1.3 SEM image of blue wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus) guard hair……………..9

1.4 SEM image of waterbuck (Kobus ellipsiprymmus) guard hair…………………..10

1.5 SEM image of klipspringer (Oreotragus oreotragus) guard hair………………..11

1.6 SEM image of gemsbok (Oryx gazella) guard hair……………….……………..12

1.7 SEM image of steenbok (Raphicerus campestris) guard hair...…………………13

1.8 SEM image of common duiker (Sylvicapra grimmia) guard hair...……………..14

1.9 SEM image of African buffalo (Syncerus caffer) guard hair…………………….15

1.10 SEM image of male nyala (Tragelaphus angasii) guard hair...………………….16

1.11 SEM image of male nyala (Tragelaphus angasii) bristle hair…...……………....17

1.12 SEM image of bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus) guard hair...…………………..18

1.13 SEM image of greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) guard hair……………..19

1.14 SEM image of giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis) guard hair……………………..20

1.15 SEM image of giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis) bristle hair…………………….21

1.16 SEM image of warthog (Phacochoerus africanus) guard hair...………………...22

1.17 SEM image of lion (Panthera leo) guard hair...…………………………………23

1.18 SEM image of lion (Panthera leo) bristle hair...………………………………...24

vii

1.19 SEM image of leopard (Panthera pardus) light guard hair...…………………....25

1.20 SEM image of leopard (Panthera pardus) dark guard hair...……………………26

1.21 SEM image of spotted hyaena (Crocuta crocuta) guard hair...………………….27

1.22 SEM image of Burchell’s zebra (Equus burchellii) guard hair...………………..28

1.23 SEM image of Burchell’s zebra (Equus burchellii) bristle hair...……………….29

2.1 Map of Balule Nature Reserve and corresponding management districts……….36

2.2 Plots sampled in 2014……………………………………………………………37

2.3 Plots sampled in 2015……………………………………………………….…...37

2.4 Grid used for subsampling method………………………………………………38

2.5 Petri dish with 18 points, used for hair selection………………………………...39

2.6 Distribution of all 87 predator scat samples collected in 2015…………………..43

2.7 Bar graph comparing proportions of species found in lion fecal samples from

2015, aerial game counts, and lion fecal samples from 2014…………....………46

2.8 Bar graph comparing proportions of species found in hyaena fecal samples from

2015, aerial game counts, and hyaena fecal samples from 2014…………….…..46

2.9 Bar graph demonstrating Jacob's Index values for all species in lion and hyaena

diets in 2014………………………………………………………………...……47

2.10 Bar graph demonstrating Jacob's Index values for all species in lion and hyaena

diets in 2015……………………………………………………………………...47

2.11 Brightfield image of impala (Aepyceros melampus) guard hair medulla

pattern……………………………………………………………………….…...49

2.12 Cast of impala (Aepyceros melampus) guard hair scale pattern…………………49

viii

2.13 Brightfield image of blue wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus) proximal region of

guard hair medulla pattern…….…………………………………………………50

2.14 Cast of blue wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus) guard hair scale pattern……...50

2.15 Brightfield image of blue wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus) distal region of

guard hair medulla pattern….……………………………………………………50

2.16 Brightfield image of waterbuck (Kobus ellipsiprymnus) proximal guard hair

medulla pattern…………………………………………………………………...51

2.17 Cast of waterbuck (Kobus ellipsiprymnus) guard hair scale pattern……………..51

2.18 Cast of waterbuck (Kobus ellipsiprymnus) distal region of guard hair scale

pattern……………………………………………………………………………51

2.19 Brightfield image of klipspringer (Oreotragus oreotragus) guard hair medulla

pattern…………………………………………………………………………....52

2.20 Cast of klipspringer (Oreotragus oreotragus) guard hair scale pattern………….52

2.21 Brightfield image of steenbok (Raphicerus compestris) guard hair medulla

pattern……………………………………………………………………………52

2.22 Cast of steenbok (Raphicerus compestris) guard hair scale pattern……...……...52

2.23 Brightfield image of duiker (Sylvicapra grimmia) guard hair medulla pattern.....53

2.24 Cast of duiker (Sylvicapra grimmia) proximal region of guard hair scale

pattern……………………………………………………………………………53

2.25 Cast of duiker (Sylvicapra grimmia) medial/distal region of guard hair scale

pattern……………………………………………………………………………53

2.26 Brightfield image of African buffalo (Syncerus caffer) proximal guard hair

medulla pattern……………………………………………………………...……54

ix

2.27 Cast of African buffalo (Syncerus caffer) guard hair scale pattern………...……54

2.28 Brightfield image of African buffalo (Syncerus caffer) distal region of guard hair

medulla pattern…………………………………………………………………...54

2.29 Brightfield image of nyala (Tragelaphus angasii) bristle hair medulla pattern....55

2.30 Cast of nyala (Tragelaphus angasii) bristle hair scale pattern………...………...55

2.31 Brightfield image of nyala (Tragelaphus angasii) guard hair medulla pattern.....55

2.32 Cast of nyala (Tragelaphus angasii) guard hair scale pattern………...…………55

2.33 Brightfield image of bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus) guard hair medulla

pattern…………………………………………………………………………....56

2.34 Cast of bushbuck (Travelaphus scriptus) guard hair scale pattern………………56

2.35 Brightfield image of greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) guard hair medulla

pattern……………………………………………………………………………56

2.36 Cast of greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) guard hair scale pattern……....56

2.37 Brightfield image of giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis) bristle hair medulla

pattern……………………………………………………………………….…...57

2.38 Cast of giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis) bristle hair scale pattern………………57

2.39 Brightfield image of giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis) proximal region of guard

hair medulla pattern……………………………………………………………...57

2.40 Cast of giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis) guard hair scale pattern………………57

2.41 Brightfield image of giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis) distal region of guard hair

medulla pattern…………………………………………………………………..58

2.42 Brightfield image of lion (Panthera leo) dark bristle hair medulla pattern...……59

2.43 Cast of lion (Panthera leo) bristle scale pattern…………………………………59

x

2.44 Brightfield image of lion (Panthera leo) light bristle hair medulla pattern...……59

2.45 Cast of lion (Panthera leo) guard hair scale pattern……………………………..59

2.46 Brightfield image of lion (Panthera leo) guard hair medulla pattern...………….60

2.47 Brightfield image of leopard (Panthera pardus) guard hair medulla pattern...….61

2.48 Cast of leopard (Panthera pardus) guard hair scale pattern……………………..61

2.49 Brightfield image of spotted hyaena (Crocuta crocuta) proximal/medial region of

guard hair medulla pattern……………….………………………………………62

2.50 Cast of spotted hyaena (Crocuta crocuta) guard hair scale pattern……………...62

2.51 Brightfield image of spotted hyaena (Crocuta crocuta) distal region of guard hair

medulla pattern…………………………………………………………………...62

2.52 Brightfield image of Burchell’s zebra (Equus burchellii) dark bristle hair medulla

pattern………………………………………………………………….………...63

2.53 Cast of Burchell’s zebra (Equus burchellii) bristle hair scale pattern...…………63

2.54 Brightfield image of Burchell’s zebra (Equus burchellii) white bristle hair

medulla pattern………………………………………………………..…………63

2.55 Cast of Burchell’s zebra (Equus burchellii) guard hair scale pattern………...….63

2.56 Cast of Burchell’s zebra (Equus burchellii) guard hair scale pattern………...….64

xi

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1.1 Species whose hairs were imaged with SEM ..........................................................4

2.1 Species whose hair was gathered for reference and characterized ........................40

2.2 Number of scats containing hairs of each prey species by region consumed by

lion .........................................................................................................................44

2.3 Number of scats containing hairs of each prey species by region consumed by

hyaena ....................................................................................................................44

2.4 G-statistic results for the African lion when compared to aerial game counts and

results from the 2014 study ....................................................................................48

2.5 G-statistic results for the spotted hyaena when compared to aerial game counts

and results from the 2014 study .............................................................................48

1

CHAPTER 1

AN SEM IMAGE REFERENCE GUIDE TO HAIRS OF SEVENTEEN SPECIES OF

LARGE AFRICAN MAMMALS

Introduction

Morphological features of mammalian hairs have proven to be useful in a variety

of biological studies, including predator diet analyses, conservation management,

forensic studies, medical uses, and even archaeological studies (Johnson and Hansen

1979, Rosas-Rosas et al. 2003, Deedrick and Koch 2004, Manfredi et al. 2004, Breuer

2005, Ott et al. 2006, Backwell et al. 2009, Mansilla et al. 2011, Wentworth et al. 2011,

Braczkowski et al. 2012, Mbizah et al. 2012, Verma and Joshi 2012, Davidson et al.

2013, Taru and Backwell 2013, Taru and Backwell 2014). Hair is made mostly of keratin,

which causes it to be very durable, as keratin is more resistant to decay and digestive

alteration than other mammalian tissues such as dentin or bone (Deedrick and Koch 2004,

Backwell et al. 2009, Mansilla et al. 2011, Taru and Backwell 2013). Under ideal

conditions, keratin may last hundreds or even thousands of years without undergoing

significant changes, and is therefore useful when it comes to species identification from

historical samples (Backwell et al. 2009, Mansilla et al. 2011, Taru and Backwell 2013).

Short (1978) and Keogh (1983) found that there are no recognizable differences between

2

otherwise identical hairs from fresh kills, from museum specimens, or from digested

materials.

Mammalian hair shafts consist of three main concentric layers: the cuticle, the

cortex, and the medulla (Deedrick and Koch 2004). The cuticle is the superficial layer of

the hair. It consists of scales which typically overlap each other and form cuticular scale

patterns. The cortex is the intermediate layer of the hair. It typically contains pigment

granules, which give a hair its color, and sometimes contains ovoid bodies, which are

large, pigmented, oval-shaped structures. The medulla forms the central core of the hair.

It is made of dead, collapsed cells; the number present can vary greatly. In some hairs,

the medulla may be absent.

Longitudinally, hair also consists of three regions: proximal (the end nearest the

root or follicle), medial (the middle region), and distal (the free end). Scale patterns can

change down the length of the hair, so images should be taken at all three regions for

every species (Seiler 2010). This is very important, especially when analyzing hairs from

scat, because hairs will often be fragmented, so scale patterns from only one region of the

hair may be available. Cuticular scales always point from the proximal end of the hair to

the distal region, and hair shafts tend to decrease in diameter towards the distal end

(Deedrick and Koch 2004).

Previous catalogs have used several terms to describe the different common

cuticular scale patterns. These terms include imbricate, mosaic, chevron, coronal, and

petal-like or spinous (Homan and Genoways 1978, Deedrick and Koch 2004, Keogh

1983). Imbricate is described as flattened, overlapping scales with margins close together

(Deedrick and Koch 2004). Mosaic is described as “being composed of a number of

3

units” (Keogh 1983). Chevron is a waved pattern in which the trough, crest, or both of

the scales resemble a “V” shape (Keogh 1983). Coronal involves only one or two scales

surrounding the hair shaft and bearing the resemblance of a stack of paper cups (Homan

and Genoways 1978, Deedrick and Koch 2004, Keogh 1983). Petal-like, or spinous

scales protrude from the hair shaft. They resemble overlapping flower petals and may be

diamond or triangular in shape (Deedrick and Koch 2004, Keogh 1983).

The distances between two adjacent scale margins are often used as descriptors

and diagnostic markers in addition to the shape of the scales. The three most common

words used to describe the distances are close, near, and distant (Keogh 1983). These

terms are only relative, and are not quantified, so it is less precise to describe a hair in this

way, but can help in cases where the identity of the species is uncertain. Lastly, the scale

margins themselves can be described as smooth, crenate, or rippled (Keogh 1983).

In several studies, cuticular scale patterns of hairs were used to aid in the process

of species identification (Johnson and Hansen 1979, Rosas-Rosas et al. 2003, Manfredi et

al. 2004, Breuer 2005, Ott et al. 2006, Wentworth et al. 2011, Braczkowski et al. 2012,

Mbizah et al. 2012, Davidson et al. 2013). This is often accomplished by creating a scale

imprint by mounting a hair on a slide using clear nail polish or a gelatin and allowing it to

dry (Homan and Genoways 1978, Keogh 1983, Mizutani 1999, Ott et al. 2006,

Wentworth et al. 2011, Mbizah 2012) . Once dry, the hair is removed and a mold of the

scale pattern is left. This mold is then observed under a light microscope and compared to

a reference catalog of known hair scale patterns.

Using a scanning electron microscope (SEM) allows for a more detailed analysis

of cuticular scale patterns. Using the SEM, scales can be observed directly, instead of

4

through use of imprints or molds. The SEM provides higher resolution images of the

cuticle scale patterns than light microscopes (Sahajpal and Goyal 2009). This gives a

much clearer picture of the scale patterns than light microscopy methods, revealing

different scale shapes, scale margin patterns, and accurate distances between scales.

It has been argued that the scale patterns are not enough to accurately identify

mammalian species to a taxonomic level finer than genus (Short 1978, Taru and

Backwell 2014). The purpose of this catalog is not to address this point, but rather to

provide a clear reference system for those who are looking to use scale patterns to aid in

the identification of African game species from hair samples.

Species Studied

This catalog was created in conjunction with another study, in which the feces of

apex predators within the Balule Nature Reserve of the Greater Kruger National Park

region of South Africa were examined to determine which prey species were consumed.

Therefore, only the larger, more prevalent species found within that area are included.

We photographed guard hairs or bristle hairs from 17 species (Table I). Classifications

follow Wilson and Reeder (2005):

Scientific Name Common Name

Aepyceros melampus—Lichtenstein 1812 impala

Connochaetes taurinus—Burchell 1824 blue wildebeest

Kobus ellipsiprymnus—Ogilby 1833 waterbuck

5

Oreotragus oreotragus—Zimmerman 1783 klipspringer

Oryx gazella—Linnaeus 1758 gemsbok

Raphicerus campestris—Thunberg 1811 steenbok

Sylvicapra grimmia—Linnaeus 1758 bush duiker

Syncerus caffer—Sparrman 1779 African buffalo

Tragelaphus angasii—Angas 1849 nyala

Tragelaphus scriptus—Pallas 1766 bushbuck

Tragelaphus strepsiceros—Pallas 1766 greater kudu

Giraffa camelopardalis—Linnaeus 1758 giraffe

Phacochoerus africanus—Gmelin 1788 warthog

Panthera leo—Linnaeus 1758 lion

Panthera pardus—Linnaeus 1758 leopard

Crocuta crocuta—Erxleben 1777 spotted hyaena

Equus burchellii—Gray 1824 Burchell’s zebra

Table 1 Species whose hairs were photographed with SEM

Materials and Methods

Most hairs were collected from specimens in a taxidermy office located in

Phalaborwa, Limpopo Province, South Africa. Lion hairs and warthog hairs were

collected from the Louisville Zoo, located in Louisville, Kentucky, USA. Bushbuck,

gemsbok, and leopard hairs were donated by the Thomas M. Baker collection of Bowling

Green, Kentucky, USA. Guard hairs were collected from the dorsoscapular, scapular,

6

chest, or axillary region of each animal, as was done in previous studies (Homan and

Genoways 1978, Short 1978, Keogh 1983, Hess et al. 1985, Seiler 2010). If bristle hairs

were present, they were collected as well. The bristle hairs were always taken from the

mane of the species.

Hair shafts were soaked in 91% isopropyl alcohol for about one hour for cleaning,

and then soaked in distilled water for 3-5 minutes to rinse. After air-drying, they were

prepared for observation under a scanning electron microscope. They were mounted onto

stubs using very smooth tabs (Cat #16084-20, Ted Pella) and sputter-coated with gold-

palladium alloy (60% gold, 40% palladium) for three minutes. The stub was then turned

180° and again sputter-coated with the gold palladium alloy. Whole hairs were mounted;

in some cases long hairs had to be mounted in sections to fit on the stubs.

Samples were observed using a JEOL JSM-6510LV scanning electron

microscope at 10 kV and 500x magnification (unless otherwise specified) and

photographed in three different locations—the proximal, medial, and distal

regions. These settings gave the best resolution with the least amount of contrast on the

edges of hairs. The same magnification was used for most hairs to give a reference for

size differences among hairs and among different regions of the same hair. If more detail

was needed, or if the hair was too big for the frame, the magnification was altered.

7

Results

Figure 1 SEM image of impala (Aepyceros melampus) guard hair

8

Figure 2 SEM image of impala (Aepyceros melampus) guard hair

9

Figure 3 SEM image of blue wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus) guard hair

10

Figure 4 SEM image of waterbuck (Kobus ellipsiprymnus) guard hair

11

Figure 5 SEM image of klipspringer (Oreotragus oreotragus) guard hair

12

Figure 6 SEM image of gemsbok (Oryx gazella) guard hair

13

Figure 7 SEM image of steenbok (Raphicerus campestris) guard hair

14

Figure 8 SEM image of common duiker (Sylvicapra grimmia) guard hair

15

Figure 9 SEM image of African buffalo (Syncerus caffer) guard hair

16

Figure 10 SEM image of male nyala (Tragelaphus angasii) guard hair

17

Figure 11 SEM image of male nyala (Tragelaphus angasii) bristle hair

18

Figure 12 SEM image of bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus) guard hair

19

Figure 13 SEM image of greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) guard hair

20

Figure 14 SEM image of giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis) guard hair

21

Figure 15 SEM image of giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis) bristle hair

22

Figure 16 SEM image of warthog (Phacochoerus africanus) guard hair

23

Figure 17 SEM image of lion (Panthera leo) guard hair

24

Figure 18 SEM image of lion (Panthera leo) bristle hair

25

Figure 19 SEM image of leopard (Panthera pardus) light guard hair

26

Figure 20 SEM image of leopard (Panthera pardus) dark guard hair

27

Figure 21 SEM image of spotted hyaena (Crocuta crocuta) guard hair

28

Figure 22 SEM image of Burchell's zebra (Equus burchellii) guard hair

29

Figure 23 SEM image of Burchell's zebra (Equus burchellii) bristle hair

30

Discussion

We have presented the cuticular scale patterns of hair from 17 mammalian species

commonly found in the South African lowveld. In most cases, the process of Seiler

(2010) was followed, and the three regions of hair shafts (proximal, medial, and distal)

were photographed to display changes in the scale pattern along the length of the hair.

Our samples of male nyala’s bristle hair, warthog’s guard hair, and Burchell’s

zebra’s guard hair, had damage to the hair shaft that destroyed the cuticle. In these cases,

certain regions of the hair could not be photographed. Seiler (2010) also noted damaged,

unrecognizable cuticle patterns in a number of her hair samples. She attributed this

damage to museum storage. Keogh (1983), however, records that hairs collected from

specimens in museum storage do not show a significant difference from those that are

collected from live specimens.

Most samples were collected from the dorsoscapular area of each animal. Lion

guard hairs were collected both from lion feces gathered by the Louisville Zoo in

Louisville, Kentucky, USA, and from the axillary region of a taxidermic specimen from

the Thomas M. Baker collection of Bowling Green, Kentucky, USA. Hairs from the

axillary region had no cuticular scale patterns. It is uncertain if this is natural or caused

by damage from preparing the specimen for taxidermy. Only guard hairs collected from

the fecal sample were photographed. These hairs were swallowed during grooming.

Because these guard hairs were collected from feces, it is unsure from which part of the

body these hairs originated. Also, leopard hairs were collected from the lower left flank,

and gemsbok and bushbuck guard hairs were collected from the sternal region.

31

As noted in similar studies, a limiting factor of this study was the lack of hairs

collected from different body regions of each species. No hairs were collected from the

posterior, ventral, or cranial regions of the animals. There are also no scale patterns

representing hairs from juveniles; all hairs came from adults.

It is important to note that impala has two different types of scale patterns. The

first scale pattern (Figure I) appears to be streaked, with a raised surface running down

the center of the hair shaft. The second (Figure II) appears to be imbricate overall, with

smooth, yet irregularly waved scales. Both are unique to the impala species and make this

species easily identifiable. Klipspringer hair is unmistakable, with several scales along

the entire length of the hair in a mosaic, petal-like pattern. Steenbok hair is also unique,

with scales appearing mosaic proximally and slowly transitioning into a smooth, coronal

shape. Duiker and lion guard hairs are both coronal throughout the length of the shaft,

and medullary characteristics are necessary to distinguish between the two. Giraffe guard

hairs can be recognized by their regularly waved scales. Bristle hairs of all species—as

well as guard hairs for buffalo, warthog, wildebeest, and waterbuck—can be

distinguished by their large size, as well as the close proximity and very rippled

appearance of scale margins. Guard hairs of greater kudu, bushbuck, leopard, hyaena, and

zebra are all characterized by close, rippled scale margins, as well, but the hair shaft tends

to be thinner than in the species previously listed. We did also observe hairs from each

species at 10 kV and 10,000x magnification to search for distinguishing characteristics at

the extremely microscopic level. However, no additional distinctive features were found

to discriminate among different species. To produce a fully diagnostic key, the scale

32

patterns found in this study should be studied along with medullary characteristics, color

patterns, dimensions, and other diagnostic features of known reference hairs.

33

CHAPTER 2

DIETS OF TWO APEX PREDATORS IN A PERIOD OF DROUGHT THROUGHOUT

THE BALULE NATURE RESERVE, HOEDSPRUIT, SOUTH AFRICA

Introduction

Population control is a very important aspect of conservation. One way to manage

the populations of species is to set hunting quotas for each of the various species within a

certain area. Hunting quotas are largely determined based upon the abundance of species,

as well as the hunting patterns of nonhuman predators. In the Balule Nature Reserve of

South Africa, there are five apex predators which often pass through the area. These are

lion (Panthera leo), spotted hyaena (Crocuta crocuta), leopard (Panthera pardus),

cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus), and wild dog (Lycaon pictus). This study seeks to determine

the diet compositions of two of these apex predators in Balule Nature Reserve, South

Africa: the lion and spotted hyaena.

When hunting, apex predators demonstrate both preference and avoidance of

different species. Selective feeding takes place if a predator consumes equally common

species at different rates (Jacobs 1974). Preferences in diets occur when species are

consumed more than expected based on their relative abundance within an area (Hayward

and Kerley 2005, 2008). When a species is avoided as prey by a predator, the species is

34

consumed less than expected based on its relative abundance (Hayward and Kerley 2005,

2008). The diets of apex predators are largely dependent upon the mass of prey, relative

abundance, herd size, and evolutionary adaptations that render a species more or less

susceptible to predators (Hayward and Kerley 2005, Hayward 2006, Rapson and Bernard

2007, Mbizah 2012, Clements et al 2014).

Lions prefer prey species that fall between the range of 92 kg and 632 kg and

avoid species that are < 32 kg and > 632 kg (Clements et al 2014). Both lions and

hyaenas have rich, diverse diets, and have a large dietary overlap (Hayward and Kerley

2008). They both fulfill the upper niche of Africa’s predatory guild, and hyaenas are also

often seen scavenging at lion kill sites (Hayward and Kerley 2008).

Spotted hyaenas prefer prey species between 91 kg and 139 kg and avoid species

< 15 kg. Spotted hyaenas are the only apex predators that do not have a tendency to avoid

prey above a certain mass (Hayward 2006, Clements et al 2014). This is most likely

because hyaenas are often scavengers (Breuer 2005, Hayward 2006, Trinkel 2010,

Clements et al 2014), so prey that they do not kill will also appear in their scat. It could

also be due to their ability to hunt in both group and solo fashions (Breuer 2005,

Hayward 2006).

On average, the Balule Nature Reserve receives 243.4 mm of rainfall between the

months of January and June (Olifants West 2015). In 2014, the area received 317.4 mm

of precipitation within the same amount of time (Olifants West 2015). In the first six

months of 2015, the Balule Nature Reserve experienced a drought, with only 127.6 mm

of rainfall (Olifants West 2015). I compared the diets of lions and spotted hyaenas to a

similar study conducted in 2014 to observe changes in diets of these species within a

35

drought period. Prey species have been shown to adjust their behavior by increasing herd

size and vigilance while at waterholes during times of drought, when the risk of

encountering predators is increased (Valiex et al 2009). Therefore, it can be reasonably

hypothesized that the diets of lions and spotted hyaenas will change significantly during

this period of drought, due to changes in behavior of both predators and prey. The results

of this study will also contribute to a long-term study of predator/prey relationships

within the Balule Nature Reserve’s ecosystem.

Study Area

This study took place in Balule Nature Reserve, which is 60 km southwest of

Phalaborwa and 17 km north of Hoedspruit in the Limpopo Province of South Africa

(Olifants 2013). The nature reserve covers 40,000 hectares and makes up the western

boundary of the Greater Kruger National Park, as well as the Association of Private

Nature Reserves (APNR) (Olifants 2013). There are nine administrative units within the

Balule Nature Reserve: Grietjie, Mohlabetsi River (MRNR), Mohlabetsi South, Olifants

East (OREC), Olifants North (ON), Olifants South (OS), Olifants West (OW), Parsons,

and York. Over the past 30 years, Balule has received an average annual rainfall of a little

over 415 mm, which places it within the category of a “semi-arid savannah biome”

(Olifants 2010, page 5; Olifants 2011, page 3). While the landscape and topography

within and between the regions of Balule can fluctuate, Tupsuvihniö (Aristida congesta)

and Curly Leaf (Eragrostis rigidior) have the highest frequency of occurrence among

grass species (Olifants 2014, page 23). Trees dominating the landscape consist of

36

Knobthorn (Acacia nigrescens), Raisin Bush (Grewia spp.), Red Bushwillow

(Combretum apiculatum), and Corkwood (Commiphora spp.) (Olifants 2014a).

Figure 1 Map of Balule Nature Reserve and corresponding management districts; image from http://www.olifantsreserve.co.za/documents/Balule%20Management%20Regions.jpg

Methodology

Fecal Collection In 2014, the Balule Nature Reserve adopted a systematic method for

collecting fecal samples, created by Audrey N. Sohikian (Olifants 2014b, page 46-68), in

which 30 plots were chosen within the reserve, and three transects were walked within

each plot. This year, 16 of those plots were sampled, each measuring one square

kilometer. Three one-kilometer transects were walked in every plot. Transects were

37

separated by 500 meters. Plots were hiked between June 8, 2015, and August 6, 2015.

Anywhere from two to five observers walked along the different transects, scanning the

ground for predator feces. Apex predator feces are easily distinguished from other scat by

their size, white appearance, and presence of hair. When scat was found, it was placed in

a plastic sealable bag, labeled, and the GPS coordinates were recorded. Scats were

identified with the assistance of field guides, as well as a scat identification book (Murray

2011).

Figure 2 Plots sampled in 2014 (Olifants 2014b)

Figure 3 Plots sampled in 2015

38

Fecal Analysis To analyze all fecal samples without bias, it was necessary to develop a

sampling method to randomly select hairs for identification. Similar to Eagle and Pelton

(1983), Hellgren (1993), Marker et al (2003), Ott et al (2006), and Martins et al (2011), a

grid was created on a wooden board with 24 columns and 12 rows, totaling 288 cells with

an area of 9 cm2 each. Fecal samples were crumbled by hand, and evenly spread out

along to grid. Using a random number generator (random.org), five cells were chosen,

and all hairs were collected from these cells.

Figure 4 Grid used for subsampling method

After collecting hairs from the grid, they were distributed evenly in a petri dish

with 25 labeled points on the bottom. The hair closest to each point was chosen for

identification. If the sample contained fewer than 25 hairs, all hairs were identified. Hairs

were placed in distilled water for one hour and then moved to 91% isopropyl alcohol for

a few minutes for cleaning (Sahajpal and Goyal 2009). After completing 24 samples, it

was determined that no more than 18 hairs were necessary for identifying all species

within a sample.

39

Figure 5 Petri dish with 18 points, used for hair selection

After cleaning, hairs were placed on a microscope slide with a drop of distilled

water, and a cover slip was placed on top. They were viewed under a WILD M20-90715

microscope to observe the medulla and cortex. Cuticular scale imprints were made for

each hair by spreading a thin layer of Henkel NB Multi-Purpose Cement (part #1589347)

on a microscope slide and pressing the unknown hair overtop. The glue was allowed to

dry, hairs were pulled off using a pair of thin-point tweezers, and the scale impressions

were viewed under the microscope. Medullary characteristics and scale patterns were

compared to reference materials (Keogh 1983, Backwell et al 2009, Seiler 2010, Taru and

Backwell 2013, Taru and Backwell 2014). A catalog of reference hairs from Limpopo

Taxidermy, the Louisville Zoo (Kentucky, USA), and the Thomas M. Baker Collection

(Kentucky, USA) were also used. These microscopic characteristics, along with some

macroscopic characteristics, were used to identify hairs to the species level when

possible. If more than one item from the same species was found in a scat sample, it was

considered to be from the same individual animal.

40

Species Studied Only hairs from game species in the Balule Nature Reserve were

identified. Classifications follow Wilson and Reeder (2005):

Scientific Name Common Name

Aepyceros melampus—Lichtenstein 1812 impala

Connochaetes taurinus—Burchell 1824 blue wildebeest

Kobus ellipsiprymnus—Ogilby 1833 waterbuck

Oreotragus oreotragus—Zimmerman 1783 klipspringer

Raphicerus campestris—Thunberg 1811 steenbok

Sylvicapra grimmia—Linnaeus 1758 bush duiker

Syncerus caffer—Sparrman 1779 African buffalo

Tragelaphus angasii—Angas 1849 nyala

Tragelaphus scriptus—Pallas 1766 bushbuck

Tragelaphus strepsiceros—Pallas 1766 greater kudu

Giraffa camelopardalis—Linnaeus 1758 giraffe

Phacochoerus africanus—Gmelin 1788 warthog

Panthera leo—Linnaeus 1758 lion

Panthera pardus—Linnaeus 1758 leopard

Crocuta crocuta—Erxleben 1777 spotted hyaena

Equus burchellii—Gray 1824 Burchell’s zebra

Table 1 Species whose hair was gathered for reference and characterized

41

Statistical Analysis Several different tests were used to analyze the diet compositions

of both apex predators. First, the proportions for all species found in scat samples were

determined by dividing the number of occurrences of one species found in all samples by

the total occurrences of all species. These proportions were compared with the species

availability determined by aerial game counts, as well as with the results from the study

completed in 2014 (Olifants 2014b, page 46-68), using the Jacob’s Index (Jacobs 1974)

and the g-test goodness-of-fit (Rohlf and Sokal 1981, Sokal and Rohlf 1981).

The Jacob’s Index was applied to each species found in scat samples to determine

selected and non-selected prey species of both apex predators. The Jacob’s Index is as

follows:

𝐷 =𝑟 − 𝑝

𝑟 + 𝑝 − 2𝑟𝑝

where r is equal to the proportion of a species found in scat samples, and p is equal to the

proportion of a species found in game counts (Jacobs 1974). D values range from -1 to

+1, with values less than zero indicating a species was consumed less than expected

based on its relative abundance, zero indicating prey was consumed equal to its relative

abundance, and values greater than zero indicating prey was consumed more than

expected based on its relative abundance.

The g-tests determined whether there were any significant differences in the total

diet composition of either predator when comparing it to both the game counts and the

results from 2014. The formula is as follows:

𝑔 = 2∑𝑂𝑖 × ln𝑂𝑖𝐸𝑖

42

where Oi represents the number of a certain prey species observed in all samples, and Ei

represents the number of times that same species would be expected to appear in the

same number of samples based on the proportions from aerial game counts or 2014’s

observations (Rohlf and Sokal 1981, Sokal and Rohlf 1981). This test was conducted

twice for each predator—once to compare with the expected results coming from aerial

game counts, and once to compare with the expected results coming from 2014’s results.

If any species was not detected in the fecal samples, they were omitted from the

g-test. Therefore, when comparing the proportions of prey species found in lion scat in

2014 to proportions of prey species found in lion scat in 2015, steenbok, warthog, and

wildebeest were omitted from the g-test equation. Wildebeest was not detected in any of

the fecal samples found in 2014, and steenbok and warthog were not detected in any of

the fecal samples tested in 2015. Because steenbok and warthog were not detected in any

of the fecal samples in 2015, they were also omitted from the g-test when comparing the

proportions of prey species found in lion scat in 2015 to the proportions of prey species

found during aerial game counts. Nyala was not detected in hyaena scat in 2014, so it was

omitted from the g-test when comparing proportions of prey species found in hyaena scat

in 2014 to the proportions of prey species found in hyaena scat in 2015.

Results

In total, 87 fecal samples were collected between June 8, 2015, and August 6,

2015. Of the 87 samples collected, 68 scats contained hair that was able to be identified.

Hairs in exceptionally old, deteriorated samples were damaged past the point of

43

identification. Therefore, it should be noted that it is not of use to collect scat samples

which have been exposed to much weathering and degradation (Breuer 2005, Yihune and

Bekele 2014).

Most scat samples were collected from the regions of Olifants South, Olifants

West, Jejane, and York. No scat samples were found within transects in the regions of

Parsons, Olifants North, and Greitjie. While some scat samples were spotted in these

plots, they were not located within transects, and thus could not be collected. It would be

wise to allow opportunistic scat collection while walking between different transects, to

allow more opportunity for scat collection.

Figure 6 Distribution of all 87 predator scat samples collected in 2015

Of the 68 scat samples that could be identified, 34 scat samples were identified as

hyaena scat and 34 were identified as lion scat. Tables 2 and 3 display the number of

44

scats containing hairs of each prey species consumed by each predator, and in which

regions the fecal samples containing those prey hairs were located.

Lion prey consumption across all regions of Balule Nature Reserve

Jejane MRNR OS OW OREC York

bushbuck 1 0 0 0 0 0

duiker 0 0 1 0 0 2

giraffe 2 0 1 0 0 0

impala 4 2 3 1 0 11

kudu 0 1 0 1 1 2

nyala 1 1 1 0 0 1

steenbok 0 0 0 0 0 1

warthog 0 0 0 0 0 0

waterbuck 0 0 0 0 0 1

wildebeest 1 0 0 0 0 0

zebra 0 0 0 0 0 8

Table 2 Number of scats containing hairs of each prey species by region consumed by

lion

Hyaena prey consumption across all regions of Balule Nature Reserve

Jejane MRNR OS OW OREC York

bushbuck 0 3 0 0 0 0

duiker 1 1 0 0 0 0

45

giraffe 0 2 0 0 0 0

impala 4 8 0 2 0 6

kudu 1 2 0 0 0 3

nyala 0 1 1 0 0 2

steenbok 0 0 1 0 0 0

warthog 0 0 1 0 0 0

waterbuck 3 0 0 1 0 3

wildebeest 0 1 0 2 0 0

zebra 1 0 0 0 0 9

Table 3 Number of scats containing hairs of each prey species by region consumed by

hyaena

When comparing proportions of species consumed found in lion scat, impala and

zebra made up the greatest proportions. Steenbok and warthog were totally absent. These

proportions were compared with the proportions of species found during aerial game

counts, as well as the results found in the 2014 study.

46

Figure 7 Bar graph comparing proportions of species found in lion fecal samples in 2014,

2015, and aerial game counts

Proportions of prey species found in hyaena fecal samples were also compared to

proportions found during aerial game counts and results from the study conducted in

2014. Similar to the lion, impala and zebra also made up the largest proportion of species

found in hyaena diets for 2015.

Figure 8 Bar graph comparing proportions of species found in hyaena fecal samples in

2014, 2015, and in aerial game counts

0

0.5

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f Sp

ecie

s C

on

sum

ed

Proportions of prey species found in lion fecal samples in 2014 and 2015 and in aerial game counts

Proportion of species found in lion fecal samples in 2014

Proportion of species found in lion fecal samples in 2015

Proportion of species found during aerial game counts

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f Sp

ecie

s C

on

sum

ed

Proportions of prey species found in hyaena fecal samples in 2014 and 2015 and in aerial game counts

Proportion of species found in hyaena fecal samples in 2014

Proportion of species found in hyaena fecal samples in 2015

Proportion of species found during aerial game counts

47

These proportions were used when calculating the Jacob’s Index for each species

consumed by each predator. The Jacob’s Index is shown here for both 2014 and 2015 for

an easy comparison between studies.

Figure 9 Jacob's Index values for all species in lion and hyaena diets in 2014

Figure 10 Jacob's Index values for all species in lion and hyaena diets in 2015

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

Jaco

b's

Ind

ex V

alu

es f

or

All

Spec

ies

Axis Title

Comparison of Jacob's Index Values Between Lion and Hyaena in 2014

Lion Hyaena

-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Jaco

b's

Ind

ex V

alu

es f

or

All

Spec

ies

Comparison of Jacob's Index Values Between Lion and Hyaena in 2015

Lion Hyaena

48

These proportions were also used to calculate g-values to compare proportions of

different prey species in the scat of each predator species to both aerial game counts and

the results from the 2014 study. The results are shown in Tables 4 and 5.

Lion compared with… G-statistic P-value Significance?

Game Counts g = 56.477 p < 0.001 Significantly different

Year 2014 g = 26.946 p < 0.001 Significantly different

Table 4 G-statistic results for the African lion when compared to aerial game counts and

results from the 2014 study

Hyaena compared with… G-statistic P-value Significance?

Game Counts g = 73.395 p < 0.001 Significantly different

Year 2014 g = 55.655 p < 0.001 Significantly different

Table 5 G-statistic results for the spotted hyaena when compared to aerial game counts

and results from the 2014 study

49

Light Microscopy Images

Images were taken using a light microscope. If the appearance of the hair shaft or scale

pattern changed along the length of the hair, multiple images are displayed and labeled

according to the region of the hair shown in the image.

Medulla Scale Patterns

impala (Aepyceros melampus)

Figure 11 Brightfield image of impala

(Aepyceros melampus) guard hair medulla

pattern

impala (Aepyceros melampus)

Figure 12 Cast of impala (Aepyceros

melampus) guard hair scale pattern

50

blue wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus)

Figure 13 Brightfield image of blue

wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus)

proximal region of guard hair medulla

pattern

Figure 15 Brightfield image of blue

wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus) distal

region of guard hair medulla pattern

blue wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus)

Figure 14 Cast of blue wildebeest

(Connochaetes taurinus) guard hair scale

pattern

51

waterbuck (Kobus ellipsiprymnus)

Figure 146 Brightfield image of

waterbuck (Kobus ellipsiprymnus)

proximal region of guard hair medulla

pattern

Figure 18 Brightfield image of waterbuck

(Kobus ellipsiprymnus) distal region of

guard hair medulla pattern

waterbuck (Kobus ellipsiprymnus)

Figure 17 Cast of waterbuck (Kobus

ellipsiprymnus) guard hair scale pattern

52

klipspringer (Oreotragus oreotragus)

Figure 19 Brightfield image of

klipspringer (Oreotragus oreotragus)

guard hair medulla pattern

klipspringer (Oreotragus oreotragus)

Figure 20 Cast of klipspringer

(Oreotragus oreotragus) guard hair scale

pattern

53

steenbok (Raphicerus campestris)

Figure 21 Brightfield image of steenbok

(Raphicerus campestris) guard hair

medulla pattern

steenbok (Raphicerus campestris)

Figure 22 Cast of steenbok (Raphicerus

campestris) guard hair scale pattern

54

duiker (Sylvicapra grimmia)

Figure 23 Brightfield image of duiker

(Sylvicapra grimmia) guard hair medulla

pattern

duiker (Sylvicapra grimmia)

Figure 24 Cast of duiker (Sylvicapra

grimmia) proximal region of guard hair

scale pattern

Figure 25 Cast of duiker (Sylvicapra

grimmia) medial/distal region of guard

hair scale pattern

55

African buffalo (Syncerus caffer)

Figure 26 Brightfield image of African

buffalo (Syncerus caffer) proximal region

of guard hair medulla pattern

Figure 28 Brightfield image of African

buffalo (Syncerus caffer) distal region of

guard hair medulla pattern

African buffalo (Syncerus caffer)

Figure 27 Cast of African buffalo

(Syncerus caffer) guard hair scale pattern

56

nyala (Tragelaphus angasii)

Figure 29 Brightfield image of nyala

(Tragelaphus angasii) bristle hair medulla

pattern

Figure 31 Brightfield image of nyala

(Tragelaphus angasii) guard hair medulla

pattern

nyala (Tragelaphus angasii)

Figure 30 Cast of nyala (Tragelaphus

angasii) bristle hair scale pattern

Figure 32 Cast of nyala (Tragelaphus

angasii) guard hair scale pattern

57

bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus)

Figure 33 Brightfield image of bushbuck

(Tragelaphus scriptus) guard hair medulla

pattern

bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus)

Figure 34 Cast of bushbuck (Tragelaphus

scriptus) guard hair scale pattern

greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros)

Figure 35 Brightfield image of greater

kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) guard

hair medulla pattern

greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros)

Figure 36 Cast of greater kudu

(Tragelaphus strepsiceros) guard hair

scale pattern

58

giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis)

Figure 37 Brightfield image of giraffe

(Giraffa camelopardalis) bristle hair

medulla pattern

Figure 39 Brightfield image of giraffe

(Giraffa camelopardalis) proximal region

of guard hair medulla pattern

giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis)

Figure 38 Cast of giraffe (Giraffa

camelopardalis) bristle hair scale pattern

Figure 40 Cast of giraffe (Giraffa

camelopardalis) guard hair scale pattern

59

giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis)

Figure 41 giraffe (Giraffa

camelopardalis) distal region of guard

hair medulla pattern

giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis)

warthog (Phacochoerus africanus)

No image available

warthog (Phacochoerus africanus)

No image available

60

lion (Panthera leo)

Figure 42 Brightfield image of lion

(Panthera leo) dark bristle hair medulla

pattern

Figure 44 Brightfield image of lion

(Panthera leo) light bristle hair medulla

pattern

lion (Panthera leo)

Figure 43 Cast of lion (Panthera leo)

bristle hair scale pattern

Figure 45 Cast of lion (Panthera leo)

guard hair scale pattern

61

lion (Panthera leo)

Figure 15 Brightfield image of lion

(Panthera leo) guard hair medulla pattern

lion (Panthera leo)

62

leopard (Panthera pardus)

Figure 47 Brightfield image of leopard

(Panthera pardus) guard hair medulla

pattern

leopard (Panthera pardus)

Figure 48 Cast of leopard (Panthera

pardus) guard hair scale pattern

63

spotted hyaena (Crocuta crocuta)

Figure 49 Brightfield image of spotted

hyaena (Crocuta crocuta)

proximal/medial region of guard hair

medulla pattern

Figure 51 Brightfield image of spotted

hyaena (Crocuta crocuta) distal region of

guard hair medulla pattern

spotted hyaena (Crocuta crocuta)

Figure 50 Cast of spotted hyaena

(Crocuta crocuta) guard hair scale pattern

64

Burchell’s zebra (Equus burchellii)

Figure 52 Brightfield image of Burchell's

zebra (Equus burchellii) dark bristle hair

medulla pattern

Figure 54 Brightfield images of Burchell's

zebra (Equus burchellii) white bristle hair

medulla pattern

Burchell’s zebra (Equus burchellii)

Figure 53 Cast of Burchell's zebra (Equus

burchellii) bristle hair scale pattern

Figure 55 Cast of Burchell's zebra (Equus

burchellii) guard hair scale pattern

65

Burchell’s zebra (Equus burchellii)

Figure 16 Brightfield image of Burchell's

zebra (Equus burchellii) guard hair

medulla pattern

Burchell’s zebra (Equus burchellii)

Discussion

Based on hairs found in feces, African lions’ diets on Balule consist of impala

(44%), zebra (19%), kudu (10%), and nyala (8%). Zebra (25%) and impala (13%)

constituted the largest fractions of African lions’ diets in the 2014 study as well. (Olifants

2014b). Prey species making up the largest fraction of spotted hyaena diets during this

study include impala (33%), zebra (17%), waterbuck (12%), and kudu (10%). In 2014,

spotted hyaena diets were composed of zebra (22%), warthog (19%), buffalo (11%), and

impala (10%). There is similarity between years 2014 and 2015 of the simple frequencies

of prey species that comprised the diets of both apex predators. However, these data are

inconclusive unless compared with abundance of prey species within the Reserve, which

was the purpose of the Jacob’s Index.

66

The results of the Jacob’s Index calculations for African lions indicate that lions

are consuming nyala, duiker, zebra, and giraffe more than expected. Impala, despite

making up the largest portion of prey species found in lion fecal samples, were

significantly less represented than expected when compared to their abundance in the

Reserve. Steenbok and warthog were completely absent from any fecal samples deposited

by lions. Previous studies have shown lions consuming prey species in the weight range

of 32 - 632 kg at a rate greater than or equal to their abundance in the environment

(Clements et al 2014). Nyalas have a weight range between 55 and 126 kg, duikers weigh

between 15 and 25 kg, zebras weigh between 300 and 320 kg, and giraffes weigh

between 800 and 1200 kg (Kruger 2016). Discrepancies found between this study and the

literature could be because we found many samples within close proximity to each other,

indicating that many identified species found in separate fecal samples could have

originated from the same individual animal.

Jacob’s Index values for spotted hyaena diets indicate that hyaenas consume

nyala, bushbuck, zebra, and duiker more frequently than expected based on their

abundance in the environment. Impala were also significantly less represented in hyaena

diets than expected when compared to aerial game counts. Previous studies have

indicated a tendency for spotted hyaenas to consume prey species with a mass of 15 kg

and above at rates greater than or equal to their abundance in the environment (Clements

et al 2014). This tendency was consistent with this study, as nyala weigh between 55 and

126 kg, bushbuck weigh between 30 and 77 kg, zebra weigh between 300 and 320 kg,

and duikers weigh between 15 and 25 kg (Kruger 2016). The degree of dietary overlap

67

between the spotted hyaena and the African lion agrees with results found in previous

studies (Hayward and Kerley 2008).

Significant differences were found with both apex predator diets when compared

to results from 2014. Jacob’s Index values during both years were similar for bushbuck,

duiker, impala, nyala, and zebra, but that is where the similarities end. Results from 2015

indicate both apex predators consume giraffe and wildebeest more than expected relative

to their abundance, while in 2014 they received low Jacob’s Index values. In 2014,

warthog was consumed more than expected by both apex predators, whereas neither apex

predator showed a preference for them during this study. Besides the significant

differences found in proportions, both apex predators consumed the same prey species at

rates greater than expected during both years. During both studies, lions consumed nyala,

duiker, and zebra more than expected. They also consumed waterbuck and impala at rates

lower than expected when compared with their abundance. Hyaenas consumed bushbuck,

duiker, and zebra more than expcted throughout both studies and consumed impala

significantly less than expected during both 2014 and 2015.

Information gathered in this study is used to make educated decisions on hunting

quotas for hunters on the Balule Nature Reserve. Animals on the Balule Nature Reserve

are managed to maximize profits while maintaining species’ populations at sustainable

levels. When creating hunting quotas, it is important to note the hunting patterns of

predators, as well as the relative abundance of all species within the Reserve (Caro et al

1998). If a prey species with a lower abundance on the Reserve is consumed at a higher

rate by carnivorous predators (i.e. zebra), the hunting quota for that species should be

lower. If a prey species with a higher abundance on the Reserve is consumed at a lower

68

rate by carnivorous predators (i.e. impala), the hunting rate for that species should be

higher. It is also important to consider the age and sex structure of populations (Caro

2009). Lastly, the management of large nature reserves such as Balule should take into

account the effects of illegal hunting on the population when determining offtake hunting

quotas (Caro et al 1998).

69

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Backwell, L., R. Pickering, D. Brothwell, L. Berger, M. Witcomb, D. Martill, K.

Penkman and A. Wilson. 2009. Probable human hair found in a fossil hyaena

coprolite from Gladysvale cave, South Africa. J Archaeol Sci 36: 1269-1276.

Braczkowski, A., L. Watson, D. Coulson and R. Randall. 2012. Diet of leopards in the

southern Cape, South Africa. Afr J Ecol 50: 377-380.

Breuer, T. 2005. Diet choice of large carnivores in northern Cameroon. Afr J Ecol 43:

181-190.

Caro, T.M., C.R. Young, A.E. Cauldwell, D.D.E. Brown. 2009. Animal breeding systems

and big game hunting: Models and application. Biol Conserv 142(4): 909-929.

T. M. Caro, N. Pelkey, M. Borner, E.L.M. Severre, K.L.I. Campbell, S.A. Huish, J. Ole

Kuwai, B.P. Farm, and B.L. Woodworth. 1998. The impact of tourist hunting on

large mammals in Tanzania: an initial assessment. Afr J Ecol 36: 321-346.

Clements, H.S., C.J. Tambling, M.W. Hayward, and G.I.H. Kerley. 2014. An Objective

Approach to Determining the Weight Ranges of Prey Preferred by and Accessible

to the Five Large African Carnivores. Plos One 9(7): 1-9.

Davidson, Z., M. Valeix, F.V. Kesteren, A.J. Loveridge, J.E. Hunt, F. Murindagomo and

D.W. Macdonald. 2013. Seasonal Diet and Prey Preference of the African Lion in

a Waterhole-Driven Semi-Arid Savanna. Plos One 8: e55182.

70

Deedrick, D.W. and S.L. Koch. 2004. Microscopy of Hair Part 1: A Practical Guide and

Manual for Human Hairs. Forensic Science Communications [Online]. Available:

https://www2.fbi.gov/hq/lab/fsc/backissu/jan2004/research/2004_01_research01b.

htm#refer.

Eagle T.C. and M.R. Pelton. 1983. Seasonal Nutrition of black bears in the Great Smoky

Mountains National Park. Bears: their biology and management. 5: 94-101.

Hayward, M.W. 2006. Prey preferences of the spotted hyaena (Crocuta crocuta) and

degree of dietary overlap with the lion (Panthera leo). Journal of Zoology. 270:

606-614.

Hayward, M.W. and G. Kerley. 2005. Prey preferences of the lion (Panthera leo). Journal

of Zoology. 267(3): 309-322.

Hayward, M.W. and G. Kerley. 2008. Prey preferences and dietary overlap amongst

Africa's large predators. S Afr J Wildl Res 38(2): 93-108.

Hellgren, E.C. 1993. Status, distribution, and summer food habits of black bears in Big

Bend National Park. The Southwestern Naturalist. 38(1): 77-80.

Hess, W.M., J.T. Flinders, C.L. Pritchett and J.V. Allen. 1985. Characterization of Hair

Morphology in Families Tayassuidae and Suidae with Scanning Electron

Microscopy. J Mammal 66: 75-84.

Homan, J.A. and H.H. Genoways. 1978. An analysis of hair structure and its

phylogenetic implications among heteromyid rodents. J Mammal 59: 740-760.

Jacobs, J. 1974. Quantitative Measurement of Food Selection: A Modification of the

Forage Ratio and Ivlev's Electivity Index. Oecologia. 14(4): 413-417.

71

Johnson, M.K. and R.M. Hansen. 1979. Coyote Food Habits on the Idaho National

Engineering Laboratory. J Wildlife Manage 43: 951-956.

Keogh, J.H. 1983. A photographic reference system of the micro-structure of the hair of

southern African bovids. S Afr J Wildl Res 13: 89-132.

Kruger National Park [Internet]. African Mammal Guide. Accessed 1 April 2016.

Available from: http://www.krugerpark.co.za/Kruger_Park_Reference_Guide-

travel/african-mammals-guide.html.

Manfredi, C., M. Lucherini, A.D. Canepuccia and E.B. Casanave. 2004. Geographical

Variation in the Diet of Geoffroy's Cat (Oncifelis geoffroyi) in Pampas Grassland

of Argentina. J Mammal 85: 1111-1115.

Mansilla, J., P. Bosch, M.T. Menéndez, C. Pijoan, C. Flores, M.C. López, E. Lima and I.

Leboreiro. 2011. Archaeological and Contemporary Human Hair Composition

and Morphology. Chungara: Revista de Antropología Chilena. 43: 293-302.

Marker, L.L., J.R. Muntifering, A.J. Dickman, M.G.L. Mills, and D.W. Macdonald.

2003. Quantifying prey preferences of free-ranging Namibian cheetahs. S Afr J

Wildl Res 33(1): 43-53.

Martins, Q., W.G.C. Horsnell, W. Titus, T. Rautenbach, and S. Harris. 2011. Diet

determination of the Cape Mountain leopards using global positioning system

location lusters and cat analysis. Journal of Zoology. 283: 81-87.

Mbizah, M.M., J. Marino and R.J. Groom. 2012. Diet of four sympatric carnivores in

Savé Valley Conservancy, Zimbabwe: implication for conservation of the African

wild dog (Lycaon pictus). S Afr J Wildl Res 42: 94-103.

72

Mizutani, F. 1999. Impact of leopards on a working ranch in Laikipia, Kenya. Afr J Ecol

37: 211-225.

Murray, K. 2011. Scatalog: Quick ID to Southern African Animal Droppings. Capetown:

Struick Nature. 36 p.

Olifants West Nature Reserve. September 2010. Wardens Report.

Olifants West Nature Reserve. March 2011. Wardens Report.

Olifants West Nature Reserve. 2013. About OWNR.

http://www.olifantswest.co.za/index.php/about-ownr-takazile/general. Accessed

16, August 2015.

Olifants West Nature Reserve. June 2014. Wardens Report.

Olifants West Nature Reserve. December 2014. Wardens Report.

Olifants West Nature Reserve. 2015. Rainfall.

http://www.olifantswest.co.za/index.php/rainfall. Accessed 16 August 2015.

Ott, T, G.I.H. Kerley and A.F. Boshoff. 2006. Preliminary observations on the diet of

leopards (Panthera pardus) from a conservation area and adjacent rangelands in

the Baviaanskloof region, South Africa. Afr Zool 42: 31-37.

Rapson, J.A. and R.T.F. Bernard. 2007. Interpreting the diet of lions (Panthera leo); a

comparison of various methods of analysis. S Afr J Wildl Res 37(2): 179-187.

Rosas-Rosas, O.C., R. Valdez, L.C. Bender and D. Daniel. 2003. Food Habits of Pumas

in Northwestern Sonora, Mexico. Wildlife Soc B 31: 528-535.

Rohlf, F.J. and R. R. Sokal. 1981. Statistical Tables. 2nd edition. W. H. Freeman and

Company; New York (NY).

73

Sahajpal V. and S.P. Goyal. Microscopic Examiations in Wildlife Investigations. 2009.

Microscopic Examinations in Wildlife Investigations. Forensic Science in

Wildlife Investigations. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. pp. 19-59.

Seiler, N. 2010. SEM-Atlas of hair structures of South-African mammals. Mammalia 74:

281-290.

Short, H.L. 1978. Analysis of cuticular scales on hairs using the scanning electron

microscope. J Mammal 59: 261-268.

Sokal, R. R. and F. J. Rohlf. 1981. Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in

biological research. 2nd edition. W. H. Freeman and Company; New York (NY).

Taru, P. and Backwell, L.R. 2013. Identification of fossil hairs in Parahyaena brunnea

coprolites from Middle Pleistocene deposits at Gladysvale cave, South Africa. J

Archaeol Sci 40: 3674-3685.

Taru, P. and Backwell, L.R. 2014. Hair morphology of some artiodactyls from southern

Africa. Ann Ditsong Nat Mus of Natural Hist 4: 26–32.

Trinkel, M. 2010. Prey selection and prey preferences of spotted hyenas Crocuta crocuta

in the Etosha National Park, Namibia. Ecological Research. 25(2): 413-417.

Valeix M., H. Fritz, A.J. Loveridge, Z. Davidson, J.E. Hunt, F. Murindagomo, and D.W.

Macdonald. 2009. Does the Risk of Encountering Lions Influence African

Herbivore Behaviour at Waterholes? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

63(10): 1483-1494.

Verma, K. and B. Joshi. 2012. Different Animal Species Hairs as Biological Tool for the

Forensic Assessment of Individual Identification Characteristics from Animals of

Zoological Park, Pragti Maidan, New Delhi, India. J Forensic Res 3: 160.

74

Wentworth, J.C., C.J. Tambling and G.I.H. Kerley. 2011. Evidence for prey selection by

spotted hyaena in the Eastern Cape, South Africa. Acta Theriol 56: 389-392.

Wilson, D.E. and D.M. Reeder (eds). 2005. Mammal species of the world. A taxonomic

and geographic reference. Third edition. Johns Hopkins University Press,

Baltimore. pp. 2142.

Yihune M. and A. Bekele. 2014. Feeding ecology of the Ethiopian wolf in the Simien

Mountains National Park, Ethiopia. Afr J Ecol 52: 484-490.