ANT 154B Course notes- Lecture _14

ANT 154B Course notes- Lecture _14 - ANT 154BN Course notes...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ANT 154BN Course notes Lecture #14: Primate community structure 22 February 2011 Key terms and concepts are indicated in blue Outline 1. Community ecology 2. Measuring diversity 3. Primate communities: patterns 1. Community ecology Community: All the organisms that inhabit a particular area An assemblage of populations of different species living close enough for potential interaction Interspecific interactions: relationships among species within a community communities have collective and emergent properties competition predation herbivory disease symbiosis (parasitism, mutualism, commensalism) Community attributes Species composition: Species richness: Species diversity: what species are found there how many species are found there number and relative abundance of species 2. Measuring diversity Alpha: diversity within a particular area or ecosystem Beta: changes in species diversity between ecosystems or along environmental gradients Gamma: total species over a large area or region ANT 154B Lecture #14 course notes page 2 of 7 Measuring Measuring diversity at different scales diversity at different scales Measuring diversity at different scales Measuring diversity at different scales Tuesday, February 23, 2010 14 5 6 2 2 Measuring diversity at different scales Tuesday, February 23, 2010 Tuesday, February 23, 2010 15 16 10 3 Tuesday, February 23, 2010 17 ANT 154B Lecture #14 course notes Diversity indices depend both on species richness and evenness page 3 of 7 rank-abundance diagrams Rank-abundance diagrams change in grassland community with continuous fertilizer inputs Tokeshi 1993 Tuesday, February 23, 2010 23 3. Primate communities: patterns Comparing primate communities: body size Comparing primate communities: activity period ANT 154B Lecture #14 course notes Comparing primate communities: group size page 4 of 7 Comparing primate communities: diet Principal components analysis • used to reduce dimensions in multidimensional dat sets (remove correlations among variables) • allows you to identify the most important gradients Principal components analysis characteristic 3 char act PC 2 eris ti c2 stic 1 characteri PC 1 component space original data space ANT 154B Lecture #14 course notes Principal components analysis nocturnal, body size, diurnality, frugivory, leaping￿. ɢ. ￿ʟ￿￿ɢʟ￿ ￿ɴ￿limbing, terrestriality c ￿. ￿. ʀ￿￿￿ Nocturnality leaping Body size, diurnality, frugivory, climbing, terrestriality page 5 of 7 498 3 Factor 2 (25%) 1 0 Arboreal quadrupedalism faunivory Folivory 2 folivory –1 arboreal quadrupedalism, faunivory –2 –3 –2 –1 0 Factor 1 (28%) 1 2 3 Tuesday, February 23, 2010 Primate communities within biogeographic regions highly congruent Primate communities within biogeographic regions highly congruent nocturnal, leaping body size, diurnality, frugivory, climbing, terrestriality 499 Figure 3. Plot of all the primate species on 1. Avahi laniger 25. 2. Propithecus diadema 26. 3. Propithecus verreauxi 27. 28. 4. Lepilemur microdon 5. Lepilemur ruficaudatus 29. 30. 6. Hapalemur griseus 7. Hapalemur aureus 31. 32. 8. Hapalemur simus 9. Eulemur fulvus 33. 34. 10. Eulemur rubriventer 11. Eulemur fulvus 35. 36. 12. Varecia variegata 13. Microcebus rufus 37. 38. 14. Microcebus murinus 15. Mirza coquereli 39. 40. 16. Cheirogaleus major 17. Cheirogaleus medius 41. 42. 18. Phaner furcifer 19. Daubentonia madagascariensis 43. 44. 20. Galagoides demidoff 45. 21. Galagoides demidoff 46. 22. Galago senegalensis 47. 23. Perodicticus potto 48. 24. Perodicticus potto 5 Pongo pygmaeus ycticebus coucang 70 species, 10 Nvariables per0..specieslus 51 Hylobates syndacty Colobus guereza the first two factors of the principal components analysis. Nycticebus coucang 49. Pan troglodytes Colobus polycomos Piliocolobus badius Piliocolobus badius Procolobus verus Presbytis thomasi Presbytis melalophos Trachypithecus obscura Macaca fascicularis Macaca fascicularis Macaca nemestrina Macaca nemistrina Cercocebus albigena Cercocebus atys Papio anubis Cercopithecus diana Cercopithecus campbelli Cercopithecus petaurista Cercopithecus mitis Cercopithecus ascanius Cercopithecus l’hoesti Pan troglodytes 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. Hylobates syndactylus Hylobates lar Hylobates lar Saguinus fuscicollis Saguinus imperator Saguinus midas Saimiri sciureus Saimiri sciureus Cebus albifrons Cebus apella Cebus apella Pithecia pithecia Chiropotes satanas Callicebus moloch Aotus trivirgatus Alouatta seniculus Alouatta seniculus Ateles paniscus Ateles paniscus Fleagle & Reed 1996 38 ￿￿￿￿￿ʀɪɴɢ ￿ʀɪ￿￿￿￿ ￿￿￿￿￿ɴɪ￿ɪ￿￿ 3 (a) 2 L. microdon 3 (b) A. laniger H. aureus H. simus H. griseus L. ruficauda 2 folivory E. fulvus Factor 2 (25%) P. diadema Factor 2 (25%) 1 0 –1 –2 –3 3 (c) 2 3 1 0 E. fulvus E. rubriventer D. madagascariensis M. rufus 1 0 M. murinus P. verreauxi P. furcifer V. variegata C. major –1 M. coquerelli C. medius –2 –1 0 1 2 3 –2 –3 3 –2 –1 0 1 2 3 Factor 1 (28%) Factor 1 (28%) arboreal quadrupedalism, faunivory 500 ￿. ɢ. ￿ʟ￿￿ɢʟ￿ ￿ɴ￿ ￿. ￿.(d) ʀ￿￿￿ 2 1 0 P. versus Factor 2 (25%)Factor 2 (25%) Factor 2 (25%) Factor 2 (25%) Tuesday, February 23, 2010 P. potto –1 Madagascar Primate communities within Fleagle & Reed 1996 biogeographic regions highly congruent 3 (a) P. badius (b) C. guereza P. badius G. demidoff 2 1 0 C. polykomos 2 1 0 G. demidoff P. melalophos G. senegalensisP. thomscanius C. aasi P. troglodytes C. mitis C. atys H. lar P. obsculra C. petaurista C. diana H. syndactylus C. albigena C. l'hoesti P anubi c H. syndas tylus –1 39 –2 –octurnal, e –3 P n1 0 1M. nem2strina 3 body–2 –1 diurnality,mafrugivory, size, 0M. fasc1cularis 2. pyg 3eus i –1 1 (28%) N.Fouctor 1 (28%) c ac ang lleapingmate communities on thclimbing,ofterrestriality Figure 4. Individual p ot of four pri e first two factors the principal components –1 –2 –3 C. campbelli M. fasicularis P. potto P. troglodytes H. lar M. nemestrina –2 N. couFactor cang analysis—two from Madagascar: (a) Ranomafana and (b) Marosalaza Forest near Morondava; and two from –2 –2 Afr–3 : (c) T2i Fores1 and (d) Kibal1 Forest. ica e –a –t 0 –2 –1 0 1 2 3 –3 2 3 Factor 1 (28%) Factor 1 (28%) 3 Nevertheless, in the distribution of species in the ecolog3 al space defined by the first two PCA ic (c) (d) factors, they are more similar to one another than either is to the communities from other continental regions. Compared with the Malagasy communities, the two African communities 2 2 are distinguished by the abundance of medium to large, diurnal, quadrupedal, frugivorous species such as cercopithecines and chimpanzees that occupy the lower right quadrant and the 1y of species in the upper left quadrant (small folivorous leapers) and lower left quadrant 1 paucit (smaller faunivorous quadrupeds). Only the galagos extend the ecological range of the African A. seniculus A. seniculus C. moloch P. f ithecia raph. p th e g communities into the left side o 0 0 S f s icollis The two Asian communities, Kuana cusompat [Figure 5(a)] . aunicmpKattambalb[fFoinsure 5(b)] are al L d er e or C. e i r g A. p is S. S. sciureus C. apella among the most diverse in Asia, but have fewer species than thS. mursetusdiverse comA. paniscus on e scio mu ni ties C. apella C. satanus –1 othe–1continentsS(.e.g.asBourliere, 1985; Terborgh & van Schaik, 1.9t8i5i)r.gatuhere is no cluster of r , A r v Ts mid similar sympatric species such as found in communities elsewhere (cercopithecines in Africa, hapal2 murs, Lepilemur and Avahi in Madagascar, tamari2 s, capuchins and squirrel monkeys in e n – – Factor 2 (25%) Factor 2 (25%) folivory –3 –2 –1 0 1 Factor 1 (28%) 2 3 –3 –2 –1 0 1 Factor 1 (28%) 2 3 arboreal quadrupedalism, faunivory Figure 5. Individual plots of four primate communities on the first two factors of the principal components analysis—two from Asia: (a) Kuala Lompat, and (b) Ketambe; and two from South America (c) Raleighvallen–Voltzberg, and (d) Manu. South America). It is likely that had we included a Bornean locality with a tarsier we would have seen more heterogeneity in Asian localities and more similarity to the African sites. However the presence of medium-sized, frugivorous–folivorous, suspensory gibbons in the upper right quadrant and the absence of numerous cercopithecines in the lower right quadrant also dist ngu sh th Tuesday, February i23, i2010 e Asian communities. Compared with the communities from the other biogeographical regions, the two South American communities, Raleighvallen–Voltsberg in Surinam [Figure 5(c)] and Manu in Peru [Figure 5(d)] are most distinctive in the lack of ecological diversity among the different species, and hence, their tight clustering. The extreme adaptations to folivory, suspension, nocturnality and folivory that characterize species in other primate faunas and give those faunas a greater diversity are lacking in the platyrrhine communities. Among the diverse species America Fleagle & Reed 1996 40 ANT 154B Lecture #14 course notes Primate communities within biogeographic regions highly congruent nocturnal, leaping body size, diurnality, frugivory, climbing, terrestriality page 6 of 7 500 3 (a) 2 1 0 P. melalophos ￿. ɢ. ￿ʟ￿￿ɢʟ￿ ￿ɴ￿ ￿. ￿. ʀ￿￿￿ 3 (b) 2 P. thomasi H. lar folivory H. syndactylus H. lar M. nemestrina Factor 2 (25%) H. syndactylus M. fasicularis Factor 2 (25%) P. obsculra 1 0 –1 –2 –3 3 –1 –2 –3 3 (c) 2 M. nemestrina N. coucang N. coucang M. fascicularis P. pygmaeus –2 –1 0 1 2 3 –2 –1 0 1 2 3 Factor 1 (28%) (d) Factor 1 (28%) arboreal quadrupedalism, faunivory 13 02 Factor 2 (25%) –1 1 –2 0 –3 Factor 2 (25%) Tuesday, February 23, 2010 Asia Primate communities withinFleagle & Reed 1996 biogeographic regions highly congruent Factor 2 (25%) 13 02 (a) L. microdon A. seniculus A. laP.igerhecia n pit ￿￿￿￿￿ʀɪɴɢ ￿ʀɪ￿￿￿￿ 2 ￿￿￿￿￿ɴɪ￿ɪ￿￿ 499 Factor 2 (25%) (b) L. ruficaud.amoloch C A. seniculus H. aureus H. griseus A. paniscus S. sciureus C. apella H. simus P. diadema C. satanus S. midas –1 1 –2 0 S. fuscicollis S. imperator C. albifrons E. fulvus A. paniscus S. sciureus C. apellP. verreauxi a A. trivirgatus P. furcifer 41 0 1 –2 –1 0 2 –3 nocturnal, 3 body size, (28%1) 2 3 frugivory, Factor 1 diurnality, –15. Individual plots of four primate communities on the fir1t two factors of the principal components –s Figure leaping climbing, terrestriality analysis—two from Asia: (a) Kuala Lompat, and (b) Ketambe; and two from South America (c) –2 –1 E. rubriventer D. madagascctier s1 (28%) Fa ar o n is M. rufus M. murinus E. fulvus V. variegata C. major M. coquerelli C. medius Raleighvallen–Voltzberg, and (d) Manu. –2 –2 –1 0 1 –3 2 3 –2 –3 –2 –1 0 1 2 3 a South America). It is Factlor t1 (2t8had we included a Bornean localityFwcitor a (t28%) r we would like y ha %) th 1 arsie have see3 more heterogeneity in Asian localities and 3more similarity to the African sites. n (c) (d) However the presence of medium-sized, frugivorous–folivorous, suspensory gibbons in the upper rig2 t quadrant and the absence of numerous cercopithecines in the lower right quadrant h 2 also distinguish the P. veiraus communities. As sn C. guereza P. nadies from the other biogeographical regions, thbadtus o South b it iu s P. e iw Compared with the commu 1 1 G. demidoff American communities, Raleighvallen–Voltsberg in Surinam [Figure 5(c)] and Manu in Peru C. polykomos [Figure 5(d)] are most distinctive in the lack of ecological dive.rsntyalansiong .taseaniufferent species, i eg ems C h c di s G se G. 0 and henc0 , their tighdemliuosftering. Thetregltretme adaptations to folivory, suspetnsion, nocturnality e tcd f x C. mi is P. o ody es and folivory that characterize species in other primate faunas and give tC. o'hoestfaunas a h l se i P. anubis C. albigena C. petaurista P. potcking in the platyrrhine communities. Among the diverse species to greater –diversity are la 1 –1 C. diana P. trog y z of extant primates, pCaayrrC. icnmpbelare a relatively uniform grouP. potoof moderatelodstiesed, l . t tys h a es li pt frugivous–faunivorous, arboreal quadrupeds. Factor 2 (25%) Factor 2 (25%) folivory –2 –3 –2 –1 0 1 Factor 1 (28%) 2 3 –2 –3 –2 –1 0 1 Factor 1 (28%) 2 3 arboreal quadrupedalism, faunivory Figure 4. Individual plot of four primate communities on the first two factors of the principal components analysis—two from Madagascar: (a) Ranomafana and (b) Marosalaza Forest near Morondava; and two from Africa: (c) Tai Forest and (d) Kibale Forest. (a) Nevertheless, in the distribution of species in the ecological space defined by the first two PCA factors, they are more similar to one another than either is to the communities from other continental regions. Compared with the Malagasy communities, the two African communities are distinguished by the abundance of medium to large, diurnal, quadrupedal, frugivorous species such as cercopithecines and chimpanzees that occupy the lower right quadrant and the Tuesday, February 23, 2010 paucity of species in the upper left quadrant (small folivorous leapers) and lower left quadrant (smaller faunivorous quadrupeds). Only the galagos extend the ecological range of the African communities into the left side of the graph. The two Asian communities, Kuala Lompat [Figure 5(a)] and Ketambe [Figure 5(b)] are among the most diverse in Asia, but have fewer species than the most diverse communities on other continents (e.g., Bourliere, 1985; Terborgh & van Schaik, 1985). There is no cluster of similar sympatric species such as found in communities elsewhere (cercopithecines in Africa, hapalemurs, Lepilemur and Avahi in Madagascar, tamarins, capuchins and squirrel monkeys in ￿￿￿￿￿ʀɪɴɢ ￿ʀɪ￿￿￿￿ ￿￿￿￿￿ɴɪ￿ɪ￿￿ (b) Africa Fleagle & Reed 1996 42 495 (c) Figure 2. Graphic illustration of the three measures of ecological dispersion among individual species within communities. (a) Area of polygon, (b) average distance from centroid and (c) average taxonomic distance. complete the data set. However, only a very limited amount of data was borrowed because it is documented that primate species demonstrate different dietary regimes at different localities, e.g., Eulemur fulvus (Richard & Dewar, 1991). In order to compare the different primate communities in a common overall ecological –2 –3 –2 –1 0 Factor 1 (28%) 1 2 3 Figure 6. #14 course notes ANT 154B Lecture Superimposed polygons outlining the ‘‘ecological space’’ of the first two factors of the principal page 7 of 7 components analysis occupied by each of the eight primate communities. (——), South America; (– – –), Asia; (- - -), Madagascar; (· · ·), Africa. Table 2 Four measures of dispersion among individual species comprising each of the eight primate communities Taxonomic distance (two factors) 1·34 1·36 0·83 0·68 1·25 1·29 1·18 1·16 Taxonomic distance (all variables) 0·612 0·620 0·408 0·471 0·466 0·540 0·671 0·614 Community Ranomafana Morondava Raleighvallen Manu Kuala Lompat Ketambe Kibale Tai Area of polygon 491 460 149 149 432 629 577 598 Centroid distance 1·38 1·35 0·79 0·72 1·23 1·24 1·16 1·14 leapers and the small faunivorous–frugivorous arboreal quadrupeds, with only a few taxa, notably Eulemur and Phaner, occupying some sort of intermediate position. Madagascar stands Summary t ingeneral dance of folivores and folivore–frugivores, a phenomenon noted in many other ou of its abun patterns discussions of this radiation (e.g., Tattersall, 1982; Terborgh & van Schaik, 1987). However, Madagascar: abundance of nocturnal, solitary, folivorous species any consideration of the diversity of primates on Madagascar must acknowledge the vast America: lack of folivorous, solitary species; small body sizes Asia: low species diversity; few small species; many suspensory species Africa: abundance of large frugivores Take home messages 1. Ecological communities have collective and emergent properties. 2. Species diversity is a function of both species richness and evenness. 3. Primate communities are more similar within than between broad biogeographic regions. 4. Note the general patterns in each region, summarized on the previous slide. No question to ponder today Focus on the readings; there will be things from the reading on the test. ...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online