There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
--- Peter Broekhuijsen ---

  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
behind the big cat's and bear's, who is the top predator?

United States Styx38 Offline
Banned

@Shadow 

I forgot to add a link for post 109


*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author



Prey selection, food habits and dietary overlap between leopard Panthera pardus (Mammalia: Carnivora) and re-introduced tiger Panthera tigris (Mammalia: Carnivora) in a semi-arid forest of Sariska Tiger Reserve, Western India  (Mondal et. al)



Here is what was stated in the same source:


"The contribution of rodent in leopard’s diet was 44.2% in 1990, when the study area was largely occupied by tigers (Sankar & Johnsingh 2002), but after the local extermination of tiger from the study area (2007-08), Mondal et al. (2011) found no contribution of rodent in leopard’s diet. Later, after the re-introduction of tiger in the study area (in 2009), the contribution of rodent in leopard’s diet raised to 5.4% (Table III). In 1990, chital contributed maximum in tiger diet (57.2%) followed by sambar (18.1%) and in leopard diet, rodent contributed maximum (44.2%) followed by chital (20.2%), sambar (19.4%) and nilgai (7%). But after the local extermination of tiger from the study area, the diet of leopard changed significantly. The contribution of sambar and nilgai in leopard’s diet increased to 40.3% and 11.5% respectively in 2007-08, when there was no tiger in the study area (Mondal et al. 2011) (Table III). It was evident that, leopard shifted their diet from lesser prey species. to large ungulates after tiger extermination from Sariska (Sankar et al. 2009; Mondal et al. 2011)"

You can see how they shifted to bigger kills when the tigers were temporarily extirpated.

My argument there will be a higher frequency of bigger kills for leopards in areas without carnivores or at least low density.

I even made a comparison:




*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author




http://etheses.saurashtrauniversity.edu/804/1/majmudar_a_thesis_wildlife%20science_red..pdf




*This image is copyright of its original author


Kittle, Andrew et. al. The ecology and behaviour of a protected area Sri Lankan leopard (Panthera pardus kotiya) population. Tropical Ecology 58(1):71-86  February 2017




So here is the comparison using the data from each park: 

Tiger dominated area (Pench Tiger Reserve), a Leopard made a rare adult female sambar kill, but still less compared to the total amount of young and juvenile kills (6.4% juvenile/subadult kills vs. 1.8% adult kill)

A place where Tigers were briefly extirpated (Sariska Tiger Reserve) , a Leopard made more adult male and female sambar kills than subadults or fawns ( 15% and 31% adult kills vs 11% subadult kills)

Now in a place where there are no major competitors (Yala, Sri Lanka), a Leopard made more adult male sambar kills ( 3 adult kills vs 1 juvenile/subadult kill)


My point was that the frequency of large kills (e.g. Sambar Stags) are greater in places without serious competitors, or increase when the original competitor population dies off. 

That is why I used  John Nash Nature Reserve, since there were not too many serious competitors, and they found an adult zebra and an eland cow killed by leopards (which is even considered rare in the main source).


I wasn't trying to demean the leopard, just pointing out that the make larger kills more often (higher frequency) in areas without other competitors, or a low competitor density. 

I was addressing these previous statements in the thread.


faess Wrote: Wrote:So what constitutes theleopard being a better predator? Bigger prey? better kill rate? killing other bigger predators? Because can make a case for the mountain lion on all those accounts







GuateGojira Wrote: Wrote:The case of the leopard is also weird and we will need more evidence. Health state of the eland and true age and size are very relevant here. Normally, about 200 kg seems the normal limit for a large leopard in any territory.

 
I think that the most extreme case of one-to-one predation case are those of the puma and elk bull. There is video evidence of 60-90 kg pumas killing 300-400 kg male elks (if not slightly heavier). 
2 users Like Styx38's post
Reply




Messages In This Thread
RE: behind the big cat's and bear's, who is the top predator? - Styx38 - 06-04-2019, 10:33 PM



Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

About Us
Go Social     Subscribe  

Welcome to WILDFACT forum, a website that focuses on sharing the joy that wildlife has on offer. We welcome all wildlife lovers to join us in sharing that joy. As a member you can share your research, knowledge and experience on animals with the community.
wildfact.com is intended to serve as an online resource for wildlife lovers of all skill levels from beginners to professionals and from all fields that belong to wildlife anyhow. Our focus area is wild animals from all over world. Content generated here will help showcase the work of wildlife experts and lovers to the world. We believe by the help of your informative article and content we will succeed to educate the world, how these beautiful animals are important to survival of all man kind.
Many thanks for visiting wildfact.com. We hope you will keep visiting wildfact regularly and will refer other members who have passion for wildlife.

Forum software by © MyBB