Dataset Information

Why do African elephants (Loxodonta africana) simulate oestrus? An analysis of longitudinal data.

ABSTRACT: Female African elephants signal oestrus via chemicals in their urine, but they also exhibit characteristic changes to their posture, gait and behaviour when sexually receptive. Free-ranging females visually signal receptivity by holding their heads and tails high, walking with an exaggerated gait, and displaying increased tactile behaviour towards males. Parous females occasionally exhibit these visual signals at times when they are thought not to be cycling and without attracting interest from musth males. Using demographic and behavioural records spanning a continuous 28-year period, we investigated the occurrence of this "simulated" oestrus behaviour. We show that parous females in the Amboseli elephant population do simulate receptive oestrus behaviours, and this false oestrus occurs disproportionately in the presence of naïve female kin who are observed coming into oestrus for the first time. We compare several alternative hypotheses for the occurrence of this simulation: 1) false oestrus has no functional purpose (e.g., it merely results from abnormal hormonal changes); 2) false oestrus increases the reproductive success of the simulating female, by inducing sexual receptivity; and 3) false oestrus increases the inclusive fitness of the simulating female, either by increasing the access of related females to suitable males, or by encouraging appropriate oestrus behaviours from female relatives who are not responding correctly to males. Although the observed data do not fully conform to the predictions of any of these hypotheses, we rule out the first two, and tentatively suggest that parous females most likely exhibit false oestrus behaviours in order to demonstrate to naïve relatives at whom to direct their behaviour.

SUBMITTER: Bates LA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2850927 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:South Africa has many fenced reserves harbouring small to medium sized populations of African elephant (Loxodonta africana), most of which have been translocated. Elephants on fenced reserves may be exposed to various management interventions and practices (translocation, hunting, darting, high tourism impact, contraception programs, disruption due to infrastructure maintenance, etc.). These factors may impact the welfare of elephants. Poor elephant welfare may have serious consequences such as increased inter- and intra-species aggression that could result in fatalities. This is the first study to attempt to define behavioural and physiological welfare parameters for free-ranging elephants on small to medium sized reserves. The eight study sites incorporated reserves with different social structure combinations, elephant life-histories, reserve sizes, habitat, management, and tourism intensity. Data collection consisted of behavioural observations (10-minute videos) as well as faecal samples. By incorporating both behavioural and physiological (faecal glucocorticoid metabolite (fGCM) concentration) parameters, we aimed to investigate whether the two parameters showed similar trends. Five behavioural categories were identified (Arousal, Assessing, Ambivalent, Ambivalent/ Body care, and Frustrated behaviour), with various detailed behaviours demonstrated by the elephants that may indicate the influence of anthropogenic disturbance and possibly impact on animal welfare. The study showed significant differences between the selected detailed behaviours, behavioural categories and fGCM concentrations of elephants across the eight reserves. History seemed to be a decisive factor, as reserves with predominantly ex-captive elephants showed higher frequencies of certain behaviours as well as higher fGCM concentrations. Age, sex, reserve size and season were also found to contribute to our defined welfare indices and fGCM concentrations. This indicates that behavioural parameters, indicative of certain behavioural states, are valuable indicators of welfare, as supported by the physiological response of the elephants. The results also highlight the importance of taking multiple specified behaviours from a category into consideration when evaluating the welfare of elephants, to account for individual variation.

Project description:Increasing human population growth, exurban development, and associated habitat fragmentation is accelerating the isolation of many natural areas and wildlife populations across the planet. In Tanzania, rapid and ongoing habitat conversion to agriculture has severed many of the country's former wildlife corridors between protected areas. To identify historically linked protected areas, we investigated the genetic structure and gene flow of African savanna elephants in Tanzania using microsatellite and mitochondrial DNA markers in 688 individuals sampled in 2015 and 2017. Our results indicate distinct population genetic structure within and between ecosystems across Tanzania, and reveal important priority areas for connectivity conservation. In northern Tanzania, elephants sampled from the Tarangire-Manyara ecosystem appear marginally, yet significantly isolated from elephants sampled from the greater Serengeti ecosystem (mean F ST = 0.03), where two distinct subpopulations were identified.Unexpectedly, elephants in the Lake Manyara region appear to be more closely related to those across the East African Rift wall in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area than they are to the neighboring Tarangire subpopulations. We concluded that the Rift wall has had a negligible influence on genetic differentiation up to this point, but differentiation may accelerate in the future because of ongoing loss of corridors in the area. Interestingly, relatively high genetic similarity was found between elephants in Tarangire and Ruaha although they are separated by >400 km. In southern Tanzania, there was little evidence of female-mediated gene flow between Ruaha and Selous, probably due to the presence of the Udzungwa Mountains between them. Despite observing evidence of significant isolation, the populations of elephants we examined generally exhibited robust levels of allelic richness (mean A R = 9.96), heterozygosity (mean µH E = 0.73), and effective population sizes (mean N e = 148). Our results may inform efforts to restore wildlife corridors between protected areas in Tanzania in order to facilitate gene flow for long-term survival of elephants and other species.

Project description:Accurate counts of animals are critical for prioritizing conservation efforts. Past research, however, suggests that observers on aerial surveys may fail to detect all individuals of the target species present in the survey area. Such errors could bias population estimates low and confound trend estimation. We used two approaches to assess the accuracy of aerial surveys for African savanna elephants (Loxodonta africana) in northern Botswana. First, we used double-observer sampling, in which two observers make observations on the same herds, to estimate detectability of elephants and determine what variables affect it. Second, we compared total counts, a complete survey of the entire study area, against sample counts, in which only a portion of the study area is sampled. Total counts are often considered a complete census, so comparing total counts against sample counts can help to determine if sample counts are underestimating elephant numbers. We estimated that observers detected only 76% ± SE of 2% of elephant herds and 87 ± 1% of individual elephants present in survey strips. Detectability increased strongly with elephant herd size. Out of the four observers used in total, one observer had a lower detection probability than the other three, and detectability was higher in the rear row of seats than the front. The habitat immediately adjacent to animals also affected detectability, with detection more likely in more open habitats. Total counts were not statistically distinguishable from sample counts. Because, however, the double-observer samples revealed that observers missed 13% of elephants, we conclude that total counts may be undercounting elephants as well. These results suggest that elephant population estimates from both sample and total counts are biased low. Because factors such as observer and habitat affected detectability of elephants, comparisons of elephant populations across time or space may be confounded. We encourage survey teams to incorporate detectability analysis in all aerial surveys for mammals.

Dataset Information

Why do African elephants (Loxodonta africana) simulate oestrus? An analysis of longitudinal data.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets