However, the population adjacent to the northwest border of the park has increased at a faster rate (4.4% per year) mostly through immigration (Campbell and Hofer 1995). In 1978 human population densities varied ranging from 0.1–954 people km−2 and in 2002 the range in densities spanned 15–2,840 people km−2. Buffalo increase and distance to reserve boundary In 1970, prior to the decrease phase there was no spatial relationship between buffalo selleck screening library occupancy and distance to the reserve boundary. During the hunting phase there was a positive relationship between distance and buffalo numbers (1992, r = 0.15, P-value < 0.001, and
1998 r = 0.23, P-value = 0.03). see more When enforcement was increased (2000–2008) there was no relationship between distance and buffalo. Discussion Our results explain the spatial variation in buffalo population recovery across the protected area and elaborate on the work of
Hilborn et al. (2006), which confined itself to the time trends of the whole buffalo population. Buffalo selleck chemicals llc population changes are best explained largely by hunting but model fit was improved with the addition of predation mortality. Food supply was only a factor in areas where hunting was least, namely the east and south. In addition, our spatial results are consistent with the trends in the elephant population (Sinclair et al. 2007, 2008). Elephants behave more as one cohesive population, which moves away from disturbed areas and finds sanctuary in more peaceful areas, so that densities are a reflection of movements.
Buffalo on the other hand are extremely philopatric and remain within their home range irrespective of the disturbance (Sinclair 1977). Therefore, buffalo numbers reflect the local dynamics of an area. The buffalo Alanine-glyoxylate transaminase populations in close proximity to areas with higher rates of human settlement had low or negative intrinsic rates of population increases and, therefore, were either slowest to recover or failing to recover at all. Areas of slow buffalo recovery are consistent with the previous analysis by Campbell and Hofer (1995), which identified similar areas of high human exploitation on a different suite of species, namely the resident antelopes. Hunter populations reside along the western and north-western boundaries of the protected area, and incursions are made into the park from the west. Human populations have increased considerably in the past 30 years (Fig. 7b) and buffalo numbers in the north and the far west reflect these changes in human populations along the boundaries. In contrast, the strong gradient in food supply, which is determined by the rainfall gradient (Fig. 1), is opposite to the trends in population recovery, i.e. areas of high food supply are those with the least recovery. In conclusion, the increase in human populations along the western boundaries of the Serengeti ecosystem has led to negative consequences within the protected area on wildlife populations, as indicated by trends in the buffalo population.
Related posts:
- coli population in the stream in response to a rain event (χ2 tes
- Human pressure on forests, caused by population growth, diffused
- In this large population-based contemporary cohort study from the
- A sero-epidemiological population-based cross-sectional study (n
- This left 186 trees for the analysis of population genetics param