Comparing capuchins and coatis: causes and consequences of differing movement ecology in two sympatric mammals

The mechanisms that shape animal movement decisions at the level of an individual or a group of animals can scale up to affect larger-scale ecological processes. Ecologists often use mechanistic animal movement models to understand these links, but animal movement models rarely connect empirically with an understanding of how animals actually decide to move around in their environment. To better understand this relationship, we compared the travel behaviour of two sympatric mammal species that have broadly similar diets: brown capuchin monkeys, Cebus apella nigritus, and ring-tailed coatis, Nasua nasua. According to most mechanistic animal movement models, species that exploit the same resources should show similar movement patterns. Although the fruit component of coati and capuchin diets is very similar, coatis primarily feed on invertebrates in the leaf litter or soil, while capuchins forage on invertebrate prey in the forest canopy. We found that these two species showed markedly different movement patterns: while capuchins typically travelled between fruit trees in relatively straight lines, coatis had significantly more tortuous daily travel paths and frequently visited the same fruit trees more than once per day. These circular coati travel paths would not be predicted by most foraging models. We posit that these differences in coati and capuchin movement patterns are driven by differences in arboreal and terrestrial travel costs, exploitation of fallen fruits and shifts in foraging behaviour over the course of the day. Because these seemingly small differences between the two species lead to major differences in movement behaviour, we posit that animal movement models need to better incorporate (1) travel costs, (2) both directed travel and random food search and (3) realistic diet models that include resources with different nutrient compositions

Response to comments on “Compassionate Conservation deserves a morally serious rather than dismissive response - reply to Callen et al., 2020”

[No abstract available

Envisioning the future with ‘compassionate conservation’:An ominous projection for native wildlife and biodiversity

The ‘Compassionate Conservation’ movement is gaining momentum through its promotion of ‘ethical’ conservation practices based on self-proclaimed principles of ‘first-do-no-harm’ and ‘individuals matter’. We argue that the tenets of ‘Compassionate Conservation’ are ideological - that is, they are not scientifically proven to improve conservation outcomes, yet are critical of the current methods that do. In this paper we envision a future with ‘Compassionate Conservation’ and predict how this might affect global biodiversity conservation. Taken literally, ‘Compassionate Conservation’ will deny current conservation practices such as captive breeding, introduced species control, biocontrol, conservation fencing, translocation, contraception, disease control and genetic introgression. Five mainstream conservation practices are used to illustrate the far-reaching and dire consequences for global biodiversity if governed by ‘Compassionate Conservation’. We acknowledge the important role of animal welfare science in conservation practices but argue that ‘Compassionate Conservation’ aligns more closely with animal liberation principles protecting individuals over populations. Ultimately we fear that a world of ‘Compassionate Conservation’ could stymie the global conservation efforts required to meet international biodiversity targets derived from evidenced based practice, such as the Aichi targets developed by the Convention on Biological Diversity and adopted by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and the United Nations.Fil: Callen, Alex. Universidad de Newcastle; AustraliaFil: Hayward, Matt W.. Universidad de Newcastle; Australia. Nelson Mandela University; Sudáfrica. Universidad de Pretoria; SudáfricaFil: Klop Toker, Kaya. Universidad de Newcastle; AustraliaFil: Allen, Benjamin L.. University of Queensland; AustraliaFil: Ballard, Guy. University of New England Australia; Australia. University of New South Wales; AustraliaFil: Beranek, Chad T.. Universidad de Newcastle; Australia. Universidad de Pretoria; SudáfricaFil: Broekhuis, Femke. University of Oxford; Reino UnidoFil: Bugir, Cassandra K.. Universidad de Newcastle; Australia. Universidad de Pretoria; SudáfricaFil: Clarke, Rohan H.. Monash University; AustraliaFil: Clulow, John. Universidad de Newcastle; AustraliaFil: Clulow, Simon. Universidad de Newcastle; Australia. Macquarie University; AustraliaFil: Daltry, Jennifer C.. Fauna & Flora International; Reino UnidoFil: Davies Mostert, Harriet T.. Universidad de Pretoria; Sudáfrica. Endangered Wildlife Trust; SudáfricaFil: Di Blanco, Yamil Edgardo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú | Universidad Nacional de Misiones. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú; ArgentinaFil: Dixon, Victoria. Universidad de Newcastle; AustraliaFil: Fleming, Peter J. S.. University of Queensland; Australia. University of New England; Australia. University of New South Wales; AustraliaFil: Howell, Lachlan G.. Universidad de Newcastle; AustraliaFil: Kerley, Graham I. H.. Nelson Mandela University; SudáfricaFil: Legge, Sarah M.. Australian National University, Fenner School Of Environment And Society; Australia. University of Queensland; AustraliaFil: Lenga, Dean J.. Universidad de Newcastle; AustraliaFil: Major, Tom. Bangor University; Reino UnidoFil: Montgomery, Robert A.. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Moseby, Katherine. University of New South Wales; AustraliaFil: Meyer, Ninon. Fondation Yaguara Panama; PanamáFil: Parker, Dan M.. University of Mpumalanga; Sudáfrica. Rhodes University.; SudáfricaFil: Périquet, Stéphanie. Ongava Research Centre; SudáfricaFil: Read, John. University of Adelaide; AustraliaFil: Scanlon, Robert J.. Universidad de Newcastle; AustraliaFil: Shuttleworth, Craig. Bangor University; Reino Unido. Red Squirrel Trust Wales; Reino UnidoFil: Tamessar, Cottrell T.. Universidad de Newcastle; AustraliaFil: Taylor, William Andrew. Endangered Wildlife Trust; SudáfricaFil: Tuft, Katherine. Arid Recovery; AustraliaFil: Upton, Rose M. O.. Universidad de Newcastle; AustraliaFil: Valenzuela, Marcia. Universidad de Newcastle; Australia. Instituto Politécnico Nacional. Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados. Departamento de Fisica.; MéxicoFil: Witt, Ryan R.. Universidad de Newcastle; AustraliaFil: Wüster, Wolfgang. Bangor University; Reino Unid

Envisioning the future with 'compassionate conservation': An ominous projection for native wildlife and biodiversity

The 'Compassionate Conservation' movement is gaining momentum through its promotion of 'ethical' conservation practices based on self-proclaimed principles of 'first-do-no-harm' and 'individuals matter'. We argue that the tenets of 'Compassionate Conservation' are ideological - that is, they are not scientifically proven to improve conservation outcomes, yet are critical of the current methods that do. In this paper we envision a future with 'Compassionate Conservation' and predict how this might affect global biodiversity conservation. Taken literally, 'Compassionate Conservation' will deny current conservation practices such as captive breeding, introduced species control, biocontrol, conservation fencing, translocation, contraception, disease control and genetic introgression. Five mainstream conservation practices are used to illustrate the far-reaching and dire consequences for global biodiversity if governed by 'Compassionate Conservation'. We acknowledge the important role of animal welfare science in conservation practices but argue that 'Compassionate Conservation' aligns more closely with animal liberation principles protecting individuals over populations. Ultimately we fear that a world of 'Compassionate Conservation' could stymie the global conservation efforts required to meet international biodiversity targets derived from evidenced based practice, such as the Aichi targets developed by the Convention on Biological Diversity and adopted by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and the United Nations

Data from: Jaguar Movement Database: a GPS-based movement dataset of an apex predator in the Neotropics

The field of movement ecology has rapidly grown during the last decade, with important advancements in tracking devices and analytical tools that have provided unprecedented insights into where, when, and why species move across a landscape. Although there has been an increasing emphasis on making animal movement data publicly available, there has also been a conspicuous dearth in the availability of such data on large carnivores. Globally, large predators are of conservation concern. However, due to their secretive behavior and low densities, obtaining movement data on apex predators is expensive and logistically challenging. Consequently, the relatively small sample sizes typical of large carnivore movement studies may limit insights into the ecology and behavior of these elusive predators. The aim of this initiative is to make available to the conservation-scientific community a dataset of 134,690 locations of jaguars (Panthera onca) collected from 117 individuals (54 males and 63 females) tracked by GPS technology. Individual jaguars were monitored in five different range countries representing a large portion of the species’ distribution. This dataset may be used to answer a variety of ecological questions including but not limited to: improved models of connectivity from local to continental scales; the use of natural or human-modified landscapes by jaguars; movement behavior of jaguars in regions not represented in this dataset; intraspecific interactions; and predator-prey interactions. In making our dataset publicly available, we hope to motivate other research groups to do the same in the near future. Specifically, we aim to help inform a better understanding of jaguar movement ecology with applications towards effective decision making and maximizing long-term conservation efforts for this ecologically important species

NEOTROPICAL ALIEN MAMMALS: a data set of occurrence and abundance of alien mammals in the Neotropics

Biological invasion is one of the main threats to native biodiversity. For a species to become invasive, it must be voluntarily or involuntarily introduced by humans into a nonnative habitat. Mammals were among first taxa to be introduced worldwide for game, meat, and labor, yet the number of species introduced in the Neotropics remains unknown. In this data set, we make available occurrence and abundance data on mammal species that (1) transposed a geographical barrier and (2) were voluntarily or involuntarily introduced by humans into the Neotropics. Our data set is composed of 73,738 historical and current georeferenced records on alien mammal species of which around 96% correspond to occurrence data on 77 species belonging to eight orders and 26 families. Data cover 26 continental countries in the Neotropics, ranging from Mexico and its frontier regions (southern Florida and coastal-central Florida in the southeast United States) to Argentina, Paraguay, Chile, and Uruguay, and the 13 countries of Caribbean islands. Our data set also includes neotropical species (e.g., Callithrix sp., Myocastor coypus, Nasua nasua) considered alien in particular areas of Neotropics. The most numerous species in terms of records are from Bos sp. (n = 37,782), Sus scrofa (n = 6,730), and Canis familiaris (n = 10,084); 17 species were represented by only one record (e.g., Syncerus caffer, Cervus timorensis, Cervus unicolor, Canis latrans). Primates have the highest number of species in the data set (n = 20 species), partly because of uncertainties regarding taxonomic identification of the genera Callithrix, which includes the species Callithrix aurita, Callithrix flaviceps, Callithrix geoffroyi, Callithrix jacchus, Callithrix kuhlii, Callithrix penicillata, and their hybrids. This unique data set will be a valuable source of information on invasion risk assessments, biodiversity redistribution and conservation-related research. There are no copyright restrictions. Please cite this data paper when using the data in publications. We also request that researchers and teachers inform us on how they are using the data