Activity and Habitat Use of Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) in the Anthropogenic Landscape of Bossou, Guinea, West Africa

Abstract

Many primate populations inhabit anthropogenic landscapes. Understanding their long-term ability to persist in such environments and associated real and perceived risks for both primates and people is essential for effective conservation planning. Primates in forest–agricultural mosaics often consume cultivars to supplement their diet, leading to potentially negative encounters with farmers. When crossing roads, primates also face the risk of encounters with people and collision with vehicles. Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) in Bossou, Guinea, West Africa, face such risks regularly. In this study, we aimed to examine their activity budget across habitat types and the influence of anthropogenic risks associated with cultivated fields, roads, and paths on their foraging behavior in noncultivated habitat. We conducted 6-h morning or afternoon follows daily from April 2012 to March 2013. Chimpanzees preferentially used forest habitat types for traveling and resting and highly disturbed habitat types for socializing. Wild fruit and crop availability influenced seasonal habitat use for foraging. Overall, chimpanzees preferred mature forest for all activities. They showed a significant preference for foraging at >200 m from cultivated fields compared to 0–100 m and 101–200 m, with no effect of habitat type or season, suggesting an influence of associated risk. Nevertheless, the chimpanzees did not actively avoid foraging close to roads and paths. Our study reveals chimpanzee reliance on different habitat types and the influence of human-induced pressures on their activities. Such information is critical for the establishment of effective land use management strategies in anthropogenic landscapes.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10764-016-9947-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Anthropogenic influences on primate antipredator behavior and implications for research and conservation

“…Of the total 222, 21 studies (~9.45%) were explicitly designed to address HIREC or species conservation (Table ). Bryson‐Morrison et al () and Lindshield et al () used direct observation of western chimpanzees ( Pan troglodytes verus ) to assess whether fear of humans might drive habitat use or foraging decisions. Specifically, Bryson‐Morrison et al used information about habitat‐level differences in risk and examined whether this corresponded with utilization and activity budgets.…”

“…Although relatively little research uses primate antipredator behaviors for identifying when species are adversely affected by HIREC, we located a set of highly relevant studies focused on primate–predator interactions and antipredator behaviors. Their approaches included using antipredator behavior to gauge hunting pressure (Bshary, ; Croes et al, ; Papworth et al, ), to investigate how primates deal with fear of (potentially lethal) conflict with humans (Bryson‐Morrison et al, ; Fehlmann et al, ; Lindshield et al, ; Mikula et al, ), and/or to assess whether predator‐naïve primates could discern whether an animal was dangerous (Cagni et al, ; Friant et al, ; Gil‐da‐Costa, ; Gil‐da‐Costa et al, ; Sündermann et al, ). Data on primate habitat use and risk‐sensitive behaviors were also used to assess whether perceived risk varied between more natural or human‐modified habitats (Nowak, Hill, et al, ; Nowak et al, ) and whether primates tended to avoid areas where native or exotic predators spent more time (Farris et al, ).…”

The macronutrient composition of wild and cultivated plant foods of West African chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) inhabiting an anthropogenic landscape

“…): Campbell‐Smith, Campbell‐Smith, Singleton, & Linkie, 2011). Studies examining primate feeding ecology within human‐impacted environments have revealed diverse crop‐foraging strategies depending on various factors such as availability, proximity and type of cultivated resources, habitat quality and wild food availability, and perceived risks associated with crop‐foraging (Bryson‐Morrison, Tzanopoulos, Matsuzawa, & Humle, 2017; Hockings, Anderson, & Matsuzawa, 2009; McKinney, 2011; McLennan, 2013; Naughton‐Treves, Treves, Chapman, & Wrangham, 1998; Reynolds, 2005; Strum, 2010). Where crops are fully incorporated into the diets, primates often display changes to activity budget and ranging patterns, spending less time foraging and traveling and more time resting (e.g., Altmann & Muruthi, 1988; Cancelliere, Chapman, Twinomugisha, & Rothman, 2018; Saj, Sicotte, & Paterson, 1999; Strum, 2010; Warren, Higham, MacLarnon, & Ross, 2011).…”

“…The Bossou chimpanzees have foraged on crops for generations and consume 17 different fruit and non‐fruit varieties (Hockings, 2011; Hockings et al, 2009). Crops account for a relatively large proportion of overall feeding time (6.4–20% per annum: Bryson‐Morrison, 2017; Hockings et al, 2009; Takemoto, 2002). The chimpanzees also frequently feed from the semidomesticated or wild oil palm ( Elaeis guineensis ), exploiting more food parts (i.e., fruit, nut kernel, pith, petiole, flower, and heart) than any other known chimpanzee community (Humle & Matsuzawa, 2004).…”

The Influence of Leaf Consumption on Time Allocation in Black Howler Monkeys (Alouatta pigra)

“…Anthropogenic disturbance changes habitat patterns and, with it, induces variation in food availability [Tylianakis et al, 2008]. Adjustments in time budgets in response to anthropogenic disturbance have been documented in several taxa and may involve either of the two energetic strategies described above (e.g., black bears, Ursus americanus [Beckmann and Berger, 2003]; chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes [Bryson-Morrison et al, 2017]; mantled howler monkeys, Alouatta palliata [Asensio et al, 2007]; Florida scrub-jays, Aphelocoma coerulescens [Fleischer et al, 2003]; spider monkeys, Ateles geoffroyi [Ordóñez-Gómez et al, 2016]; Sulawesi Tonkean macaques, Macaca tonkeana [Riley, 2007; but see Bishop et al, 2015]). It is less clear, however, which are the specific factors determining such adjustments.…”