Dietary overlap and co-existence of sympatric wild yak, Tibetan wild ass and Tibetan antelope in Arjin Shan National Nature Reserve, Xinjiang Province, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context Wild yak (Bos grunniens), Tibetan wild ass (Equus kiang, also known as kiang) and Tibetan antelope (Pantholops hodgsoni, also known as chiru) have been sympatric on the Tibetan Plateau for numerous generations. There is concern over potential dietary competition among them, particularly in winter when their forage resources are scarcer, but little is known about their dietary interactions. Aim We aimed to determine diet composition and dietary overlap of the three ungulate species, and to assess the extent of potential dietary competition among them in order to enhance our understanding of mechanisms underlying their co-existence. We predicted that the three species would widen their choice of forages in winter (December) compared with summer (June–July), and that there would be diet segregation among them, particularly in winter when food resources were scarcer. Methods We collected fresh faecal samples of the three species and reference forage samples from the field during our transect line surveys in the summers of 2012 and 2013, and winter of 2012 in Arjin Shan National Nature Reserve (ANNR) of Xinjiang Province, China. Slides of faecal samples were prepared for microhistological analysis, and plant fragments in faecal samples were identified under microscope. Relative percentage frequency of diet plant species, diet breadth and dietary overlap were calculated. Key results The three species consumed similar forage plants, but varied greatly in their percentage use of the available forages. Wild yak mainly fed on sedges in summer and graminoids in winter, supplemented with forbs. Kiang consumed mainly forbs in summer and browse in winter, and chiru mainly fed on graminoids and forbs in summer. Wild yak had the widest choice of forages, and kiang had the narrowest one in summer, but both wild yak and kiang became less selective in their food choice in winter, resulting in higher diet breadth. The dietary overlaps among them, as represented by Pianka’s index, were generally low, ranging from 0.26 between chiru and kiang to 0.51 between wild yak and kiang. The dietary overlap between wild yak and kiang decreased from summer (0.51) to winter (0.35), suggesting an increased dietary divergence. Key conclusion Our study reveals that the three species are ‘opportunistic feeders’, able to cope with coarse forage resources. There is dietary segregation among them as indicated by low dietary overlap, suggesting risk of potential competition for diets. We suggest that competition may have shaped their dietary divergence, contributing to their co-existence in ANNR. Implication Although there is dietary segregation among the three species in ANNR, it is not possible to make definitive conclusions about interspecific competition from these results. Further studies are needed to investigate if there is spatial and habitat segregation among them, which may facilitate their dietary divergence and thus contribute further to their co-existence in ANNR. Continued efforts are also needed to monitor their population dynamics and status of forage resources in order to prevent overgrazing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".