Snapshot of the Atlantic Forest canopy 831


FIG. 2 Species accumulation curves in Caparaó National Park, Brazil, with 95% CIs, for all mammal species detected, and for mammal species detected only in ombrophilous and semideciduous forests, by arboreal camera traps.


detectedwas a primate, the northernmuriqui B. hypoxanthus, and the smallest-bodied mammals were G. microtarsus, Rhipidomys sp., Marmosa (micoureus) paraguayana, G. b. ingrami, Caluromys philander, Phyllomys sp., Philander quica andC. flaviceps (Paglia et al., 2012;Faria et al., 2019). The majority of themammal species are arboreal but five are scan- sorial (G. b. ingrami,M. m. paragiayana, P. quica, Tamandua tetradactyla and Leopardus wiedii) and two are terrestrial (Eira barbara and Nasua nasua). The number of species predicted by the jackknife 1 esti-


mator was 17 ± SD 1.4 (Fig. 2), suggesting that c. 88%of species present can be captured within the first 1,000 camera-trap days (41.7 days for each of our 24 cameras), which is the minimum effort needed to detect the arboreal mammal assemblage in tropical rainforest (Bowler et al., 2017). The cumulative curves for species richness increased substantially during the first 500 camera-trap days in both forest types (Fig. 2) but took longer to stabilize for the om- brophilous forest, which indicates that it could require greater effort to detect rare and cryptic species there. Although arboreal camera traps documented greater species richness and relative abundance for the mammal commu- nity in Ombrophilous Dense Forest (Supplementary Figs 1 & 2), there were no significant differences between forest types (richness: W= 90,P= 0.245; abundance: W= 72, P=0.931). The estimated detection rates for mammals were highly variable, from 0.04 for M. m. paraguayana, Philander quica, T. tetradactyla and Phyllostomidae bats to 12.00 for B. hypoxanthus (Table 1). The estimates for mammals in semideciduous forest ranged from 2.2 for G. microtarsus to 14.6 for B. hypoxanthus, whereas in ombrophilous forest the detection rates ranged from 0.1 for M. m. paraguayana, P. quica, T. tetradactyla and Phyllostomidae bats to 17.3 for G. b. ingrami. Brachyteles hypoxanthus and the black-horned capuchin S. nigritus were detected widely (20 and 17 canopy sampling locations, respectively) and across an altitude gradient (Fig. 3). However, M. m. paraguayana, P. quica, T. tetradactyla and Phyllostomidae bats were detected only once and


L. wiedii was detected only twice during the survey period. The kinkajou P. flavus and C. spinosus were detected at two and three sampling locations, respectively, close to streams in the ombrophilous forest type at altitudes up to 1,364 m (Fig. 3). The Jaccard index revealed a dissimilarity of 0.375 in troph-


ic guilds between the forest types. Ten species were recorded exclusively in the Montane Ombrophilous Dense Forest and only one species was recorded exclusively in the semidecidu- ous forest (Fig. 3, Table 1). The species richness of frugivores– omnivores and frugivores–folivores was high in both forest types. However, two trophic guilds were missing in the semi- deciduous forest: carnivores and myrmecophages. The mean relative abundance was greatest for folivore (8.1,n = 1), frugi- vore–granivore (7.9,n = 1), frugivore–folivore (5.5 ± SD 5.9,n = 3) and frugivore–insectivore–granivore (5.4,n = 1) species. The frugivore–insectivore–gumivore (6.8,n = 1), frugivore– folivore (5.9 ± SD 7.7,n = 3)and folivore (2.9,n = 1) species had the greatest mean relative abundances in the semi- deciduous forest, whereas frugivore–granivore (17.3,n= 1), folivore (14.5,n= 1) and frugivore–folivore (5.1 ± SD 4.0,n= 3) species had the greatest mean relative abundances in the ombrophilous forest.


Discussion


Weexamined the species richness, community composition and functional traits of arboreal mammals in the Atlantic Forest canopy. As far as we are aware, this is the first study using arboreal camera trapping to assess mammal as- semblages in the canopy of this biodiversity hotspot (except for low-height camera-trap studies; Kierulff et al., 2004; Oliveira-Santos et al., 2008). Our results demonstrate the ef- ficiency of this method for detecting arboreal mammals of various body sizes and for detecting rare and highly cryptic species such as the buffy-headed marmoset, tree-rats and the thin-spined porcupine. Furthermore, we compiled evi- dence that this protected area has high species richness and a functional community of arboreal mammals,


Oryx, 2022, 56(6), 825–836 © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605321001563


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164