Savannah and forest elephants in Uganda 189
FIG. 1 The Democratic Republic of the Congo–Uganda border, and the Sebitoli area in Kibale National Park (Uganda), with locations of the camera traps.
et al., 2002;Mondol et al., 2015; Kim &Wasser, 2019); along the border of the DRC and Uganda; the northern Central African Republic; the Gourma region in Mali; and along the Pendjari–Arli complex of West Africa on the Benin– Burkina Faso border (Mondol et al., 2015; Kim & Wasser, 2019). To date, no study combining genetics and morphology
has been able to shed light on the phenotype of hybrid ele- phants. Yet the study of phenotypes (the set of observable characteristics of all or part of an organism) is central to many disciplines in biology (Houle et al., 2010). In addition, we have no information about whether hybrids could be phenotypically intermediate between their parents, closer to one parent or outside the range of variation of both par- ents’ species. As hybrids are fertile (Mondol et al., 2015), we can assume they have a wide range of phenotypes depending on their hybridization rate and whether their mates are hy- brids or pure forest or savannah elephants (Roca et al., 2005; Mondol et al., 2015). Our study aims to confirmthat the two species of African elephant can be discriminated using a set of six proposed morphological criteria, and that in a hybrid- ization zone both species can be found as well as individuals differing from both the savannah and the forest phenotype, which could emerge from the reproduction of the two species. This study took place in the hybridization zone at the
DRC–Uganda border in the forested Sebitoli area in the north of Kibale National Park, Uganda. This zone is located 60 km north of the nearest area of savannah in Queen Elizabeth National Park and is linked to it by a corridor that facilitates the movement of elephants between the two Parks (Fig. 1). The presence of the two species and the hybrids has already been documented in the south of Kibale National Park. However, neither the proportions of each species nor the history or dynamics of the populations are
known (Mondol et al., 2015). Local farmers and villagers in the Sebitoli area have also reported the presence of two types of elephants distinguishable by their size, colour and behaviour (Capelot, 2013; SK, pers. comm., 2012; JB, pers. comm., 2019). As direct observations and access to biolog- ical samples are challenging because of the dense under- growth, swamps and mountains of the Sebitoli terrain, all of which add to the danger of closely approaching elephants, which are likely to charge if threatened (Omeja et al., 2016), we used camera traps and developed an assignment key for the elephant species to document phenotypes in this area.
Study area
The 795 km2 Kibale National Park in south-west Uganda is a mosaic of mature forest, successional forest (formerly used for agriculture), grassland, woodland, lakes and wetlands (Chapman & Lambert, 2000). The movement of elephants between Kibale National Park (forested area) and DRC can only take place in the south via the connection between Queen Elizabeth National Park (savannah area) and Virunga National Park (mixed forest–savannah area) be- cause of the high altitude of the Rwenzori Mountains be- tween the two countries. Migrations between the Virunga and Queen Elizabeth National Parks have been observed since the 1960s, mainly from the DRC to Uganda (Keigwin et al., 2016). In the extreme north of Kibale National Park, the Sebitoli research area, monitored by the Sebitoli Chimpanzee Project, covers c. 25 km2 of forest logged in the 1970s. Today, this area comprises regenerating forest (70%), with only 14% being old-growth forest, surrounded by farm- lands and tea and eucalyptus plantations (Bortolamiol et al., 2014).
Oryx, 2023, 57(2), 188–195 © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605321001605
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
