SPATIAL ECOLOGY OF HATCHLING AND JUVENILE KOMODO DRAGONS (Varanus komodoensis) IN THE KOMODO NATIONAL PARK, INDONESIA

MUHAMAD JERI IMANSYAH

THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT FOR THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF SCIENCE

FACULTY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA

BANGI

2006

EKOLOGI SPATIAL TETASAN DAN ANAKAN BIAWAK KOMODO (Varanus komodoensis) DI TAMAN NEGARA KOMODO, INDONESIA

MUHAMAD JERI IMANSYAH

TESIS YANG DIKEMUKAKAN UNTUK MEMENUHI SEBAHAGIAN DARIPADA SYARAT MEMPEROLEH IJAZAH

SARJANA SAINS

FAKULTI SAINS DAN TEKNOLOGI UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA

BANGI

2006

iii

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the work in this thesis is my own except for quotations and

summaries, which have been duly acknowledged

5 December 2006 MUHAMAD JERI IMANSYAH P28345

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am grateful upon The Almighty and Merciful Allah S.W.T and his Prophet Muhammad S.A.W that by His will has bestowed me a good opportunity to explore one of the tinniest parts of nature’s secret. This thesis has benefited from the help of many people during all the stages of its maturation. Coming at the end of this work, I wish to list here all the contributions that made this work possible, by order of apparition;

Special thanks to Prof. Dr. Zubaid Akbar Mukhtar Ahmad for thesis supervision and every scientific discussion. I particularly thank Dr. Tim Jessop, my co-supervisor his assistance in providing research funds and equipments, more over in directing my field research and scientific writing progress during it. Without their help, this work had probably not successfully merged.

Special appreciations should be awarded to my fellow Research Officers at CRES Komodo Project; Deni Purwandana, Achmad Ariefiandy, and Ibrahim, for their great friendship, assistances and vigorous work in the field catching the dragons, and also developing data base for my scientific analysis. I would like also to appreciate my research assistants; Dimas, Aris, Niken for the hard work in the field tracking the dragons.

I should be indebted Dr Claudio Ciofi (University of Florence, Itali) for his assistance in writing research-grant proposal for fundraising, and his scientific advices in data analysis and thesis writing. Particular thank to Dr. Joana Sumner (Australian National University, Australia) and Dr. Shukor Md. (Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia) for their assistance in reviewing this thesis.

Avery special thanks also should be given to my parents: Abdul Azid Muchtar and Aas Sadiah; and my younger brothers and sister: Oris Junisa, Atus Satriawan, Widia Putri Julika. Last, but not least, a special grateful and dedication should be awarded to the most amazing woman in my life, my beloved wife, Eva Fairus Balahmar. Their patience, passionate, and encouragements to kept lifting up my performance and through the hard time during the research and scientific writing. This work will not be done very well without their support.

It is also should be acknowledged that this study is part of a long-term conservation and research project undertaken by CRES with the Komodo National Park (KNP). I would like to thank the KNP management for granting permission to work across Komodo National Park, providing field staff and accommodation. This study was funded by the Zoological Society of San Diego (ZSSD), the American Aquarium and Zoo Association (AAZA), the Komodo Species Survival Plan (Komodo SSP), and the Oriental Bird Club (OBC). Permission for this study was achieved from the Komodo National Park management. Administration assistance was provided by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) Bali Office through a MoU between TNC and ZSSD.

v

ABSTRACT

Radio-telemetry and mark-recapture techniques were used to investigate and compare patterns in the spatial ecology of hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons (Varanus komodoensis) in the Komodo National Park (KNP), Indonesia. Radio-tracking was conducted in Loh Liang, Komodo Island, between March-July 2004 and 2005, while the mark-recapture study was conducted in 10 major coastal-deciduous-forests across four islands in KNP from 2003 to 2005. Estimated average daily distance moved by hatchlings was (32.62 ± 12.67 m/day) compared to juveniles (129.14 ± 41.71 m/day; t-test t1,9=-3.01, p=0.02). Minimum Convex Polygon analysis showed that hatchlings used significantly smaller activity areas as compared to juveniles, (3.02 ± 0.73 ha and 24.31 ± 8.38 ha; t-test; t1,9 = -3.66, p = 0.01). In five of six activity areas, the activity areas of juveniles overlapped with one (n = 4) or two (n = 1) conspecifics with the extent of overlap ranging from 4.84 – 91.01 %. With respect to habitat use hatchlings were almost entirely arboreal (97.70%) compared to juveniles which more terrestrial (71.0%) (Chi square test; x2 = 239.22, p ≤ 0.01). With respect to elevation there was a significant preference for hatchlings to be located in the lowest elevation class (< 25 m) as compared to juveniles dragons (25 – 50 m) (Chi square test; x2 = 25.127, p ≤ 0.01). There was a tendency for hatchlings to occupy Tamarindus indica trees (45.37 %) as shelter whilst juveniles predominantly used crevices under or among rocks (51.77% ± 5.72). There was also a significant correlation between long distance movement and area size of the valleys (Pearson correlation test; r = -0.125, p ≤ 0.01) and the degree of the slope (Spearman correlation test; r = -0.399, p ≤ 0.01). In contrast the long distance movement showed no significant correlation with vegetation types (Pearson correlation test; 0.659, p ≤ 0.01 and Spearman correlation test; r = 0.09 p = 0.58). This study suggested that limited movement of hatchlings and juveniles (inter-valley and inter-island) could impact gene flow among sub-populations. Managers should consider appropriate strategies in maintaining genetic variability source to prevent inbreeding of isolated populations.

vi

ABSTRAK

Tujuan daripada kajian ini ialah untuk menyelidiki pola-pola dalam ekologi spasial pada tetasan dan anak Biawak Komodo (Varanus komodoensis) di Taman Negara Komodo, Indonesia. Di dalam penyelidikan ini, kaedah Capture-Mark-Release and Recapture telah dijalankan di 10 lembah utama ke atas 4 pulau di TNK daripada 2003 sehingga 2005, manakala ‘radiotracking’ dijalankan di Loh Liang, pulau Komodo, antara bulan Mac sehingga Julai 2004 dan 2005. Didapati bahawa jarak perpindahan tetasan biawak Komodo lebih rendah (32.62 ± 12.67 m/hari) dari pada anakan (129.14 ± 41.71 m/hari; t-test t1,9=-3.014, p=0.015). Tetasan memiliki luasan Minimum Convex Polygon yang secara nyata lebih kecil (3.02 ± 0.73 ha) dari pada anakan (24.31 ± 8.38 ha; t-test; t1,9 = -3.658, p = 0.006). Terdapat 5 dari pada 6 kes overlap wilayah aktiviti (4.84 – 91.01 %). Tetasan bersifat arboreal (97.70%) dari pada anakan yang cenderung terestrial (71.0%) (Chi square test; x2 = 239.22, p ≤ 0.001). Tetasan lebih banyak teramati pada ketinggian yang rendah (> 25 m) dari pada anakan yang lebih banyak teramatai pada ketinggian (25 – 50 m; Chi square test; x2 = 25.127, p ≤ 0.001). Tetasan menunjukkan kecenderungan untuk menggunakan pohon asam Tamarindus indica tree (45.37 %) sebagai tempat berteduh, sedangkan anakan lebih memilih celah-celah diantara batu karang (51.77 %). Terdapat pula korelas yang nyata antara jarak perpindahan skala besar dengan luasan lembah (Pearson correlation test; r = -0.125, p ≤ 0.001) dan dengan tingkat kemiringan tebing (Spearman correlation test; r = -0.399, p = 0.007), akan tetapi terdapat korelasi yang tidak nyata dengan jenis vegetasi (Spearman correlation test; r = -0.399, p = 0.007). Daripada kajian ini menunjukkan bahawa sedikitnya perpindahan antara lembah mahupun antara pulau pada tetasan dan anakan biawak Komodo dapat berdampak kepada rendahnya pertukaran variasi gen pada populasi pulau. Pengurus mesti merancang strategi pengurusan tetasan dan anakan Biawak Komodo untuk menyokong pertukaran sumber variasi gen bagi populasi terisolasi.

vii

CONTENTS

Page

DECLARATION iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv

ABSTRACT v

ABSTRAK vi

CONTENTS vii

LIST OF FIGURES x

LIST OF TABLES xi CHAPTER I GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Spatial Ecology Studies in Free Ranging Animals 4 2.2 Systematics and Distribution of the Komodo Dragons 5 2.3 Present Status of the Komodo Dragons 8 2.4 Biology, Ecology, and Reproduction of the Komodo

Dragons 9

2.5 Biology and Ecology of Juveniles 11 2.6 Previous Ecological Studies on the Komodo Dragons 12 CHAPTER III GENERAL METHODOLOGY 3.1 Study Site 14 3.1.1 Biogeographical setting 14 3.1.2 Selected study sites 16 3.2 Field Techniques 20 3.2.1 Juvenile classification 20 3.2.1 Radiotelemetry 21 3.2.3 Mark-recapture techniques 22 3.2.4 Baited box-trapping technique 23

viii

3.2.5 Baited Pipe-trapping technique 24 3.2.6 Noosing and Hand-capture technique 25 3.2.7 Nest enclosure traps 25 3.3 Data Analysis 26

3.3.1 Spatial movement and activity area 26 3.3.2 Habitat use 27 3.3.3 Long distance movement 27 CHAPTER IV A COMPARISON OF DAILY MOVEMENT

PATTERNS, ACTIVITY AREAS AND HABITAT USE BETWEEN HATCHLING AND JUVENILE KOMODO DRAGONS

4.1 Introduction 28 4.2 Materials and Methods 29 4.2.1 Study site 29 4.2.2 Studied animals 30 4.2.3 Radiotelemetry technique 30 4.2.4 Habitat assessment 31 4.2.5 Data analysis 32 4.3 Results 35

4.3.1 Patterns of movement 35 4.3.2 Size of activity areas 40 4.3.3 Patterns in habitat use 40 4.3.4 Shelter sites selection 42

4.4 Discussion 44 CHAPTER V ASSESSING LONG DISTANCE MOVEMENT

OF HATCHLING AND JUVENILE KOMODO DRAGONS

5.1 Introduction 49 5.2 Materials and Methods 51

5.2.1 Study sites and capture technique 51 5.2.2 Data analysis 53 5.2.3 Statistical analysis 54

5.3 Results 56 5.4 Discussion 57

ix

CHAPTER VI GENERAL DISCUSSION 6.1 General Discussion 62 6.2 Recommendations 63 CHAPTER VII CONCLUSION REFERENCES 68

x

LIST OF FIGURES No. Figure Page 2.1 Distribution of Varanus komodoensis. Grey areas represent

the current distribution; black areas represent areas that were identified as part of the distribution by Auffenberg (1981); Hatched areas indicated where V. komodoensis has been reported by villagers. 7

3.1 Study sites across the four islands of Komodo National Park.

Numbers are dedicated to show the locations; 1. Loh Sebita; 2. Loh Liang; 3. Loh Lawi; 4. Loh Wau; 5. Loh Buaya; 6. Loh Baru; 7. Loh Tongker; 8. Loh Dasami; 9. Nusa Kode; 10. Gili Motang. 19

4.1 Movement patterns of hatchling Komodo dragons. Arrows

indicate starting point and general direction of movements. Letter refers to hatchlings ID as follow; a) 64D4C0E, b) 63DFB2A, c) 64E4218, d) 63C1383. 37

4.2 Movement patterns of two juvenile Komodo dragons (a:

639E332, b: 63D9C4B). Circles indicate shelter sites. 38 4.3 Activity area overlaps of six juvenile Komodo dragons as

calculated by MCP (a) and 50% Adaptive Kernell (b). Numbers refer to juvenile ID as follow: 1) 64CF2A0, 2) 639E332, 3) 64E761C, 4) 64E2E95, 5) 63DE6F1, 6) 63D9C4. 39

4.4 Differences in terrestrial and arboreal habitat use by hatchling

and juvenile Komodo dragons (a). Figure b depicts the relationship between body size (SVL) and arboreal activity in the radio-tracked Komodo dragons. 41

5.1 Frequency of annual movement for hatchling (a), daily and

annual movement for juvenile (b, c). 55

xi

LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2.1 Local names for Komodo dragon. 6 2.2 Average density of Varanus komodoensis in Komodo

National Park (KNP) and Flores Island. 8 3.1 Size of each island within KNP and it’s vegetation cover (in

km2). 15 3.2 Range of measurements applied in classifying hatchling and

juvenile Varanus komodoensis in this study. Measurement data were obtained during the mark-recapture study (2003-2005). 21

4.1 Summary of SVL, weight, number of observations, and fixes

of radio-tracking study in hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons. 31

4.2 Detail of results on radio-tracking study of hatchling and

juvenile Komodo dragons. 36 4.3 Percentages of overlap on activity areas in juveniles. 36 4.4 Frequency of elevation preferred by hatchling and juvenile

(%). 43 4.5 Major tree preferences used by hatchling and juveniles (%). 43 4.6 Total number of tree species and mean values of tree

parameters used, and animal position on tree. 43 5.1 Total number of tagged animals for each year. 52 5.2 Distance of movement of juvenile Komodo dragons (m) 58 5.3 Topographical barrier’s score of each study area. 58 5.4 Distance between islands in Komodo National Park. 58

CHAPTER I

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

The Komodo dragon (Varanus komodoensis) is the largest extant lizard in the world

(King & Green 1999; Mattison 1992; Pough et al. 2001). This species lives in a

relatively small range of distribution in the wild. Komodo dragons can be found on the

islands of Komodo, Rinca, Nusa Kode, Gili Motang, and the western coast of Flores

(Ciofi et al. 2002; Ciofi & de Boer 2004), and were previously known on Padar Island.

Currently, four of these populations are located within the boundary of Komodo

National Park (PHKA 2000). Flores is the largest island within the Komodo dragon’s

distribution and contains two nature reserves: Wae Wuul on the west coast and Wolo

Tado on the north coast (Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). It is evident that the dragon

populations in these parks are more secure than those outside of the parks, given that

key threatening processes, including habitat loss, altered fire regimes and competition

for key prey with humans, are largely absent within the park (Jessop et al. 2004). The

range of the Komodo dragon has decreased significantly over the last 3 decades due to

several threatening processes including the suspected decline of large prey, such as

Timor deer (Cervus timorensis) and anthropic habitat fragmentation and disturbances

(Ciofi et al. 2002; Ciofi & de Boer 2004). Degradation of the environment is

considered to be a major threatening process that could influence the viability of the

extant dragon populations (Jessop et al. 2004).

Due to its vulnerability and its restricted distribution in the wild, Varanus

komodoensis is listed as “vulnerable” in the IUCN Red Data Book, and is on

Appendix I of CITES (Ciofi et al. 2002). The Komodo dragon is also protected by

2

Indonesian law, including the need for a presidential decree to transfer any

individuals of this charismatic species out of Indonesia.

There are a number of key research areas that require further investigation to

facilitate Komodo dragon management and conservation. An important component of

Komodo dragon management is to understand the spatial requirements and habits,

including movement, activity area, behavior, and habitat use (Phillips 1995; Brill et

al. 1995). These spatial aspects of an animal’s ecology are the key to understanding

important processes such as dispersal, habitat partitioning and reproduction and how

they influence population structure. Understanding these spatial aspects of dragon

ecology is also invaluable in the conservation of this threatened species.

Studies in spatial ecology are often undertaken to calculate estimates of

individual movement, home range, habitat utilization (i.e. Fitzgerald et al. 2002;

Piepgras & Lang 2000), diet (Thompson & Thompson 2001; Whitaker & Shine,

2003), and responses to anthropic habitat changes (Pearson et al. 2005). Knowledge

of an animal’s home range is also important for management purposes (Caley 1997).

Boudjemad et al. (1999) related how habitat modification by anthropic causes could

directly affected demography and movement capacity of wildlife. Further, habitat

change can influence dispersal or foraging strategies (i.e. aspects of spatial ecology),

which can have an impact on the fitness of individuals and, ultimately, the population

as a whole (Greenwood & Swingland 1984).

A number of spatial studies have been conducted and have described activity,

area size, movement, and behaviour of Varanid lizards (Ibrahim 2002; Thompson et

al. 1999; Thompson 1992) is relation to patterns of physiology, reproduction and

demography (Christian et al. 1995; Christian & Weavers 1994; James 1996; Phillips

1995). These spatial studies focused on adults, and thus little is known concerning

juveniles and hatchlings. Spatial studies on Komodo dragons by Auffenberg (1981)

and Sastrawan and Ciofi (2002) focused on the home ranges of adult dragons only.

3

In the present study, spatial ecology was defined as the interaction between

young Komodo dragons with environmental conditions. It is hypothesized that

environmental conditions will influence the spatial ecology of young Komodo

dragons. The objectives of this study are to: 1) determine the patterns of daily

movement and the activity areas; 2) identify patterns of habitat use; and 3) assess

long distance movement ability in hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons. Results of

this research are anticipated to contribute valuable information on the biology of

hatchling and juvenile Komodo Monitors, that can be of benefit to the management

practices of the park, particularly for this species and its habitat.

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 SPATIAL ECOLOGY STUDIES IN FREE RANGING ANIMALS

Habitat loss and fragmentation are currently the most serious threats to wildlife

worldwide, so it is important to understand how patterns and processes of landscape

change will cause individual populations and species to respond to these broad-scale

modifications (Blumstein & Fernandez-Juricic 2004; Collinge 2001). Spatial

heterogeneity processes directly affect ecological systems (Gardner et al. 1989). The

spatial arrangement of individuals within a population will reflect aspects of its

behavior and ecology, and is important in determining population persistence and

gene flow within and between sub-populations (Brown & Downhower 1988; Johnson

2000). Thus, the dynamics of an animal population depends not only on birth and

death rates, but also on an animal’s ability to move into or out of a population

(Dasmann 1964). Determining the number of individuals persisting in an area is a

basic question in ecology, but it is more important to understand how an animal

responds to changing landscape conditions, regardless of whether it is at the

individual, population or community level (Lawson et al. 2006).

Krebs (1999) pointed out that spatial ecology as a science aims to understand

the ecological processes that determine the location of individuals, which are rarely

spread evenly over the landscape. Collinge (2001) concluded that spatial ecology is

an ecological study, which centers upon understanding how landscape configurations

influence the community and population dynamics of organisms. Spatial ecology is at

the very core of the science of ecology (Boyce & McDonald 1999). Whitaker and

Shine (2003) stated that studying spatial ecology can contribute at least three potential

5

benefits; first, a better understanding of movement and habitat selection by the

animal, second, giving information regarding animal-human interactions, and third, as

an aid in assessing the response and role of an animal in regards to their habitat.

Collinge (2001) emphasized that empirical studies in spatial ecology beneficially

links conservation biology research to practical mechanisms for species management

and conservation planning. In studying spatial ecology, authors included studies of

dispersal (e.g. Olsson & Shine 2003), movement and activity area, habitat use,

activity patterns (Fitzgerald et al. 2002; Piepgras & Lang 2000), diets (Thompson &

Thompson 2001; Whitaker & Shine 2003), and anthropic habitat changes (Pearson et

al. 2005; Martin et al. 2001; Fitzgerald et al. 2002).

Dispersal is the movement of an individual from its natal area to an

unoccupied and suitable area within which it is able to establish its own home range.

Caughley and Sinclair (1994) emphasised that migration is not the equivalent of

dispersal. Greenwood and Swingland (1984) described dispersal as being caused by

the need for an individual to search for food sources. Lebreton et al. (2003) studied

the importance of dispersal as a mechanism in reproduction.

It is essential in studying spatial ecology to investigate dispersal patterns.

Dispersal is recognized as a key process in ecology, evolution, and conservation and

it is important to understand the consequences to an animal’s behaviour as it responds

to the habitat (van Dyck & Baguette 2005). Dispersal can affect the dynamics and

persistence of populations, distribution and abundance, community structure, gene

flow, local adaptation, speciation, and the evolution of life-history traits (Lebreton et

al. 2003; Roper et al. 2003). Thus, dispersal is one of the most critical events in the

life of most animals and one of the most important processes affecting the ecology

and evolution of populations (Roper et al. 2003).

2.2 SYSTEMATICS AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE KOMODO

DRAGONS

The Komodo dragon, Varanus komodoensis, was described for the first time by

Major Peter A. Ouwen in 1912 (Auffenberg & Auffenberg 2002; Dunn 1927). This

6

giant lizard species was placed in the genus Varanus, family Varanidae, order

Squamata, Class Reptiles (Mattison 1992). Varanus salvadorii from Southern New

Guinea and V. varius from Southeastern and Eastern Australia are believed to be the

sister groups of V. komodoensis (King et al. 2002; Molnar 2004). The closest

congeneric species occupying the same region is the Monitor lizard, V. salvator

salvator (Auffenberg 1981).

Auffenberg (1981) reported that this species was called the “Ora” by the local

people of Komodo, Rinca, and West Manggarai. There are several local names

described by Auffenberg (1981) from across its distribution in the Lesser Sunda

region (see Table 2.1). The name “Komodo” was taken from the name of the island

where the first specimens were taken, and which means “rats” (Dunn 1928).

Table 2.1 Local names for Komodo dragon Local name Region

Ora (also hora, lawora) Komodo, Rinca, West Manggarai Buaya darat (= land crocodile) Komodo, Rinca, West Manggarai Rugu (= Ora) Central Manggarai Si (also ugu; = lizard) Central Manggarai Lio (also ugu, = large monitor) Central Manggarai Pendugu (Grandfather of Ora) Central Manggarai Mbou (= Ora) Central Manggarai

Source: Auffenberg 1981

Even though the Komodo dragon is the largest lizard in the world, this species

has the smallest range of any large carnivore (King & Green 1999; Mattison 1992;

Pough et al. 2001). In the early studies of the Komodo dragon, this species was found

in the heart of the Lesser Sunda region on the islands of Komodo, Rinca, Padar, Gili

Motang, Gili Dasami (also known as Nusa Kode), and the Western coast of Flores

Island (Dunn 1928; Fig. 2.1). Five of the islands are within the boundary of Komodo

National Park (PHKA 2000; Fig 2.1). In studies conducted after 1991, this species

could not be found on Padar Island (Ciofi & de Boer 2004; Jessop et al. 2004;

Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002).

7

Figure 2.1 Distribution of Varanus komodoensis. Grey areas represent the current distribution; black areas

represent areas that were identified as part of the distribution by Auffenberg (1981); hatched areas indicate where V. komodoensis have been reported by villagers.

Source: Redrawn from Sastrawan and Ciofi 2002.

8

2.3 PRESENT STATUS OF THE KOMODO DRAGONS

Based on population surveys conducted by the park authority, there were

approximately 2405 Komodo dragons living within Komodo National Park in 1998

(PHKA 2000, unpublished report). Ciofi and de Boer (2004) estimated that the

population density of dragons on Flores was more than 60% lower than that reported

for Komodo National Park (Table 2.2.). Jessop et al. (2006 in press) estimated that

the dragon population on Gili Motang Island has the lowest density of dragons of all

the inhabited islands within the park (see Table 2.2).

The disappearance of resident Komodo dragons on Padar Island probably

stemmed from the decline of Timor deer (Cervus timorensis) populations due to

illegal hunting (Ciofi 1999; Ciofi & de Boer 2004). Pet and Subijanto (2001) reported

that there were at least 3 cases (37.5 %) of deer hunting in Komodo National Park

that had been sent to court during 2000-2001. Ciofi et al. (2002), Ciofi and de Boer

(2004), and Primack (2004) stated that fragmentation and habitat disturbance as a

result of the high population growth of humans are the main factors affecting

Komodo dragon populations on Flores.

Table 2.2 Average density of Varanus komodoensis in Komodo National Park (KNP) and Flores Island.

Location Population density Number of sites

KNP 1 / 33.25 km 4 Komodo 13.7 ± 1.67 / km Rinca 19.6 ± 3.13 / km Nusa Kode 5.1 ± 0.61 / km Gili Motang 3.2 ± 0.23 / km Flores 1 / 170.0 km 7

Source: Modified from Ciofi & de Boer 2004; Jessop et al. 2006

unpublished data.

Even though the Komodo dragon is not threatened by the leather trade, like

the congeneric Water Monitor (V. salvator), and is considered ‘dangerous’ to humans

(King et al. 2002; Shine et al. 1996; Ellis 1998), hunting and trade in this species has

9

been occurring for a long time. Since the 1930’s Komodo dragons and their eggs have

been hunted illegally for zoo collections and for traditional medicine (Primack et al.

1988). Hien (2003) reported that the local people of Riung, Northwest Flores, claimed

that they once illegally caught 50 live specimens of the Komodo dragon for a

foreigner. However, the widespread hunting and trading of other reptiles including

varanids, for their skins and for food (e.g. Shine et al. 1996) should be considered a

potential threat to the Komodo dragon.

The Komodo dragon is protected by international conventions; it is listed in

Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild

Fauna and Flora (CITES) and is classified by the International Union for the

Conservation of Nature Resources (IUCN) as “vulnerable” due to its demographic

decline and limited distribution (Ciofi et al. 2002). The World Conservation

Monitoring Center (WCMC) also listed the Komodo dragon as “Rare” due to it’s

restricted distribution (Ellis 1998). This species is protected in Indonesia under Act

no. 5, on Conservation of Biological Resources and Their Ecosystems,1990,; and

Government regulation no. 7, on Protected Wild Flora and Fauna, 1998. Primack

(2004) included the Komodo dragon in his discussion on “conservation priorities” as

he considered that this species met all the criteria of distinctiveness, endangerment,

and utility.

2.4 BIOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND REPRODUCTION OF THE

KOMODO DRAGONS

Compared to other species in the family Varanidae, Varanus komodoenis has an

extremely large body size. Adults can reach up to 304 cm in total body length and

weigh up to 81.5 kg (Jessop et al. 2006 unpublished data). Sastrawan and Ciofi

(2002) recorded the largest Komodo dragon in their field study as being about 300 cm

in length and weighing about 69 kg. Auffenberg (1981) recorded his largest specimen

caught as being 260 cm in length and 54 kg in weight. This is similar in length to the

largest specimens of its sister species, the Papuan monitor V. salvadorii, which

reached about 265 cm in length (Horn 2004). Another large varanid species, occuring

10

on the islands of Java, Bali and throughout Lesser Sunda region, V. salvator may

reach up to 218 cm in length and weigh up to 25 kg (Gaulke & Horn 2004; Horne &

Gaulke 2004).

Hatchlings of V. komodoensis average 30.4 cm in total length and 0.08 kg in

weight, and are considerably longer at hatching than other large varanid species

(Auffenberg 1981). Ciofi (2004) recorded that hatchling V. komodoensis average 42

cm in total length and 0.10 kg in weight. Hatchling V. salvadorii possibly reach up to

49 cm in total length and 0.55 kg in weight (King & Green 1999).

Komodo dragons can be found from sea level up to about 800 meters in

altitude, mainly in tropical dry and moist deciduous monsoon forests (Ciofi 2004).

Indeed, this species is generally distributed over entire islands within KNP and

western coastal on Flores but is rarely found above 500 meters (Auffenberg 1981).

All varanids are insectivores or carnivores. Unlike other varanids that rely on

smaller prey species, Komodo dragons are able to feed on larger vertebrate species,

such as the Timor Deer (Cervus timorensis), water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis), or

small wild boars (Sus scrofa). Adult Komodo dragons mostly rely on a sit-and-wait

hunting strategy to catch their prey (Auffenberg 1981; Green et al. 1990; King &

Green 1999; Pough et al. 2001). Hatchlings and juveniles, however, feed on a diverse

diet of insects, small lizards, snakes and birds, and use more active hunting strategies

than adults (Auffenberg 1981; Ciofi 1999; Mattison 1992).

Female Komodo dragons are known to breed when they reach a body weight

of around 20 kgs (King & Green 1999). Females begin nesting in August, as

determined by the presence of recent digging activity on the nest, or by repeated

observation of individuals in association with the nest during the nesting period. The

nesting period is from August through November, with egg deposition occurring in

September (Ciofi 1999; Jessop et al. 2004). Up to 38 hatchlings will emerge from the

nest at the beginning of the dry season (Auffenberg 1981; Jessop et al. 2006

11

unpublished data). This early life-stage is dominated by high mortality. Cannibalism

among Komodo dragons has been observed and was calculated to comprise 8% of

adult dragon scats (Auffenberg 1981). Cannibalism has also been recorded in other

Varanids, such as V. griseus, V. gouldii and V. gigantheus (King & Green 1999).

2.5 BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY OF JUVENILES

Generally, mortality in lizards is highest during the first phase of their life because

they are more vulnerable to predation (Mattison 1992). Poor maternal body condition

and stress can decrease the dispersal tendency of juveniles (Meylan et al. 2002).

Typically, natural populations show substantial variation, in locomotor performance

and body size, which is related to offspring survivorship (Clobert et al. 2000). Thus,

the growth and survivorship of offspring in reptiles is greatly affected by the animal’s

environment (i.e. Brockelman 1975; Gans & Pough 1982).

Incubation temperature is known to contribute greatly to the quality of

emerging hatchlings and affects their survivorship. Cold temperature during

incubation can negatively effect hatchlings and hot temperatures can positively effect

hatchlings (Elphick & Shine 1998; Phillips & Packard 1994; Qualls & Andrews

1998). This pattern is complex, however, as higher incubation temperature will result

in earlier hatching but produce lighter and smaller hatchlings than lower temperature,

which produce larger offspring that tend to survive better (King & Green 1999). Du

and Ji (2003) reported that moderate temperatures produced optimum size, locomotor

ability and success of hatchlings in soft-shelled turtle, while Ji and Du (2000)

reported a similar pattern in colubrid snakes. In a further study on lizards, the only

discernible influence on juvenile phenotypes was their rearing environment (Qualls &

Shine, 2000). Brockelman (1975) found that a wide variety of factors can affect

optimal body size and the ability to process energy effectively, and these were also

affected by the process of competition, which the offspring must face before and

during maturity.

12

Most juvenile reptiles leave the natal area in which they were born and move

into new habitats that are not already occupied or to avoid cannibalism by adults

(Pough et al. 2001). Greenwood (1984) noted that natal dispersal among juveniles is

also considered as a mechanism to avoid future inbreeding. Heatwole (1976) and

Sarno et al. (2003) described natal dispersal as being driven by the competition for

food resources and territories with adult.

Dispersal is a mechanism for survival and is a consequence of permanent

movement away from the natal site (Brown & Downhower 1988). Animals will

exploit available resources once they are out of their natal sites (Greenwood &

Swingland 1984). Pelletier et al. (2003) described how immature turtles immediately

swam towards the ocean and steadily traveled long distances once released into the

water. Hatchling of varanids tend to climb trees and spend most of their time in the

upper strata of trees once they emerged from the underground nests (Auffenberg

1981; Bohme et al. 2004; Ciofi 2004; King & Green 1999).

2.6 PREVIOUS ECOLOGICAL STUDIES ON THE KOMODO DRAGONS

The first scientific study on the Komodo dragon was conducted by Major Peter A.

Ouwen, director of the Zoological Museum in Buitenzorg (now Bogor), Java, in 1912

(Auffenberg & Auffenberg 2002). Ouwen described the species for the first time.

Later, Dunn (1927 & 1928) conducted the first significant observations and gave the

initial information on the habitat and distribution of Komodo dragons. Auffenberg

(1981) contributed to the first comprehensive study on the ecology and behavior of

this species. On the basis of 13 months of field observations, Auffenberg (1981)

provided the base line information on aspects of the Komodo dragon’s ecology and

behavior. The most recent field study on the Komodo dragon was conducted by

Jessop et al. (2006 unpublished data). Since 2002, they undertook a broad scale

investigation in the ecologyl and demography of the Komodo dragon, which has

provided important information and instigated a program to monitor population

trends. Although numerous field studies on the ecology of Komodo dragons have

been conducted, yet there are no detailed studies on the ecology on juvenile Komodo

dragons (Auffenberg & Auffenberg 2002). Walsh et al. (2002) studied growth in

13

juvenile Komodo dragons, whilst Lemm (2004) reported a relationship between

growth and nutritional treatment in captivity.

Field and captive studies on this creature, including work on growth,

chromosomes, physiology, genetics, ecology and social behaviour, parasites,

microbiology, conservation and management, have provided valuable information to

science and to ensure effective management of the species (Ciofi et al. 2002). The

long-term management and conservation objectives underpinning survival of this

species will be to maintain a genetically viable, self-sustaining, and free-living

Komodo dragon population. Information on reproduction and broad scale ecology of

this species is needed to support the management authority responsible to protect it,

and, as pointed out by Jessop et al. (2004), information on offspring survivorship are

vital for management planning to ensure the maintenance of this unique species in

the wild.

CHAPTER III

GENERAL METHODOLOGY

3.1 STUDY SITE

3.1.1 Biogeographical Setting

The study was conducted within the Komodo National Park, East Nusa Tenggara,

Indonesia, approximately 500 km east of Bali. The Park lies in the Lesser Sunda

region between Flores Island and Sumbawa Island (8°35’40” S and 119°25’51”E),

encompassing two main islands; Komodo and Rinca; three smaller islands, Padar, Gili

Motang and Nusa Kode, and numerous smaller adjacent islands. Komodo National

Park established by the government of Indonesia in 1980, enhancing its status from

Wildlife Reserve in 1970. Before declared as national park, this park was declared as a

Man and Biosphere Reserve by UNESCO in 1977. Further, in 1991 UNESCO

designated this park as a World Heritage Site. The park was initially established to

conserve the unique Komodo dragon (Varanus komodoensis) and was identified by

both WWF and Conservation International as a global conservation priority area. This

area is a transitional zone between the Australian and Asian fauna and flora,

containing elements of both (PHKA 2000).

The park encompasses the extant distribution of the endangered species of the

Komodo dragon and is approximately 1817 km2 in size encompassing both marine

(1214 km2) and terrestrial (603 km2) habitat (PHKA 2000). Komodo and Rinca are the

two largest island, followed by Padar, Gili Motang, and Nusa Kode. Most of the

islands are mountainuous (the highest peak is 800 m asl on Komodo Island),

15

combining a mostly grass-covere rugged topography, with variuous size of flat valleys

on the lower elevation (up to 50 m asl) (Dunn 1928; Monk et al. 1997).

Komodo Island is the largest island with the highest peak reaching 800 m asl

and is mostly covered by grassy savanna habitat (59.38%) (Table 3.1). Rinca the

second largest island is also predominantly covered by savanna habitat (55.02%) and

the highest peak is 712.5 m. Padar, the third largest island, has the highest percentage

cover of savanna habitat (93.48%) amongst other large islands. The other two main

islands, Gili Motang and Nusa Kode are predominantly covered by open deciduous

forest (79.96% and 84.33%, respectively). The other numerous small islands are

predominantly covered by savanna grass.

There are four existing settlement within the park (PHKA 2000), namely

Kampung Komodo (Komodo Island), Rinca, Kerora (Rinca Island), and Papagarang

(Papagarang Island). The settlements were established prior to 1980, before the area

declared as national park. Total population of these settlements was estimated

approximately 2300 people in 1999.

Table 3.1 Size of each island within KNP and it’s vegetation cover (in km2).

Type of vegetation cover (km2) KOMODO RINCA PADAR GILI

MOTANG NUSA KODE

Island’s area 311.59 204.78 14.09 9.48 7.33 Beach Line 211.22 203.64 36.16 16.11 15.66 Mangrove Forest 3.01 6.50 0.40 0.00 0.04 Savanna 185.02 112.66 13.17 1.37 1.15 Open Deciduous Forest 79.29 64.88 0.92 7.58 6.18 Closed Deciduous Forest 38.63 27.24 0.00 0.53 0.00 Quasi Cloud Forest 8.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Source: Jessop et al. 2006 unpublished data.

The climate is dry and is influenced by monsoons and trade winds. Rainfall

varies with the elevation, averaging less than 500 mm a year, with peak values

between December and February (Monk et al. 1997). Jessop et al. (2006 unpublished

16

data) classified the vegetation cover of each island, with modifications based on

classification by Auffenberg (1980) as shown in Table 3.1:

- Mangrove Forest (MF) is a community of mangroves, flooded daily by

tides, located along the shoreline. This habitat is dominated by

Rhizophora sp. and Lumnitzera.

- Savanna (SF) habitat covered more area of the largest islands of

Komodo, Rinca, and Padar and mostly dominated the hilly areas. This

habitat is dominated by the grass species Eulalia leschenaultiana.

Common trees found at the lower altitude are Borassus filiformis,

Zyzypus sp., and Tamarindus indica.

- Open Deciduous Forest (ODF) is a tropical monsoon forest which is

dominated by Tanarindus indicus, followed by Sterculia foetida. This

forest mostly exists across the big valleys (i.e. Loh Liang, Loh Sebita).

ODF is characterized by the more open canopy. Komodo dragons are

mostly found within this type of forest.

- Closed Deciduous Forest (CDF) is a tropical monsoon forest similar to

the ODF but with a denser canopy. CDF mostly exists in the deeper

parts of valleys and has higher elevation as compared to ODF.

- Quasi Cloud Forest (QCF) is only found above 500 m asl. This forest

has a moisture and cooler climate and is characterized by moss-covered

rock, bamboo groves, and rattan.

3.1.2 Selected Study Sites

The overall study was conducted across 10 sites on four islands, but the radio

telemetry study was only done in Loh Liang. The study sites are; Loh Sebita, Loh

Liang, Loh Lawi, and Loh Wau on the Komodo Island, Loh Buaya, Loh Baru, Loh

17

Tongker, and Loh Dasami on Rinca Island, Nusa Kode Island, and Gili Motang

Island. The description of each study site is as follows (Figure 3.1);

1) Loh Sebita (SB) (8º32’ N, 119 º32 E). This site is located on the east coast

of Komodo Island. The valley is characterized by a dense mangrove forest

stretching along the east coast of the valley. Towards the west, the

topography increases gently from sea level to about 735 m asl, the second

highest peak of the island. To the south uplifted rugged mountain stands

delimit the valley with smoother hills to the north. Vegetation in Loh Sebita

is dominated by the open deciduous forest type.

2) Loh Liang (LG) (8º34’ N, 119º29 E). This site is located at the north-east

part of the island, approximately 6 km south of Loh Sebita. Loh Liang is a

wide valley and is characterized by ODF. CDF exists along the northern to

western parts. This valley is delimited by smoother hills to the west and

north, which rise from sea level to the highest altitude of the island (800 m

asl to the west and 740 m asl to the northwest). To the East, this valley is

delimited by the rugged mountain stands. Vegetation in Loh Liang is

dominated by the open deciduous forest type, except in the northern deeper

valley, close dense forest exists.

3) Loh Lawi (LW) (8º36 N, 119º26 E). This site is located at the center of

Komodo Island, approximately 7 km southern of Loh Liang. This valley is

characterized by a long (approximate 6 km from the coast line) and narrow

area, delimited by rugged mountatins to the south, west, and north. To the

east, Loh Lawi is covered by a thick mangrove forest along the south coast.

Across the valley, open deciduous forest is predominantly.

4) Loh Wau (WA) (8º41’ N, 119º26’ E). This site is located on the south of

Komod Island, approximately 17 km from Loh Liang. The valley is

delimited by rugged mountainous topography to the west and smoother hills

to both the south and north. The close dense forest vegetation type is

predominantly in this very small valley.

18

5) Loh Buaya (BY) (8º39’ N, 119º43’ E). This site is located on the northern

part of Rinca Island. This valley has a smooth topography. Savanna is

predominant in the valley with a small open deciduous forest to the middle

of the valley.

6) Loh Baru (BR) (8º43’ N, 119º41’ E). This site is located to the east of the

island, approximately 9 km south of Loh Buaya. The local people occupied

this valley before the park was established. Later, the settlements moved to

the nearest villages; Kerora and Rinca village. In Loh Baru agricultural

crops predominantly in the valley, while to the deeper part of the valley

open deciduous forest exists. The Loh Baru site also includes Loh Baru

valley and Sok Niu valley, which is located 2 km north of Loh Baru.

Komodo dragons are known to move reoutinely between these two valleys.

To the west and south, Loh Baru is delimited by rugged mountains which

lead to the highest peak altitude of the island (712.5 m asl).

7) Loh Tongker (TK) (8º45’ N, 119º43’ E). This site is located to the

Southeastern of Rinca Island, approximately 12 km southern Loh Buaya.

This small and narrow valley is predominantly covered by open deciduous

forest. Loh Tongker is delimited by rugged and steep hills.

8) Loh Dasami (DS) (8º46’ N, 119º39’ E). This site is located on the southern

part of Rinca Island, approximately 15 km southern Loh Buaya, and is

characterized by a very closed dense forest. This small valley is delimited

by a rugged mountainous terrain to the west, north and east, and the highest

peak has an altitude of 712.5 m asl.

9) Nusa Kode (NK) (8º47’ N, 119º39’ E). This site is located as a small island

is southern Rinca Island, approximately 1.5 km across Loh Dasami valley.

Nusa Kode is a rugged mountainous island and has few small and narrow

valleys. The island is predominantly covered by open deciduous forest from

sea level to the peak (400 m asl). Savanna exists on the eastern side of the

island.

19

PADAR

BORNEO

0 5 10 KilometersN

KOMODO

RINCA

1

2

3

4

5

6

78

9 10

Figure 3.1 Study sites across the four islands of Komodo National Park. Numbers are dedicated to show the locations; 1. Loh Sebita; 2. Loh Liang; 3. Loh Lawi; 4. Loh Wau; 5. Loh Buaya; 6. Loh Baru; 7. Loh Tongker; 8. Loh Dasami; 9. Nusa Kode; 10. Gili Motang.

20

10) Gili Motang (GM) (8º48’ N, 119º47’E). This mountainous island is located

8 km southeast off Rinca Island, and 3 km southwest off Flores. This

isolated island is predominantly covered by open deciduous forest

dominated by Schoutenia ovata. Along the western to the southern part of

the island, savanna exists up to the peak (425 m asl) with small closed dense

forest on the peak. This island has received less attention as compared to the

other places within the park in regards to conservation management (Jessop

et al. 2006 in press).

3.2 FIELD TECHNIQUES

3.2.1 Juvenile Classification

Hatchlings among species in Varanids vary greatly in size (King & Green 1999). They

range from 18 grams in weight and approximately 17 cm in length in V. rosenbergi,

80 to 127 grams in weight and are about 30 cm in length in V. komodoensis.

Auffenberg (1981) found that average total length of Komodo dragon hatchling was

30.4 cm in SVL and weight 80.3 grams, and were considerably longer and larger than

the other large Varanid species.

The juvenile in Komodo dragon were estimated below maturity sexual age,

which is estimated 5 years (King & Green 1999). Lemm et al. (2002) defined those

juvenile Komodo dragons which less than three years had 38 – 40 cm in SVL and 0.75

– 1.30 kg in weight. Large Komodo dragons (>2.3 m in total length and >38 kg in

weight) are likely to be males, but younger and smaller animals are difficult to sex

(Jessop et al. 2006 unpublished data; Auffenberg 1981). Within this study, hatchling

was defeined as recently hatched animal (below one year), while juvenile was above

yearling animal. Animal thus met all of the measurements ranges as shown in table 3.2

below were classified either as hatchling or as juvenile.

21

Based on the studies by Auffenberg (1981) and Ciofi (2004) juvenile of

Varanus komodoensis is categorized as follow;

- Hatchling

Hatchling has a brown pattern with large, distinct orange spots on the

dorsal region. Yellow stripes present on it’s neck to the dorsal region.

Light yellowish spot pattern found on its four legs from the temporal

region to the front. Front legs are brown with white flecks disposed in

round, horizontal circles. The ventral part of the body is light yellow

with large dark spots. Tail has some light yellow strip circling.

- Juvenile

Juvenile pattern is gradually lost with age. They still show a lighter skin

color, but have a darker brown pattern. Small light yellow spot pattern

still exists on its four legs. Tail has lighter color (as compared to

hatchlings) strip circling.

Table 3.2. Range of measurement applied in classifying hatchling and juvenile of Varanus komodoensis within this study. Measurement data were obtained during the mark-recapture study (2003-2005).

Head Length (cm) SVL (cm) Weight (kg)

Hatchlings min 3.50 16.00 0.040 max 6.00 30.00 0.400 Juveniles min 6.50 35.00 0.600 max 13.50 80.10 10.000

3.2.2 Radiotelemetry

Radiotelemetry was used to determined habitat utilization by hatchling and the

juveniles. Samuel and Fuller (1996) confirmed that radiotelemetry is a good technique

in acquiring detailed and unique information on animal ecology, physiological

22

process, and the proximate causes of mortality. White and Garrot (1990) emphasized

the use of radiotelemetry to investigate habitat requirements, and demography. Similar

techniques have been demonstrated in studying spatial ecology of reptiles (i.e.

Fitzgerald et al. 2002; Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002; Webbs & Shine 1997).

This radiotelemetry study was conducted during two four-month periods in

2004 and 2005 in Loh Liang, Komodo island, where total of twelve Komodo dragon

were radiotracked. This study was conducted after the hatchling period, which is

usually between Februarys to March, when the transition of rainy to dry season, which

is usually between March to June. AVM transmitters (G3-1V), AVM receivers

(LA12-Q), and AF Antronics Yagi antennas were used in the study. The transmitters

were glued to the base of the tail of selected animals and are considered the best site

for placement. Attaching transmitters on juveniles by means a harness (Sastrawan &

Ciofi 2002) was not feasible.

Individual were located either by direct observation or triangulation techniques

(White & Garrot 1990). During tracking, certain parameters for habitat type or tree

visited by animals recorded as follows; habitat type, tree species, breast height

diameter, and tree height. To measure tree height Suunto clinometer was used.

Radiotracked animals captured using capture techniques as described below.

3.2.3 Mark-recapture Techniques

To provide information on annual movements of the hatchling and juvenile Komodo

dragons, this research employed the Capture Mark Release and Recapture (mark-

recapture) method (Krebs. 1999; Lancia et al. 1996; White & Clark 1996). Similar

methods had been employed by Clobert et al. (2000); Limpus and Walter (1980), and

Magnusson (1979) in their studies.

Mark-recapture studies were conducted every year during 2003-2005 across 10

study sites within the Komodo National Park (Figure 3.1). This research is part of the

long-term annual population and ecology study of the Komodo dragon within the

23

Komodo National Park, which is being conducted by the Center for Conservation and

Research of Endangered Species, Zoological Society of San Diego since 2002 (Jessop

et al. 2006 unpublished data). Hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons were captured

using several techniques; including nest enclosure traps (using metal sheeting fence),

baited (box and enclosed-pipe) traps, noose or by hand. Following capture, for safety

reasons, captured Komodo dragons were restrained either by electric tape or by rope

on its four legs and mouth taped. Capture and measuring processes were no more than

30 minutes. No anesthesia was used in handling the animals. To avoid injury to

animals, physical restraint in handling the animals within this study was followed

Friend et al. (1996).

Each captured animal was paint-marked using fluorescent paint as an external

marker and permanently marked with Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tag

(Trovan ID100a) before release at the point of capture within 30 minute of capture.

The PIT tags are encased in glass, encoded with 10 digits of alphanumeric code, 8 X 2

mm in size and were implanted using a plastic syringe and 12-g needle. This

technique is believed to be superior to most tagging methodologies for marking

reptiles (Nietfield et al. 1996). Every captured Komodo dragon was measured before

release. The following data were collected from each hatchling and juvenile and all

the measurements were taken in centimeter (cm) and taken to the nearest 0.5 cm,

while weight was in kilogram (kg).

- Head Length (HL),

- Head Width (HW),

- Snout-Vent Length (SVL),

- Ventral Total Body Length (VTL),

- Tail Length (TL),

- Tail Circumference (TC),

- Weight (W),

24

3.2.4 Baited Box-trapping Technique

This study employed baited-box-trapping (Jessop et al. 2006 in press) to capture

juvenile Komodo dragons. Baited box-trapping is effective to catch individual above

yearlings. Several previous researchers (Ciofi 2002; Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002; and

Ciofi & De Boer 2004) captured Komodo dragon for genetic, home range, and

distribution study employed similar trapping method (baited wood-box traps).

Each trap (300 X 60 X 60 cm) was constructed from alloy and aluminum metal

sheets with two open-ends with sliding doors. Only one door (front side) was kept

open to allow animals to enter the trap. The front door was connected by a metal wire

with bait at the other end of the wire. Each trap was baited with goat-meat, where two

or three pieces were placed on the floor to attract the juvenile to enter and approach

the hanging bait. The front door would close whenever the hanging bait was pulled.

Eight traps were placed along a line transect with an interval of 250 - 450

meters between traps depends on the terrain and covered the valleys as much as

possible. Traps were checked twice a day (morning and afternoon session) and moved

for every three days to allow for sufficient production of the volatile oils that were

released as the bait decomposed. Trap locations were marked by GPS (Garmin Etrex

Summit). Recaptured and resighted animal within the same trapping session in each

location were recorded and considered as Within Trip Recapture or Resight.

3.2.5 Baited Pipe-trapping Technique

To capture hatchling, this study was also employing enclosed PVC pipes 1m in length

and 0.1 m in diameter where the bottom side is closed. To attract the hatchling, this

trap was baited using meat. Similar techniques were implemented with other reptiles

species as reported by Mathies et al. (2001) and Schemnitz (1996). Each pipe-trap was

placed on a tree in 100 m line transects at a 5 m distance and approximately 1–2 meter

above ground to attract hatchling and avoid disturbance by bigger Komodo dragon.

Pipe-traps were placed near the active nests to anticipate escaping hatchlings and near

25

ranger station of station where occasionally hatchlings were found every hatchling

seasons.

3.2.6 Noosing and Hand-capture Technique

The noosing technique has been demonstrated by many authors, such as Olsson and

Madson (2001) and Wapstra and Swain (2001). The noosing technique required two

persons and relies on a systematic search. Searching was conducted opportunistically

by foot and covered almost entire the valley. Noosing technique employed one 2

meters of woody “Y” stick with lasso.

3.2.7 Nest Enclosure Traps

Female Komodo dragons are known to begin nesting in August, (Jessop et al. 2004),

and lay eggs in September (Ciofi 1999). Up to 40 hatchlings will emerge from the nest

at the beginning of dry season (February to March) and weigh between 60–130 grams

and are about 20-60 cm in length (Auffenberg 1981; Ciofi 1999; King & Green 1999).

This study also employed fenced-nest technique to capture emerged-hatchlings

from nest. This technique only possible to employed in Loh Liang, Loh Sebita

(Komodo Island) and Loh Buaya (Rinca Island) where a number of active nests were

monitored from survey in the previous year. Hatchlings were captured by hand within

fenced nests. Metal sheeting with height of approximate 80cm from ground was used

to circling the nest. Size of the area in which covered by the fence varying depending

on the size of the nest. To avoid hatchlings escaping by digging the soil, 10 cm of the

lower part of the metal sheeting was pushed into the ground. Each fence was covered

by fishing nets to avoid predation by birds. Fenced-nests were monitored daily from

early February to the end of March which is considered hatchling season. Hatchlings

were captured by hand immediately on emergence and measured and PIT tagged

before released.

26

3.3 DATA ANALYSIS

The spatial ecology of juvenile Komodo dragons was assessed based on following

spatial parameters; spatial movement, activity areas, habitat use, daily activity

patterns, and annual movement. These parameters were used by Fitzgerald, et al.

(2002); Ibrahim (2002), Piepgrass and Lang (2000), and Olupot et al. (2001), in

assessing spatial ecology in reptiles. Detailed descriptions of each analysis will be

included in the relevant chapters.

3.3.1 Spatial Movement and Activity Area

Spatial movement of each size class was determined using data obtained from the

radiotelemetry study of hatchlings and juveniles. Spatial movement is defined as a

straight line moved between two consecutive points (Samuel & Fuler 1996). This

measurement will provide a minimum distance that an animal could have traveled to

reach the new location. This technique was also employed by Ibrahim (2002) and

Fitzgerald et al. (2002). Spatial movement data will be calculated by means of a

computer program ESRI ArcView 3.2 (ESRI 1999) with X Tools and Animal

Movement program (Hooge et al. 1999).

In this study, activity area is defined as a particular area covered by an animal

in it’s normal activities (Ibrahim 2002). Activity area was calculated using data

obtained by means of radiotelemetry (Fitzgerald et al. 2002; and Sastrawan & Ciofi

2002). This study employed methods of Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP) and

Adaptive Kernell as the most familiar methods in analyzing activity areas (Fitzgerald

et al. 2002; Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). This analysis employed computer programs of

ESRI ArcView 3.2 (ESRI 1999) with X Tools and Animal Movement program

(Hooge et al. 1999). Use of GIS methods will provide more accurate relocation

mapping and more proportional calculation of activity areas (Kernohan et al. 1998).

27

3.3.2 Habitat Use

To investigate habitat utilization, following parameters used by hatchlings and

juveniles were measured; shelter sites and tree preferences. The data were obtained

from radiotelemetry study. Locations noted for each radiotracked animal where they

occurred were classified as to the habitat type and were converted into the percentages

of time each animal spent in a particular habitat type (White & Garrot 1990). To

defined the type of habitat in which animal used, habitat type at the adjacent area

where animal located was determined subjectively (Jessop et al. 2004)

3.3.3 Long Distance Movement

Long distance movement in Komodo dragons was analyzed using data obtained from

the Mark-Recapture study (Husak & Fox 2003; Lancia et al. 1996; & Nietfield et al.

1996). This long distance movement is used to measure the ability of hatchling and

juvenile Komodo dragons to move to adjacent valleys or adjacent island. Long

distance movement ability was measured as a straight distance moved between two or

more consecutive points (Samuel & Fuler 1996) between capture locations from

subsequent days and years and were calculated by means of computer program of

ESRI ArcView 3.2 (ESRI 1999) with X Tools and Animal Movement program

(Hooge et al. 1999).

CHAPTER IV

COMPARISON OF DAILY MOVEMENT PATTERNS, ACTIVITY AREAS, AND HABITAT USE BETWEEN HATCHLING AND JUVENILE

KOMODO DRAGONS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

An important aspect of wildlife management programs is the ability to understand

spatial requirements and habitat use by animals (Brill et al. 1995; Fitzgerald et al.

2002; Phillips 1995; Piepgras & Lang 2000). The spatial requirement and habitat use

are especially important for Komodo dragons inhabiting the Komodo National Park

(Burghardt et al. 2002; Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). Knowledge of inter and intra-island

movements is, in fact, essential to understand meta-population dynamics. Several

studies have been conducted to describe spatial activities, movement patterns and

associated behavior of varanid lizards (e.g. Ibrahim 2002; Thompson 1992; Thompson

et al. 2002). In addition, such studies have been conducted to assess interactions

between spatial ecology and aspects of their physiology, reproduction and

demography (i.e. Christian et al. 1995; Christian & Weavers 1994; James 1996;

Phillips 1995). Previous study on Komodo dragons has focused on a preliminary

description of movements and activity area size of Komodo dragons using footprint

locations and sighting records (Auffenberg 1981). More recently, Sastrawan and Ciofi

(2002) detailed the activity areas and movements on five adult Komodo dragons that

varies in size between SVL 116 – 154 cm).

On varanids, and in squamates generally, there is a distinct lack of knowledge

pertaining to the aspects of spatial ecology of early life-history stages, including

juveniles, and especially the post-natal or hatchling stage. For many animals, the

period immediately following the departure from the natal area can be associated with

29

a period of pronounced dispersal prior to establishment of a more fixed usage of

space and eventually establishment of a home range.

To date, no study has provided quantitative data on hatchling and juvenile

Komodo dragon movement patterns (Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). To address this

knowledge gap, a radio-telemetry study to estimate home range size and describe

activity patterns of hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragon was conducted. This study

was aimed at addressing three aspects of spatial ecology:

(1) Determine dispersal patterns of hatchling following emergence from their

nest.

(2) Determine movement patterns and activity area size of hatchling and

juvenile Komodo dragons,

(3) Determine patterns of habitat use by hatchling and juvenile Komodo

dragons.

These three aspects of spatial ecology represent important facets of the

ecology of Komodo dragons as they could provide insight into ontogenic transitions

in spatial ecology. In particular, the dispersal phase is one of the key events

associated with gene flow within or among populations and responsible for

maintaining many population processes.

4.2 MATERIALS AND METHODS

4.2.1 Study Site

The study was conducted in the Loh Liang valley on Komodo Island, (8°33’40” S and

119°29’51”E) in Komodo National Park (KNP), East Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia.

General descriptions on vegetation cover of KNP are described elsewhere (e.g.

Auffenberg 1981; Jessop et al. 2006 unpublished data; Monk et al. 1999). Komodo

Island is a rugged, mountainous island covered predominantly by savannah.

Deciduous monsoon forest dominated by Tamarind tree (Tamarindus indica).are

found in coastal valleys, while closed evergreen forest persists on hills above 500 m.

30

4.2.2 Studied Animals

Five hatchling Komodo dragons with a mean snout to vent length (SVL) of 20.16 ±

0.85 cm (SEM) (range 18.25 – 22.6 cm) and body mass of 0.11 ± 0.01 kg (range

0.095 – 0.135 kg) were captured following emergence from their nest. Hatchlings

were captured by hand from fenced nests or using PVC pipe traps (10 cm diameter

and 100 cm in length). Seven juvenile Komodo dragons (mean ± SEM of SVL 55.81

± 2.97 cm and body mass of 3.03 ± 0.56, range 1.4 – 5.7 kg) were captured by hand

or in goat meat baited box traps. Trapping methods are described in Chapter III in this

thesis. Measurements of individual animals are summarized in Table 4.1.

4.2.3 Radiotelemetry Technique

This study was conducted between March 2004 and June 2005. In 2004, two

hatchlings and four juveniles were radio-tracked, and in 2005 three hatchlings and

four juveniles were followed. Telemetry equipment consisted of activity-sensitive

AVM G31V transmitters (AVM Instruments Co. Ltd.), a AVM LA12Q receiver, and

a three-element yagi antenna. Each transmitter was attached to the dragon’s base of

tail using duct tapes. In 2004, 8 transmitters were attached to four hatchlings and four

juveniles and in 2005, 6 transmitters were attached to three offspring and three

juveniles.

After the transmitters were attached, hatchlings and juveniles were

immediately released at the point of captured. Each animal was radio-tracked for 7 –

56 days and comprised a total of 7 – 66 observation events. Each animal was recorded

up to four times a day based on latitude and longitude measurement using a Garmin

GPS. To increase independency of the data for each radio-tracked animal, individual

daily observations were conducted in four sessions; separated by a minimum daily

time interval of 2-3 hours (average). Daily observations were made from 0600 to

1800 hrs across 4 time periods of 06 – 09, 09 – 12, 12 – 15, and 15 - 18 hrs.

Movement and activity area data were analyzed using 11 - 18 (mean ± SEM: 14.9 ±

0.71) temporally independent fixes over this period.

31

Table 4.1 Summary of SVL, weight and duration of radio-tracking for hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons.

Observations

# PIT tag ID Year SVL (cm) Weight (kg) Positional

Hatchling 64E4218 2004 22.6 0.14 50 1264CDC09 2004 21.3 0.11 26 6*63DFB2A 2005 18.25 0.1 66 1164D4C0E 2005 18.3 0.09 51 1863C1383 2005 20.35 0.11 67 14Mean ± SEM 20.16 ± 0.85 0.11 ± 0.01 52.00 ± 16.60 12.2 ± 1.96Juveniles 64CF2AO 2004 61.85 3.5 18 17639E332 2004 68.35 5.7 39 17643761C 2004 58.05 3.5 18 1564E2E95 2004 55.45 3.4 14 1463DE6F1 2005 51.15 1.65 57 1663D9C4B 2005 44.45 1.4 44 1563DB3B7 2005 51.35 2.05 7 6*Mean ± SEM 55.81 ± 2.97 3.03 ± 0.56 28.14 ± 7.78 14.29 ± 1.44

* Excluded from movement and activity area calculation due to lack of fixes.

Fixes were collected by either direct observation or by triangulation. To

calculate triangulation, bearings were taken using a compass from two or more

receiving points (Samuel & Fuller 1996; Fitzgerald et al. 2002; Sastrawan & Ciofi

2002). The point at which the bearings crossed denoted the animal’s position.

Typically, bearings were obtained within 3 minutes. Receiving points were located

between 30-50 meters from the estimated lizard’s position. Level of triangulation

reliability within this study was 83.2 ± 3.05 %. Fixes were recorded using a Global

Positioning System (GPS; Garmin Etrex), then recorded into an Excel spreadsheet

and visualized on to digital maps using ArcView 3.2 (ESRI).

4.2.4 Habitat Assessment

To quantify and compare the habitat use of juvenile and hatchling lizards, habitat and

shelter site parameters concurrently with positional data of lizards were collected

32

during radio-tracking (Olupot & Waser 2001). Four parameters were measured and

defined as follows;

1) Habitat strata

Use of either terrestrial or arboreal strata

2) Habitat type

The presence of lizards in one of three key habitat types: open deciduous forest,

closed dense forest, and savannah grassland. These habitat types were readily

distinguished by canopy closure and floristic composition.

3) Shelter site

Included a description of resting or sleeping location based on the use of

vegetation (identified to species), or substrate type. Further, with relation to

vegetation, particularly trees, the tree diameter at breast-height (Dbh) and tree

height were also recorded. Tree Dbh was obtained by measuring the tree

circumference at breast-height and calculated using the formula circumference =

2πr (where: π = 3.14, 2r = diameter). Tree height and Komodo dragons’ position

above ground was calculated using a Suunto Clinometer PM5 (Suunto, Finland).

4) Elevation

Ground elevation at which a lizard was located was recorded alongside every fix

locations.

4.2.5 Data Analysis

A) Movement and Orientation

Directionality and tortuousity were analyzed to describe the pattern of path movement

(linearity) of Komodo dragons (Nams & Bourgeois 2004). Directionality was

analyzed by measuring the turning angle of movement on each point in a compass

direction (Claussen et al. 1997). The turning angles indicate the movement angles

between two consecutive points (Higham et al. 2001). Tortuosity was measured by

33

analyzing the fractal dimension (D) (Milne 1991), whose values range between 1-2:

D = 1 the animals’ path of movement is straight; D = 2 (i.e. maximum) the animals

path of movement is so tortuous as to completely cover a plane (Nams & Bourgeois

2004). To describe site fidelity, Site Fidelity Test was ran with 1000 replications to

obtain the r2 value, the lower r2 value, the highest fidelity of the animal (Hooge &

Eichenlaub 1997). Directionality and Site Fidelity were computed using the Animal

Movement Program extension (Hooge et al. 1999) and X Tools of ArcVIew 3.2

(ESRI) while Fractal dimensions were computed using the computer program Fractal

(Nams 2004a).

Komodo dragon movement distances were calculated as the distance moved

between two consecutive points (Samuel & Fuler 1996). This measurement estimates

the minimum distance that an animal would have traveled between two locations.

Mean daily movement distance was obtained by dividing the total distance of

recorded movements by the total number of radio-tracking days. A similar method

has been applied elsewhere in investigating reptile movements. (e.g. Ibrahim 2002;

Fitzgerald et al. 2002; Whitaker & Shine 2003; Phillips 1995). These calculations

were made using the Animal Movement Program (Hooge et al., 1999) and X Tools

extension of ArcView 3.2 (ESRI).

B) Activity area

In this study, the activity area was defined as the area occupied by an animal during

the study period. Core area was defined as the area in which studied animal mostly

visited or occupied during the study period. Activity areas were calculated using three

methods: the 100% Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), 95% and 50% Adaptive

Kernell Analysis (AK). MCP is the most common and simplest method used to

estimate the activity area of animals by calculating the smallest possible convex

polygon around the outermost animal locations (Kenward 1993; Samuel & Fuller

1996). Sastrawan & Ciofi (2002) applied MCP to measure adult Komodo dragon’s

activity area size. However, MCP only uses a proportion of location data; it is

sensitive to outliers and incorporates large areas that may have never been used by the

animal (Melville & Swain 1999; White & Garrot 1990). The 95% AK is also suitable

34

to use in estimating activity areas of animals by calculating the distribution of 95% of

the total fixes (Kernohan et al. 1996) by smoothing the location data (Kernohan et al.

1998). The 95% AK is believed to be a very effective method for estimating activity

area (Katajisto & Moilanen 2005 in press; Pavey et al. 2003). The 50% AK method

was used to determine core areas within the activity area of hatchling and juvenile

Komodo dragons. The 50% AK has been widely used to determine the core area or

habitat use in other reptiles (Whitaker & Shine 2003; Fitzgerald et al. 2002; Kernohan

et al. 1998; Piepgras & Lang 2000; Smith et al. 1999). Overlaps were estimated by

calculating the size of overlapped activity areas between individuals and compared to

the total of activity area (Figure 4.3).

To increase the quality of data, radio-tracking animals with less than 10 fixes

(data for hatchling 64CDC09 and juvenile 6eDB3B7) were excluded. Daily

movements and activity areas were analyzed based on data subset of four hatchlings

and six juveniles with minimum 11 fixes. Activity area estimations were calculated

using the Animal Movement Program (Hooge et al. 1999) and X Tools extension of

ArcVIew 3.2 (ESRI). A similar technique for studying spatial ecology was applied by

King and Gurnell (2004) and Piepgras and Lang (2000).

C) Habitat Use

Patterns in habitat use were analyzed by comparing the frequency of particular habitat

types (arboreal and terrestrial), types of vegetation (closed forest, open forest, and

savanna), elevation of location, shelter sites, tree species, tree DBH and tree height,

and animal position above ground. To determine if Komodo dragons were using their

habitat in a non-random fashion, their observed use of habitat was compared with a

random selection of locations calculated using the program Ecological Methodology

V. 6.1 (Krebs 1999; 2002) to generate 100 random latitude and longitudes positions

within Loh Liang. These random locations were then assigned their habitat type and

elevation drawn from digital topographic maps.

35

D) Statistical Analysis

Prior to analysis all data was log transformed (Sutherland et al. 2000) to meet the

assumptions of parametric tests (Zar 1999). Log transformed data that did not meet

the assumptions was statistically analyzed using a nonparametric statistical

procedures. All data is presented in tables and graphs of the means and standard error

of the mean (SEM) of back-log transformed data. T-test, Chi square test and Mann-

Whitney U tests were used to determine the in habitat types used (King & Gurnell

2005; Rheaney & Whiting 2003). Linear regression test and ANOVA was used to test

differences in time spent on a tree between hatchlings and juveniles. For all statistical

tests, significance was inferred at P < 0.05.

4.3 RESULTS

4.3.1 Patterns of movement

During the study, hatchlings dispersed in a predominantly linear fashion with little

movement over previously occupied areas (Figure 4.1). In contrast, juvenile dragons

exhibited more tortuous movement paths reflecting increased movement over the

same area (i.e. use of an activity area) (Figure 4.2). Fractal analysis indicated that the

linearity of the movement paths undertaken by hatchlings D = 1.11 ± 0.01 was

significantly more directed (i.e. strait) than that of juvenile dragons (D = 1.39 ± 0.05;

Mann-Whitney U test; Z = -2.558, p = 0.01). The degree of site fidelity in hatchlings

(r2 = 729502.69) was significantly lower than that in juveniles (r2 = 2729220.96; T-

test t1,9=-39.123.01, p < 0.001).

Based on two estimates of daily movements, hatchlings were significantly less

active than juvenile dragons and on average moved 32.62 ± 12.67 m/day compared to

129.137 ± 41.71 m/day (T-test t1,9 = -3.014, p = 0.015) (Table 4.2). Consistent with

this the longest daily movements recorded by hatchling (163.99 ± 22.96 m/day) were

significantly less than that of juvenile dragons (509.87 ± 73.32) (T-test t1,9 = -5.241, p

< 0.001). Daily activity of hatchlings was significantly less than juvenile dragons

36

(Chi square test; x2 = 51.68, p < 0.001) based on an activity index calculated using the

relative proportion of movement fixes compared to the proportion of stationary fixes.

Tabel 4.2 Detail of results on radio-tracking study of hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons.

PIT tag Maximum

Overnight Total

Move (m) Daily

Move (m) Longest

move (m) 100%

MCP (ha) 95%

AK (ha) 50%

AK (ha) Hatchlings

64E4218 4 983.4 70.24 191.19 4.83 20.12 4.74

63DFB2A 15 571.61 15.04 195.08 1.72 13.06 3.61

64D4C0E 4 692.91 23.1 96.63 1.96 13.48 2.51

63C1383 15 949.38 22.08 173.08 3.59 12.143 2.71

Mean 9.5 ± 3.17 799.32 ±

99.82 32.61 ±

12.67 163.99 ±

22.96 3.02 ± 0.73 14.7 ±

1.83 3.39 ±

0.51 Juveniles

64CF2AO 6 2286.24 326.61 397.87 12.53 33.23 10.48

639E332 2 6308.96 143.38 791.59 32.37 16.34 2.33

643761C 2 350.72 43.84 334.35 4.02 5.49 0.56

64E2E95 5 2879.15 89.97 427.54 17.42 32.55 2.45

63DE6F1 2 5556.63 99.23 672.06 61.77 30.52 4.3

63D9C4B 2 3445.54 71.78 435.83 17.76 21.57 2.65

Mean 3.17

± 0.75 3471.21

± 892.46 129.14

± 41.71 509.87

± 73.32 24.31

± 8.38 23.28

± 4.49 3.79

± 1.42 OVERALL

Mean 5.7 ± 5.1 2402.45

± 676.16 90.53

± 92.18 371.52

± 71.08 15.8

± 5.97 19.85

± 3.02 3.63

± 0.84

Table 4.3 Percentages of overlap on activity area in juveniles

VK ID MCP (ha) OVERLAP (ha) OVERLAP (% ) OVERLAPPED VK ID

64CF2A0 12.53 2.55 20.34 639E332

639E332 32.37 2.55 7.88 64CF2A0

643761C 4.02 3.66 91.01 64E2E95

64E2E95 17.42 6.65 38.20 643761C / 63DE6F1

63DE6F1 61.77 2.99 4.84 63DE6F1

37

0 50 100 MetersN

8ー 33'15"

8ー 33'10"

8ー 33'05"

119ー 29'45" 119ー 29'50" 119ー 29'55" 119ー 30'00"

#a

#b

0 100 200 MetersN

#c

#d

8ー 34'20"

8ー 34'15"

8ー 34'10"

8ー 34'05"

8ー 34'00"

8ー 33'55"

119ー 29'50" 119ー 29'55" 119ー 30'00" 119ー 30'05"

Latit

ude

(Sou

th)

Longitude (East)

Figure 4.1 Movement patterns of hatchling Komodo dragons. Arrows indicate starting point and general direction of movements.

Letter refers to hatchlings ID as follow; a) 64D4C0E, b) 63DFB2A, c) 64E4218, d) 63C1383.

38

0 100 200 MetersN

8ー 33'40"

8ー 33'35"

8ー 33'30"

8ー 33'25"

8ー 33'20"

8ー 33'15"

8ー 33'10"

119ー 30'20" 119ー 30'25" 119ー 30'30" 119ー 30'35" 119ー 30'40" 119ー 30'45"

0 100 200 MetersN

8ー 34'20"

8ー 34'15"

8ー 34'10"

8ー 34'05"

8ー 34'00"

8ー 33'55"

8ー 33'50"

119ー 29'40" 119ー 29'45" 119ー 29'50" 119ー 29'55" 119ー 30'00"

a b

Latit

ude

(Sou

th)

Longitude (East)

Figure 4.2 Movement patterns of two juvenile Komodo dragons (a: 639E332, b: 63D9C4B). Circles indicate shelter sites.

39

0 500 1000 MetersN

8ー 34'30"

8ー34'15"

8ー34'00"

8ー33'45"

8ー33'30"

8ー33'15"

8ー33'00"

8ー32'45"

119ー 29'30" 119ー 29'45" 119ー 30'00" 119ー 30'15" 119ー 30'30" 119ー 30'45"

#2

#1

#3

#4#5

#6

0 500 1000 MetersN

8ー 34'30"

8ー 34'15"

8ー 34'00"

8ー 33'45"

8ー 33'30"

8ー 33'15"

8ー 33'00"

8ー 32'45"

119ー 29'30" 119ー 29'45" 119ー 30'00" 119ー 30'15" 119ー 30'30" 119ー 30'45"

#1

#2

#4#5

#6

#

#3

#5

Figure 4.3 Activity area overlaps of six juvenile Komodo dragons as calculated by MCP (a) and 50% Adaptive Kernell (b). Numbers

refer to juvenile ID as follow: 1) 64CF2A0, 2) 639E332, 3) 64E761C, 4) 64E2E95, 5) 63DE6F1, 6) 63D9C4.

bLongitude (East)

b

a

a La

titud

e (S

outh

)

40

4.3.2 Size of Activity Areas

Activity areas of hatchlings and juveniles ranged between 1.72 – 4.83 ha and 4.02 –

61.77 ha for MCP; 12.14 - 20.12 ha and 5.49 – 33.23 for 95% AK; and 2.51 – 4.74

and 0.56 – 10.48 ha for 50% AK (Table 4.2, Figure 4.3). Hatchlings used significantly

smaller activity areas, of approximately 8 times less than juveniles for the 100% MCP

(T-test; t1,9 = -3.66, p = 0.001). However, there was no significant differences in 95%

AK (T-test t = -0.02, p = 0.18) and neither for 50% AK (T-test t1,9 1,9 = 0.396, p =

0.70). In five of six cases, the activity areas of juvenile dragons overlapped with one

(n = 4) or two (n = 1) conspecifics. The extent of overlap of activity areas ranged from

4.84 – 91.01 % or 2.55-6.65 ha (Table 4.4; Figure 4.3.a).

4.3.3 Patterns in Habitat Use

There was a significant difference between hatchlings and juveniles in several

measured parameters of habitat use. All radio-tracked hatchlings were almost entirely

arboreal (97.7%) compared to juveniles which more terrestrial (71.0%) (Chi square

test; x2 = 239.22, p < 0.001) during the course of observation (Figure 4.4a). Hatchlings

were remained on the same tree ranged from 4 to 15 days (mean 9.5 ± 3.17 days)

before moving to the next tree (Table 4.2). Hatchlings were rarely observed on the

ground, except during long distance movements between trees (> 30 m). There was an

occasional arboreal movement whereby hatchlings were able to move between trees

with overlapping canopy. In contrast, juveniles were significantly more terrestrial than

arboreal (Figure 4.4a). However, they were still often encountered in trees. Juveniles,

on the other hand, spent significantly less time on trees ranged from 2 to 6 days,

(mean 3.17 ± 0.75; T-test t1,8=2.257, p = 0.038) (Table 4.2). However, body size,

rather than age class was a better indicator of habitat use, as there was a highly

significant negative linear relationship between body size and amount of arboreal

activity (% Arboreal activity = -2.070 * SVL + 139.244, r = 0.965; ANOVA,

F1,9 = 108.423, p < 0.001) (Figure 4.4b).

41

a

Habitat Strata

Terrestrial Arboreal

Freq

uenc

y of

Use

(%)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Hatchling Juvenile

6

130

255

53

SVL cm

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Freq

uenc

y of

arb

orea

l act

ivity

(%)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120b

Habitat Type

Closed Forest Open Forest Savanna

Freq

uenc

y of

Use

(%)

0

20

40

60

80

Hatchling Juvenile

65

42 73

716

c

Figure 4.4 Differences in terrestrial and arboreal habitat use by hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons (a). Figure b depicts the relationship between body size (SVL) and arboreal activity in the radio tracked Komodo dragons.

42

With respect to habitat preferences, both hatchlings (Chi square test; x2 =

45.86, p < 0.001) and juveniles (Chi square test; x2 = 85.04, p < 0.001) were observed

significantly more frequently in open deciduous forest, compared to either closed

dense forest or savannah (Figure 4.4.c). There was no significant difference in the

frequency of observed habitat preference use between hatchlings and juveniles (Chi

square test; x2 = 1.891, p = 0.389; Figure 4.4c.). For both hatchlings (Chi square test;

x2 2 = 14.206, p < 0.001) and juveniles (Chi square test; x = 16.205, p < 0.001) their

habitat use preference was significantly different to that calculated for habitat types

from randomly generated locations across the study sites.

With respect to elevation there was a significant preference for hatchlings to be

located in the lowest elevation class (54.54 % for < 25 m above sea level; Chi square

test; x2 = 20.98, p < 0.001) (Table 4.4). Juvenile dragons (Chi square test; x2 = 9.26, p

= 0.002) exhibited a significant preference for elevations between 25 – 50 m (36.17

%) above sea level (Table 4.4). These elevation preferences for hatchlings and

juvenile dragons were significantly different (Chi square test; x2 = 25.127, p < 0.001).

Further, both hatchlings (Chi square test; x2 = 53.707, p < 0.001) and Juveniles (Chi

square test; x2 = 29.736, p < 0.001) elevations preferences differed significantly from

random selection of elevations within their environment.

4.3.4 Shelter Sites Selection

Shelter sites were defined as those places used by hatchlings and juveniles for resting

(also as sites between movements - for juveniles only) or as overnight refuges.

Hatchlings used trees exclusively for shelter. They significantly used live (84.71 %)

over dead trees (15.29 %; Chi square test; x2 = 122.859, p < 0.001) (Table 4.4).

Amongst live trees (15 species recorded), there was a significant tendency for

hatchlings to occupy Tamarindus indica tree (45.37 %) (Chi square test; x2 = 122.86,

p < 0.001) (Table 4.5). Juveniles used predominantly crevices under or among rocks

(51.77 %) as shelters. These shelters could be a part of a larger forested area with

significant granitic exfoliation forming rocky fields or a clump of rocks associated

43

with trees. Trees (9 species recorded) were occasionally used by juveniles as locations

for resting or basking (Table 4.5).

With respect to arboreal habitat use, hatchlings used significantly thinner (tree

DBH; T-test t = -2.634, p = 0.025) and shorter trees (T-test t1,10 1,4 = -2.915, p = 0.043)

than juveniles (Table 4.6). However, there was no significant difference in tree

elevation use between hatchlings and juveniles (T-test t1,4 = 2.23, p = 0.089).

Table 4.4 Frequency of elevation preferred by hatchlings and juveniles (%)

Elevation (m) Hatchlings Juveniles

< 25 54.54 24.47

25 – 50 40.00 36.17

50 – 75 5.45 14.89

75 – 100 0.00 21.28

>100 0.00 3.19

Table 4.5 Major tree preferences used by hatchlings and juveniles (%).

Tree species Hatchlings Juveniles

Tamarindus indica 44.61 70.93

Corypha utan 14.21 0.00

Saruga sp 4.73 1.67

Schleichera oleiosa 7.20 2.40

Dead/log 13.19 0.00

Other 16.06 25.00

Table 4.6 Total number of tree species, and mean values of tree parameters used, and animal position on tree.

Parameters Hatchling Juvenile

# Tree sp. 15 9

Tree DBH (cm) 43.22 ± 7.14 66.58 ± 5.42

Tree height (m) 12.51 ± 0.72 16.14 ± 1.01

VK height (m) 7.89 ± 0.85 5.47 ± 0.67

44

4.4 DISCUSSION

Hatchlings displayed several key differences with respect to their spatial ecology

compared to juvenile Komodo dragons. In particular, their post-natal movements were

essentially linear compared to those of juveniles that appeared to have already

developed a defined area of established activity. This predominantly linear movement

could possibly underpin a deliberate type of dispersal behavior that enables hatchlings

to move as far as possible away from their nesting sites relative to the actual distance

traveled. Based on the limited number of hatchlings radio-tracked, there was no

indication that hatchlings were heading towards a consistent bearing similar to natal

dispersal in other reptiles including hatchling Green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas) that

display well-oriented post-emergence dispersal (Salmon & Wyneken 1987). Rather,

the movement of hatchling dragons was similar to patterns of natal dispersal

demonstrated by hatchlings of Blanding turtles (Emydoidea blandigii) (McNeil et al.

2000) and the Australian freshwater crocodile (Crocodylus johnstoni) (Tucker et al.

1997).

Pough et al. (2001) described that lizard hatchlings moved out of their natal

areas to find a suitable patches of habitat which are not already occupied by larger

conspecifics or to avoid cannibalism by adults. As reported by Sarno et al. (2003),

dispersal in juvenile Guanacos occurred in order to avoid conflict with adults.

Cannibalism among Komodo dragons has been observed (Auffenberg 1981) as well as

in other Varanids such as V. griseus, V. gouldii and V. gigantheus (King & Green

1999). This early life-stage is dominated by high mortality because hatchlings are

particularly vulnerable to predation (Mattison 1992).

Dispersal in threatened species is important for populations to enlarge their

distribution and to maintain genetic variability as this is a critical component of

population dynamics (Lebreton et al. 2003; Sutherland 2000; Trakhtenbrot et al.

2005). In reptiles, dispersal in hatchlings is correlated with rates of adult presence

(Pough et al. 2001). Sutherland et al. (2000) reported that natal dispersal was

positively correlated with body mass, where larger animals have larger dispersal

distance.

45

From the data, hatchlings displayed a consistent pattern in habitat use. They

were arboreal during their first stage of life. Following emergence, hatchlings

immediately climbed the nearest tree (Auffenberg 1981). Their arboreal nature is

presumably a strategy for avoiding their terrestrial based larger conspecifics and

possibly aerial predators such as birds of prey (Auffenberg 1981; King & Green

1999). Thompson (1993) reported similar behaviour in V. caudolineatus. Hatchlings

of Blanding’s turtles hide in vegetation soon after emergence (McNeil et al. 2000).

Arboreal habits could provide advantages for hatchlings to test differences in escaping

tactics from predators (Higham et al. 2001). Arboreal habitat also provides resources

such as food and shelter (Reaney & Whiting 2003). Hatchlings were observed to feed

on Gecko gecko (PIT tag ID 64E4218 and 64D4C0E) which are commonly on trees in

Komodo island (Auffenberg 1980). Unfortunately, this study could not determine how

long the hatchlings spent their life as being arboreal. Observations from KNP rangers

suggest that hatchlings could lead an arboreal life for up to five years.

Even thought juveniles were terrestrial, three out of six juveniles (SVL < 60

cm) were found occasionally on trees for overnight shelter. Auffenberg (1981)

reported a similar arboreal characteristic on juveniles less than 70 cm in SVL.

Arboreality in juvenile of other terrestrial Varanid species were also reported in V.

doreamus (Bohme et al. 2004) and V. salvator (Gaulke & Horn 2004).

The rate and distance moved by hatchlings within their natal valley was

relatively slow and small compared to juveniles, suggesting that this early dispersal

phase was not particularly important for the overall pattern of dispersal from natal

sites. Movements in hatchlings were shorter than in juveniles. Mean juvenile daily

movement was four times larger than that of hatchlings, but six times smaller than

adults (Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). As reported by Perry and Garland (2001), terrestrial

lizards have larger movement and activity area size than arboreal individuals. In

contrast, Pough et al (2001) noted that arboreal reptiles have a low movement pattern.

King and Green (1999) noted that arboreal monitors such as V candolineatus and V.

brevicauda showed a similar characteristics to Komodo dragons.

46

Movement in juvenile reptiles increase with age (McMaster & Herman 2000).

The study indicated that the larger the animal, the larger the daily movement and the

longer the movement. Sastrawan and Ciofi (2002) reported similarity in adult male

and adult female Komodo dragons. Similar patterns in other species reptiles were also

reported, such as in arboreal snakes (Fitzgerald et.al 2002; Pearson et al. 2005).

Many authors defined activity areas as a portion of a particular area used

during a defined period of time and will expand as over an extended period of time

(King & Green 1999; Thompson et al. 2002). There was size variation in activity areas

between hatchlings and juveniles. Juvenile mean activity areas were eight times larger

than those of hatchlings were.

This study also suggested that juveniles were able to explore and expand their

foraging areas better than hatchlings, which had to familiarize with their new

environment after emergence. Activity area size increased as Komodo dragons grew

older. Average adult activity area is 19 times larger than in juveniles (see also

Auffenberg 1981; Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). Smith et al. (1999) reported that the adult

Angonoka turtle Geochelone yniphora has a larger activity area size compared to

juveniles. According to Pough et al. (2001) many authors reported a positive

correlation between activity area size and body size in many species of reptiles.

Christian and Waldschmidt (1984) demonstrated that the lizard’s body size and sex

were significantly correlated to size of activity area. Perry and Garland (2002) also

demonstrated that activity area is correlated with body size in different species of

lizards.

According to this study, both hatchlings and juveniles had small core activity

areas. Komodo dragons used core areas as shelter sites rather than for foraging. Small

core area sizes were also reported for the Massasauga (Johnson 2000). In hatchling

Komodo dragons, the small size of the core area was probably due to less active

behavior in this age class as far as exploration of their new environment concerned.

Yet, juveniles preferred particular spots suitable to their needs. Although juveniles

moved away from their overnight shelter, they returned to their shelter in the

afternoon. Nevertheless, some juveniles remained at the same overnight shelter for a

47

few days (e.g. 639E332, and 63D9C4B). However, many authors reported that there is

a significant correlation between age or sex class, activity and core area in other

reptile species, such as snakes and turtles (e.g. Melville & Swain 1999; Piepgrass &

Lang 2000; Whitaker & Shine 2003). King and Green (1999) suggested that core

activity areas varied seasonally. In this study, however, it was not possible to

investigate seasonal movements and seasonal activity areas.

The importance of dispersal area for hatchlings is determined by the use of

specific tree species during their early natal dispersal. For juveniles, the importance of

their foraging area is highlighted by the 100% MCP overlap. These overlapping

activity areas indicated that these areas provided sufficient resources that are probably

shared by neighboring juveniles. Even thought there were some overlaps in activity

areas among juveniles, there was no evidence of territoriality. Juveniles were solitary

as none were found on the same tree at one time.

As discussed previously in this chapter, it was shown that hatchlings remained

arboreal during the first stage of their life. Most hatchling activities were carried out

on a tree rather than on the ground. Hatchlings descended to the ground only to move

to another tree even when tree canopy could provide a pathway for travel. Auffenberg

(1981) noted that hatchling Komodo dragons were able to take a leap from branch to

branch. During this study, two hatchlings (64D4C0E and 63DFB2A) were observed to

move between trees using aerial paths, when canopies connected to each other.

Fitzgerald et al. (2002) reported arboreal snakes to move preferentially on the ground.

According to the author, canopy structure (especially physical connectivity between

branches of adjacent trees) was not an important constraint to movement patterns.

Both hatchlings and juveniles used trees as shelter. However, hatchlings

showed a wider selection of tree species for sheltering than did juveniles (15 versus 9

tree species). A similar pattern was described for an arboreal phyton Morelia spilota

in Australia (Pearson et al. 2005). Radio-telemetry suggested that juvenile Komodo

dragons preferred to stay on bigger and higher trees than those chosen by hatchlings.

This probably indicated that juveniles selected particular sites in relation to their body

48

size. Auffenberg (1981) described that since vegetation could limit the vision of adult

Komodo dragons, it was important for small Komodo dragons to hide from the adults.

Besides using the Tamarind tree, hatchlings were often found hiding on the

Gebang tree (Corypa utan). Live Gebang trees contain dead branches at the base of

their trunks that provide cover for hatchlings to hide, while dead Gebang tree provide

holes at relatively high elevations above that ground. Blazquez and Rodriguez-Estrella

(2001) in their study of Spiny-tailed iguanas, Ctenosaura hemilopha, reported that

selected trees could allow hatchlings and juveniles to take shelter, to feed, basking in

the morning, and minimize the risk of predation.

In their early life stage, Komodo dragon showed their tendency to discover

their new environments in order to find suitable and safest space from predators.

Exploration was demonstrated by the increasing in size of movement and activity

areas along with their age. McMaster and Herman (2000) documented that along with

increasing of age, movement in juvenile reptiles become larger. Greenwood and

Swingland (1984) noted that animals are out of their natal sites to exploit available

resources. Immature Komodo dragons demonstrated their requirements of hidden

places to avoid conflict with their conspecific or other predators, including adults, as

noted by Mattison (1992) that mortality in lizards is highest during the early phase of

their life because they are more vulnerable to predation. Further, long-term and

comprehensive studies are important to investigate detail patterns in spatial use during

early life stage of Komodo dragons.

CHAPTER V

ASSESSING LONG DISTANCE MOVEMENT OF HATCHLING AND JUVENILE KOMODO DRAGONS

5.1 INTRODUCTION

Movement of individuals through their habitat is a key process underpinning many

population processes and in particular gene flow. Movements underpinning gene flow

are typically classified as dispersal (Bohonak 1999). Dispersal is one of the most

essential fitness events in the lives of most individual animals and in turn for

important processes affecting the ecology and evolution of populations and of the

most important part of conservation studies of endangered animal (Greenwood 1978;

1980; Koenig et al. 1996).

There are three critical mechanisms for dispersal: (1) leaving the natal site

(natal dispersal), (2) dispersing in terms of accession to breeding site (breeding

dispersal), and (3) settling into a new home range (immigration) (Lebreton et al.

2003). Natal dispersal is the movement of individuals from their place of birth to their

first breeding location (Greenwood 1980). According to Pough et al. (2001) hatchling

reptiles move out of their natal areas to find suitable patches of habitat that are not

already occupied by larger conspecifics. This allows access to specific resources and

avoids cannibalism by adults. Greenwood (1980) also defined breeding dispersal as

the movement of individuals between successive breeding sites, either within a

breeding season or between breeding seasons. Bancroft and Smith (2005)

demonstrated how movement into a new home range was correlated with a specific

dispersal mechanism.

50

Dispersal is an essential key process that affects extended population structure,

dynamics and gene flow (Blouin-Demers & Weatherhead 2002; Bowman et al. 2002;

Bullock 2002; Hanski 1999). In term of metapopulation dynamics, movement among

sub-populations is a key factor to survival, recruitment, emigration and immigration in

sub-populations (Drake & Alisauskas 2004). Dispersal is also important for the

evolutionary processes of the species (Lenormand 2002).

Dispersal can also play an important role in the behavior and social systems of

animals (Wolff 1999). Caro (1994) and Gompper (1996) suggested that dispersal

could also contribute to increased foraging success and thus decreased competition

among males. Female breeding dispersal is related to mate choice in order to improve

mate quality and locate resources that facilitate offspring fitness (Otter & Ratcliffe

1996).

Moving animals may contribute new genes to populations. Gene flow is

strictly affected by movements of genes within or between populations (Ciofi 2002).

Lenormand (2002) described that movement affects patterns in gene flow and the

divergence of alleles. Movement of adult Black Rat Snakes was suggested as

contribution to the out-breeding mechanism (Blouin-Demers & Weatherhead 2002).

Drake and Alisauskus (2004) reported dispersal could contribute to the gene flow

among sub-populations. Gompper et al. (1998) demonstrated that dispersal could

influence genetic relationships amongst individuals of a social carnivore. Storz (2005)

reported that trait diversification in great tits reflects the effects of dispersal and

spatial selection.

The absence of gene flow, on the other hand, increases inbreeding and genetic

drift and, in small populations, the probability of extinction (Konuma et al. 2000;

Madsen et al. 1996). Low genetic variability is generally correlated with inbreeding.

Rosenfield and Bielefeld (1992) reported a relationship between low natal dispersal

and high inbreeding incidence in Cooper’s hawk. Inbreeding can cause severe low

fitness for small populations (Lande 1998).

51

Site fidelity is often characterized by events of philopatry (Reed & Oring

1993). Variability in site fidelity is influenced by habitat, resource distribution and

includes mating and parental care systems (Emlen & Oring 1977; Powell 1989). The

interaction of movement patterns and landscape features affects individual space-use,

population dynamics and dispersion, gene flow, and the redistribution of nutrients and

other materials (Johnson et al. 1992).

To date, there has been no detailed study on the dispersal capacity of Komodo

dragon (Auffenberg & Auffenberg 2002; Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). The objective of

this study is to investigate the dispersal capacity in immature Komodo Dragons (i.e.

hatchlings and juveniles). Sutherland et al. (2000) suggested that movement from the

natal site in the early life stage of an animal is important to the processes of

demography, population dispersion, colonization, and gene flow. As parental care is

rare on reptiles, it is suggested that post-natal or early life-phase dispersal should be

common (Olson & Shine 2003; Shine 1988).

This study aimed at measuring the movement capacity of hatchling and

juvenile Komodo dragons at two different spatial scales that are thought to contribute

to gene flow among;

1) Movement between adjacent valleys within islands

2) Movement between adjacent islands.

5.2 MATERIALS AND METHODS

5.2.1 Study Sites and Capture Technique

The study was conducted over 10 sites across four islands in Komodo National Park.

These four islands encompass the extant distribution of this species within Komodo

National Park and include populations from Komodo (393.4 km2), Rinca (278.0 km2),

Gili Motang (10.3 km2) and Nusa Kode (referred to as Gili Dasami) (9.6 km2). Study

site description and area size of selected study sites and mark-recapture techniques

were described in Chapter III.

52

Dispersal in animal can be measured using the dispersal rate (number of

dispersers leaving their natal territory) and the expected distance moved by each

disperser (Sutherland et al. 2000). The extent of gene flow between populations can be

measured by means of movement data as a direct method or indirectly method in by

using genetic markers (Blouin-Demers & Weatherhead 2002). Direct assessment of

movements among populations is a valid approach for the interpretation of gene flow

in the ecological context (Bohonak 1999; 2002; Bossart & Prowel 1998).

Mark recapture is the most effective way to measure population parameters

(Seber 1982). This method is also useful to obtain data on movement and population

dynamics in animals (Claussen et al. 1997; Lancia et al. 1996; Lebreton et al. 2003;

White & Clark 1996). Several authors have used mark recapture to measure

movement in animals (e.g. Clobert et al. 2000; Limpus & Walter 1980; Magnusson

1979). A limitation of this method is that movements within and among populations

vary in space and time (Schwartz & Arnason 1996) and detailed information on

animal movement, such as frequency of movement, cannot be assessed. In practical,

mark recapture methods require individual marking (Lancia et al. 1996). Koenig et al

(1992) suggested that tagging using passive integrated transponders (PITs) is the most

efficient method in mark recapture studies to investigate dispersal mechanism.

During the study period a total of 149 hatchlings and 304 juveniles were

captured and tagged (Table 5.1). Within three years of study, 1 hatchling and 76

juveniles were recaptured in the subsequent years. To increase the sample size for

hatchlings, data on 1 recaptured hatchling from March 2006 was added. These

recapture data were then analyzed for distance of movements (see below).

Table 5.1 Total number of tagged animals for each year.

Year Hatchling Juvenile

2003 51 131

2004 6 87

2005 92 86

Total 149 304

53

5.2.2 Data Analysis

Measures of dispersal capacity of hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons were

obtained by analyzing daily, annual, farthest daily, and farthest annual movements of

animal. Daily movement (distance travelled by animal in a day) was calculated from

Within Trip Recapture / Resight (WTR) data which was taken during the trapping

session in one location. Annual movement (mean annual distance travelled by animal)

was calculated as the mean of distance between the consecutive annual capture

positions during the mark-recapture period (2003-2005). Farthest daily and farthest

annual movement was calculated as the distance between the first locations of

captured with the farthest location of recaptured.

To measure the influence of terrestrial barriers on movement, geographical

barriers were identified and scored depending on their potential effect on animal

movement. Several measurements were taken on map of the Komodo National Park

(BAKOSURTANAL 2000) as follow; elevation of the nearest highest peak elevation

to the edge of the valley (h), distance to the nearest highest peak from edge of the

valley (d), and degree of slope (s). Edge of the valley was depicted virtually by

creating a poly-line along the elevation contour lines of 62.5 m on the map. Random

points were placed along the virtual edge line using the Ecological Methodology

computer program (Krebs 2002; see Krebs 1999). The number of points is a result of

the total length of the virtual edge line (km) divided by 1 km (for example, total length

of virtual edge line for Loh Sebita was 20.1 km, giving a total of 20 random points).

Three random bearings between 0-180° were picked from each random point to

measure each parameter of the barrier mentioned above. Along the bearing line, the

nearest highest peak (h) and the distance (d) to the virtual edge line was taken.

Degree of slope (s) was ranked between 1 – 10, which was calculated by dividing the

highest peak elevation by the distance to the highest peak and multiplied by α , where

α value is 10 (Equation 5.1). Vegetation type was scored as 1 (closed forest), 2 (open

forest), and 3 (savannah). Area size was calculated as the size of the valley by creating

polygon along the elevation contour lines of 2.5 m and coastal line (0 m) on the map.

54

α×=dhs (Equation 5.1)

To measure influence of marine barriers distance between islands was

measured. Similar technique as employed to measure terrestrial barrier was employed

also to measure marine barriers. A number of random points were placed along coastal

line (0 m) on topographical map of the Komodo National Park (BAKOSURTANAL

2000). To obtain the number of random points, the total length of coastal line (island

boundary) divided by 10 km. From each random point distance to the nearest adjacent

island was measured. All distance of movements and barriers scaling were calculated

using Animal Movement program (Hooge et al. 1999) and X Tools extension of Arc

View 3.2. (ESRI).

5.2.3 Statistical Analysis

Prior to analysis all data were log transformed (Sutherland et al. 2000) to meet the

assumption of parametric tests (Zar 1999). Log transformed data that did not meet the

assumptions was statistically analyzed using nonparametric statistical procedures. All

data is presented in tables and graphs of the means and standard error of the mean

(SEM) of back-log transformed data. The Chi square test was used to determine

differences among slope degree between valleys (King & Gurnell 2005; Rheaney &

Whiting 2003). Paired T-tests was used to determine differences in distance of

movement between WTR data and annual mark recapture data. Pearson correlation

test was used to determine relationship between distances of movement with the size

of the valley. For all statistical tests, significance was inferred at P < 0.05.

55

a

Distance (m)

<100

100-2

00

200-

300

300-

400

400-

500

500-

600

600-

700

700-

800

800-

900

900-

1000

1000

-1100

1100

-1200

1200-1

300

1300

-1400

1400

-1500

>1500

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

b

Distance (m)

<100

100-2

00

200-3

00

300-4

00

400-5

00

500-6

00

600-7

00

700-8

00

800-9

00

900-1

000

1000

-1100

1100

-1200

1200

-1300

1300

-1400

1400

-1500

>1500

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

c

Distance (m)

<100

100-2

00

200-3

00

300-4

00

400-5

00

500-6

00

600-7

00

700-8

00

800-9

00

900-1

000

1000

-1100

1100

-1200

1200

-1300

1300

-1400

1400

-1500

>1500

Freq

uenc

y (%

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Figure 5.1 Frequency of annual movement for hatchling (a), daily and annual

movement for juvenile (b, c).

56

5.3 RESULTS

The study showed a low number of recapture events for hatchlings. From the total of

149 tagged hatchlings only two hatchlings were recaptured. One hatchling of 2004

was recaptured in 2005 at the same location of its first capture in Loh Baru, Rinca.

Another hatchling was recaptured a year (March 2006) after its emergence in 2005

approximately 1500 m from its initial capture location in Loh Buaya, Rinca (Figure

5.1a). On the contrary, juveniles showed a higher degree of recapture than hatchlings.

From a total of 304 juveniles tagged, 74 of them were annually recaptured during the

study period. Most juveniles displayed a very short distance of movement (< 100 m;

Figure 5.1b, 5.1c). Twenty-two (28.95 %) individual juveniles were recaptured within

the same locations of their first captured.

Both hatchlings and juveniles showed no significant difference between daily

and annual movement from WTR data and annual recapture data, respectively, (Paired

T test; t 1,75 = -0.19, p = 0.85) (Table 5.2). However, there was a significant difference

between farthest daily movement and farthest annual movement (Paired T test; t 1,75 =

2.05, p = 0.04) (Table 5.2). Annual distance and farthest annual movement in

juveniles showed a significant differences among valleys (Chi square test; x2 = 593.33,

p ≤ 0.01 and x2 = 1029.01, p ≤ 0.01) and between islands (Chi square test; x2 =

36006.11, p ≤ 0.01 and x2 = 53528.18, p ≤ 0.01) (Table 5.2). There was no record of

movements between adjacent valleys within island and neither for between adjacent

islands.

Slope degree was negatively correlated with the size of the valley and the

nearest peak elevation (Pearson correlation test; r = -0.75, p ≤ 0.01 and 0.66, p ≤ 0.01)

(Table 5.3). On the other hand, slope degree was not significantly different among

valleys (Chi square test; x2 = 6.18, p ≤ 0.52) (Table 5.3). Distance of daily movement

and farthest daily movement from WTR data during trapping session showed a

significant correlation with area (valley) size (Pearson correlation test; r = 0.32, p ≤

0.01 and r = 0.41, p ≤ 0.01) in juveniles. There was also a significant correlation

between distance annual movement and area size (Pearson correlation test; r = -0.12, p

57

≤ 0.01) and between farthest annual movement and area size (Pearson correlation test;

r = 0.34, p = 0.02). Distance in annual movement and farthest annual movement

showed a significant negative correlation with slope degree (Pearson correlation test; r

= -0.399, p ≤ 0.01, and r = -0.399, p ≤ 0.01, respectively). In contrast, both annual

movement and farthest annual movement distance were not significantly correlated

with vegetation types (Pearson correlation test; r = 0.07, p ≤ 0.63, and r = 0.16, p =

0.30).

Distance to the nearest island was significantly different among islands (Chi

square test; x2 = 14036.88, p ≤ 0.001) and significantly correlated with size of the

island (Pearson correlation test; r = 0.90, p ≤ 0.01) (Table 5.5). Daily and farthest

daily movement was significantly correlated with size of the island (Pearson

correlation test; r = 0.88, p ≤ 0.01 and r = -1.00, p ≤ 0.01). There was also a significant

correlation between daily and distance between island (Pearson correlation test; r =

0.61, p ≤ 0.01) and between farthest daily and the distance (Pearson correlation test; r

= 0.95, p ≤ 0.01). Annual and farthest annual movement were showed a negative

significant correlations with both size of island and distance between island (Pearson

correlation test; r = -0.99, p ≤ 0.01, r = -0.79, p ≤ 0.01, r = -1.00, p ≤ 0.01, and r = -

0.88, p ≤ 0.01, respectively).

5.4 DISCUSSION

Many authors define dispersal as movement away from one location to another

location, being it to move away from natal sites, to look for suitable breeding

opportunities, to find an unoccupied habitat, or to either avoid a conflict or

competition with other conspecifics (van Dyck & Baguette 2005; Grant 1978;

Greenwood 1980). In this study, dispersal was defined as movement of young

Komodo dragons to the adjacent valleys or adjacent islands in term of accession of

gene flow exchange between local populations. The aim of this study was to measure

movement patterns and site fidelity in the early life stages of Komodo dragons. Based

on three years of mark recapture data, this study has documented the first information

on dispersal ability of Komodo dragons during early life stages. In general, movement

58

in juveniles was influenced by spatial characteristics, i.e. topographical setting and

size of the valley.

Table 5.2 Distance of movement of juvenile Komodo dragons (m).

ISLAND / Location Daily Farthest

Daily Annual Farthest annual

KOMODO 368.26 714.33 579.78 476.63 Loh Sebita 916.25 658.75 873.86 1185.77 Loh Liang 967.92 862.33 577.74 753.88 Loh Lawi 1129.45 761.73 507.67 594.36 Loh Wau 461.00 343.80 419.69 344.25

RINCA 389.81 629.20 650.93 540.95 Loh Buaya 882.14 617.95 838.41 1008.86

Loh Baru 1013.29 756.33 746.33 778.76 Loh Tongker 594.00 432.14 1120.69 1330.54 Loh Dasami 594.00 432.14 469.44 475.45

Gili Motang 225.62 555.75 563.29 702.62

Table 5.3 Topographical barrier’s scores of each study area.

Location Area Size (km2)

Nearest Peak (m)

Distance to the nearest peak (m)

Slope degree

Vegetation type

Loh Sebita 5.81 181.24 889.93 4.33 2.82Loh Liang 8.94 181.24 889.93 4.33 2.82Loh Lawi 10.03 231.82 954.73 3.46 2.61Loh Wau 0.83 301.67 909.27 9.11 2.60Loh Buaya 5.50 126.81 913.46 3.61 2.78Loh Baru 5.48 253.11 597.82 7.84 2.12Loh Tongker 2.64 272.10 533.67 6.74 2.14Loh Dasami 3.54 326.76 830.43 5.22 1.00TOTAL/MEAN 5.35 234.34 814.90 5.58 2.36

Table 5.4 Distance between islands in Komodo National Park

Island Area size (km2)

Mean distance to nearest island (m)

Komodo 311.59 12981.43 Padar 14.09 5012.00 Rinca 204.78 4670.50

Nusa Kode 7.33 1206.66 Gili Dasami 9.48 3576.67

59

Both hatchlings and juveniles displayed low degrees of long distance

movement enabling them to cross into other valleys or among islands. Indeed, due to

low number of recaptures, it was difficult to measure movement capacity of hatchlings

in terms of their natal dispersal. The mark recapture method used in this study may

have limitations and underestimate records on dispersal events. Previous studies on

dispersal applying mark-recapture methods have reported similar results (Roper et al.

2003).

During the study, there was no record of within trip recapture or resight on

hatchlings, thus daily movement of hatchlings could not estimated. No captured

hatchling were recaptured nor even resighted after captured, either from nest or from

traps, during the mark-recapture study session. This study showed a low degree of

recapture opportunities for hatchlings. This might be due to arboreal tendency of

hatchlings and their tendency to stay in the same tree for a long period of time

(approximately 9 days; see chapter IV).

After a year, one hatchling was recorded did not move at all from its first

capture location. This hatchling was recaptured at the same location one year after its

first capture. In contrast, another hatchling displayed long distance movement during

the first year of its life. Radiotracked hatchlings (see chapter IV) displayed a relatively

slow and short distance movement during their first month after emergence. However,

it is difficult to conclude that hatchling Komodo dragons exhibit either site fidelity or

long distance natal dispersal during their early stage of life.

During their early life stage, Komodo dragons exhibit poor long distance

movement ability. Juveniles did not move more than 2000 m, either for daily

movement or for annual movement, and there was no record of any movement to

adjacent valleys, or to adjacent islands. In contrast, most juveniles displayed short

distance movement (<500 m). This result is similar to short distance dispersal pattern

in juveniles of the Tasmanian Snow skink (Niveoscincus microlepidotus) (Olsson &

Shine 2003). Sutherland et al. (2000) documented that dispersal in juvenile birds and

mammals often involve short distance movement, while long distance was

uncommon.

60

This study suggests that movement in hatchlings and juveniles to adjacent

valleys was limited by topographical settings of the valleys (table 5.4); i.e. high degree

of slope. Radiotelemetry data suggested that juveniles did not cross hills between

valleys during the study (Chapter IV). It was evident that landscape features, such as

mountain slope may strongly influence movements in early life stage of the species.

Olsson and Shine (2003) suggested that site preferences might influence neonates to

be less dispersed. Dahl and Willebrand (2005) reported that the philopatry pattern was

related to the low natal dispersal and high degree of adult site fidelity.

During the three years of the study, there was no evidence of juvenile Komodo

dragon dispersing to adjacent islands. Even though Komodo dragons are able to swim,

the ocean may be a main geographical barrier preventing dispersal between adjacent

islands (Ciofi 2002). Manel et al. (2003) suggested that landscape features, i.e.

mountains, stream, and ocean, might influence the pattern of gene flow and population

structure.

Dispersal is influenced by propensity of dispersers (Kawecki & Holt 2002) and

distances in dispersal are influenced by cost of dispersal, i.e. increase of mortality

(Roze & Rousett 2005). Lenormand (2002) suggested that dispersal might affect the

offspring’s survival in nature, for instance because of maladaptive mechanism of the

individual to the new environment. Sarno et al. (2003) suggested that dispersal in

juvenile could increase the mortality rate via adult predation. Yet, Waser (1996)

suggested that variation in cost and benefit or dispersal were influenced by a variety

factors, i.e. social behaviour, fitness effect of dispersal, and intra-sexual conflicts.

Extensive movement in Black rate snakes was suggested to have a correlation

with out-breeding opportunity (Blouin-Demers & Weatherhead 2002). Long distance

movement is critical for exchanging genetic information (Trakhtenbrot et al. 2005).

However, based on this study, juvenile Komodo dragons displayed a tendency to site

fidelity and suggested reduced out-breeding opportunities when they reach for adult.

Hadany et al. (2004) noted that high fitness animal show their tendency to settle to

their natal site and might be increased the potential for inbreeding when they reached

reproductive maturity.

61

In addition, this study suggested that movement and fidelity in hatchling and

juvenile Komodo dragons may have an implication to the gene flow. Ciofi (2002)

described genetic variability among island populations for Komodo dragon. High

degrees of similarity were found between Rinca and nearby islands (Nusa Kode and

west coast of Flores) whereas, populations from Komodo and Gili Motang showed

significant differentiation from other island populations.

Decreases in genetic variability may relate to population isolation due to

increase in spatial distance (Lensen et al. 2005). Kawecki and Holt (2002) noted that

low immigration would decrease population sustainability. Genetic similarity in small

populations could happen if dispersal is rare (Gomppers 1998). Several reproductive

and physiological deficiencies in small populations may result from an increase in the

level of inbreeding and low genetic variability and in turn affect population viability

(Ciofi et al. 2002). Genetic variability can be maintained with at least one disperser

per generation (Mills & Allendrof 1996). However, the current population size of the

Komodo dragons might not be adequate to maintain genetic variation (Ciofi &

Bruford 1999).

This species is characterized by a long history of isolation by geographical

barriers with a high degree of genetic distinctiveness and a significantly low level of

gene exchange with other subpopulations and may retain the potential to develop

adaptation to distinct environmental condition (Ciofi 2002). However, further studies

are required to investigate if hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons adopt natal

philopatry and do not disperse.

CHAPTER VI

GENERAL DISCUSSION

6.1 GENERAL DISCUSSION

Successful biological conservation requires are to understand patterns and processes in

spatial ecology of the species (Collinge 2001). Patterns in dispersion and use of space

by species are critically linked to how managers decide management tactics (Daltrop

et al. 2000). Studies on spatial and habitat use could provide useful information for the

conservation strategies of endangered species (McDaniel et al. 2000).

An important finding from this study was that, during the early stage of their

life, Komodo dragons have small activity areas with a high degree of overlap, and do

not move long distances. Hatchlings displayed a linear fashion of movement from

their nest that appeared to underpin a deliberate type of dispersal behavior to move as

far as possible from their nesting sites. Juveniles, in turn, displayed their ability to

explore their environment and occupied larger areas than hatchlings. Movement in

hatchlings and juveniles are important in term of finding suitable habitat to avoid

competition with larger conspecifics, expanding their distribution and maintain

genetic variability of the population (Lebreton et al. 2003; Pough et al. 2001; Sarno et

al. 2003; Sutherland 2000; Trakhtenbrot et al. 2005).

Forest coverage plays an important role for both hatchling and juvenile

Komodo dragons as shown by the extensive use of arboreal habitats. Both hatchling

and juvenile Komodo dragons displayed their preference for a particular tree (i.e.

Tamarindus indica) and particular terrestrial setting (i.e. rock crevices) for shelter.

This tendency showed the importance of trees during their early life-stage particularly

63

in avoiding cannibalism by larger Komodo dragons. Webb and Shine (1997)

documented that understanding spatial and habitat requirements in reptiles could assist

managers in determining their vulnerability to disturbances.

Based on mark-recapture data, this study showed evidence of low degree of

long distance movement by young Komodo dragons. There was no record of either

hatchling or juvenile performing long distance movements to the adjacent valleys, or

to adjacent islands. Movement in Komodo dragons, particularly young, was

constrained by landscape features. This, in turn, limited exchanges between local

populations would decrease survival probability of small and isolated population.

Brooker et al. (1999) suggested that survival probability in small populations

and isolated subpopulations is dependent on their ability to disperse. Dispersal is

critically important for species conservation in relation to the impact of natural and

human disturbances (Trakhtenbrot et al. 2005). Ciofi and de Boer (2004) documented

declines in distribution and population density of Komodo dragons during the last

three decades (Auffenberg 1981).

Given their limited dispersal abilities, this age class of Komodo dragons are in

a precarious situation, and vulnerable to both natural and anthropic threats. Ciofi

(2002) mentioned that potential natural threats included active volcanoes adjacent to

the habitat. Ciofi and de Boer (2004) noted that decline in the extant population of

Komodo dragons was influenced by habitat fragmentation and poaching activities. It

has been documented that natural and anthropogenic factors are the major causes of

species extinction within last decades (Kull et al. 2006).

6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

Dispersal in animals plays an important role in their population dynamics and genetic

variability (Trakhtenbrot et al. 2005; Grant 1978). Dispersal was suggested as a

mechanism to maintain small populations and stabilized the overall population

through recolonization and as a source of genetic variability (Reed et al. 1998).

Blouin-Demers and Weatherhead (2002) described how movements had a significant

64

impact to the gene flow mechanism in black rat snakes (Elaphe obsoleta) which was

represented by the mating system between male and females from different

subpopulations.

The absence of dispersal may put small populations at risk of local extinction

due to inbreeding depression and genetic drift (Madsen et al. 1996; Konuma et al.

2000). Limited inter-island dispersal over long periods of time may result in insular

alteration (Sinclair 1998). Losos (2004) documented that the adaptation of the Greater

Antillean anoles was correlated to isolation by insular and within island mechanisms.

Ciofi (2002) has documented the genotypic differences among insular populations,

particularly for the most isolated island, Gili Motang. This sub-population is the most

severely at risk (Jessop et al. 2006 in press). Limitation in genetic variation due to

insular adaptation has the potential to harm the extant populations of Komodo dragons

which are declining due to natural or anthropic causes.

Dispersal information can be used to develop biological population models and

direct conservation management decisions, i.e in forecasting rate of animal spread,

reintroduction strategies, or maintaining adequate genetic and population viability

(Trakhtenbrot et al. 2005). The declining status of Komodo dragons makes it

appropriate to undertake intervention measures by the park management. Since the

dispersal ability of this species during their early life stage is limited, a feasible option

to manage the population should be considered before the population becomes too

small for conservation options. Protecting remain suitable habitats is the most

important aspect for the conservation of this species (Buij et al. 2002; Galanti et al.

2005 in press; Primack 2004).

Augmentation of this endangered species could be considered by managers as

one of conservation strategies in order to maintain genetic variability and population

viability. However, augmentation might be considered as a good option only when

limiting factors can be addressed. Tweed et al. (2003) suggested that species

augmentation should consider following factors; 1) location of the historical range of

the species; 2) habitat quality and food resource availability; 3) long term security and

access for further monitoring and research.

65

Finally, further long-term studies are needed to address the lack of detailed

knowledge on the spatial ecology of this vulnerable species. Detailed ecological

studies may provide a critical basis for management and conservation planning (Webb

& Shine 1977). In addition, dispersal models can be used to predict which group or

populations is likely to be the most vulnerable to disturbance and allow managers to

test the merits of alternative habitat conservation strategies (Sutherland et al. 2000).

CHAPTER VII

CONCLUSION

This study has documented that, during their early life stage, Komodo dragons have

small activity areas with a high degree of overlap, and do not move long distances.

There was no record of either hatchlings or juveniles performing a long distance

movement to the adjacent valleys, neither to adjacent islands. Movement in Komodo

dragons, particularly young, was constrained by landscape features.

Hatchlings displayed a linear mode of movement that appeared to underpin a

deliberate type of dispersal mechanism to move as far as possible from their nesting

sites. Juveniles, in turn, displayed an ability to explore their environment and occupied

larger areas as compared to hatchlings. Movement is an important mechanism in

hatchlings and juveniles in terms of finding suitable habitat, so as to avoid competition

with larger conspecifics, expanding their distribution and maintain genetic variability

of the population.

This study also showed that forest coverage plays an important role for both

hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons. Both hatchling and juvenile Komodo

dragons displayed a preference for open forest with a particular tree (i.e. Tamarindus

indica) and particular terrestrial setting (i.e. rock crevices) as shelter. This showed the

importance of trees during their early life-stage particularly in avoiding cannibalism

by adult Komodo dragons.

Since the dispersal of this species during their early life stage is limited, it may

put the extant population of Komodo dragon at risk of local extinction due to

67

inbreeding depression and genetic drift. Several feasible options to manage the

population should be considered before the population becomes too small for

conservation options. Protecting remain suitable habitats is the most important aspect

for the conservation of this species. Augmentation of this endangered species could be

considered by managers as one of conservation strategies in order to maintain genetic

variability and population viability. Finally, further long-term studies, especially on

the hatchling and juvenile stages, are needed to address the lack of detailed knowledge

on the spatial ecology of this vulnerable species.

68

REFERENCES

Auffenberg, K. & Auffenberg, W. 2002. Introduction: The past and now. In Murphy,

J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C. & Walsh, T. (eds.). Komodo dragons: biology and conservation (zoo and aquarium biology and conservation series), pp. 1-22. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Auffenberg, W. 1980. The herpetofauna of Komodo, with notes on adjacent areas.

Bulletin of Florida State Museum, Biological Science 25(2): 39-156. Auffenberg, W. 1981. The Behavioral ecology of the Komodo dragon. Gainesville:

University Florida Press. BAKOSURTANAL. 2000. Digital topographical map of Komodo National Park,

Indonesia, scale of 1:25.000. Cibinong: Badan Koordinasi Survey Pertanahan dan Lahan.

Bancroft, J.S. & Smith, M.T. 2005. Dispersal and influences on movement for

Anoplophora glabripennis calculated from individual mark-recapture. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 116: 83–92.

Bennet, D. 2002. Diets of Varanus niloticus (Sauria: Varanidae) on the Black Volta

River in Ghana. Journal of Herpetology 36: 116–117. Bertolucci, C., Leorati, M., Innocenti, A. & Foa, A. 1999. Circannual variations of

lizard circadian activity rhythms in constant darkness. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 46: 200-209.

Blazquez, M.C. & Rodriguez-Estrella, R. 2001. Winter refuge characteristics of

Spiny-tailed iguanas, Ctenosaura hemilopha, in Baja California Sur, Mexico. Journal of Arid Environments 49: 593-599.

Blouin-Demers, G. & Weatherhead, P.J. 2002. Implications of movement patterns for

gene flow in black rat snakes (Elaphe obsolete). Canadian Journal of Zoology 80: 1162-1172.

Blumstein, D.T. & Fernandez-Juricic, E. 2004. Editorial: The emergence of

conservation behavior. Conservation Biology 18(5): 1175-1177. Bohme, W., Philip, K.M. & Ziegler, T. 2004. Varanus doreanus. In Pianka, E.R.,

King, D.R. & King, R.A. (eds.). Varanoid lizards of the world, pp. 168-171. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Bohonak, A.J. 1999. Dispersal, gene flow, and population structure. The Quarterly of

Review Biology 74(1): 21-45.

69

Bohonak, A.J. 2002. IBD (Isolation by Distance): A program for analyses of isolation by distance. The Journal of Heredity 93(2): 153-154.

Bossart, J.L. & Prowell, D.P. 1998. Genetic estimates of population structure and

gene flow: limitations, lessons, and new directions. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13(5): 202.206.

Boudjemadi, K., Lecomte, J. & Clobert, J. 1999. Influence of connectivity on

demography and dispersal in two contrasting habitats: an experimental approach. Journal of Animal Ecology 68: 1207-1224.

Bowman, J., Jaeger, J.A.G. & Fahrig, L. 2002. Dispersal distance in mammals is

proportional to home range size. Ecology 83(7): 2049-2055. Boyce, M.S. & McDonald, L. 1999. Relating population to habitat using resource

selection function. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 14: 268-272. Brill, R.W., Balazs, G.H., Holland, K.N., Chang, R.K.C., Sullivan, S. & George, J.C.

1995. Daily movements, habitat use, and submergence intervals of normal and tumor bearing juvenile green turtles (Chelonia mydas L.) within foraging area in the Hawaiian islands. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 185: 203-218.

Brockelman, W.Y. 1975. Competition, the fitness of offspring, and optimal clutch

size. The American Naturalist 109(970): 677-699. Brooker, L., Brooker, M. & Cale, P. 1999. Animal dispersal in fragmented habitat:

measuring habitat connectivity, corridor use, and dispersal mortality. Conservation ecology 3(1): 4. http://www.consecol.org/vol3/iss1/art4/ [March 3, 2006].

Brown, L. & Downhower, J.F. 1988. Analyses in behavioral ecology: a manual for

lab and field. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, Inc. Burghardt, G.M., Chiszar, D., Murphy, J.B., Romano Jr., J., Walsh, T. & Manrod, J.

2002. Behavioral complexity, behavioral development, and play. In Murphy, J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C. & Walsh, T. (eds.). Komodo dragons: biology and conservation (zoo and aquarium biology and conservation series), pp. 78–117. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Buij, R., Wich, S.A., Lubis, A.H. & Sterck, E.H.M. 2002. Seasonal movements in the

Sumatran orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus abelii) and consequences for conservation. Biological Conservation 107: 83-87.

Caley, P. 1997. Movement, activity patterns, and habitat use of feral pigs (Sus scrofa)

in tropical habitat. Wildlife Research 24: 77-87. Caro, T.M., 1994. Cheetahs of the Serengeti Plains. Chicago: University of Chicago

Press.

70

Caughley, G. & Sinclair, A.R.E. 1994. Wildlife ecology and management. London: Blackwell Science.

Christian, K.A., Corbett, L.K., Green, B. & Weavers, B.W. 1995. Seasonal activity

and energentics of two species of varanid lizards in tropical Australia. Oecologia 103: 349-357.

Christian, K.A. & Waldschmidt, S. 1984. The relationship between lizard activity

area and body size: reanalysis of the data. Herpetologica 40(1): 68-75. Christian, K. & Weavers, B. 1994. Analysis of the activity and energetics of the lizard

Varanus rosenbergi. Copeia 2: 289-295. Ciofi, C. 1999. The Komodo dragon: On a few island of Indonesian Archipelago, the

world’s largest lizard reign supreme. Scientific America. http://www.sciam.com/1999/0399issue/0399ciofi.html [December 20, 2003].

Ciofi, C. 2002. Conservation Genetics. In Murphy, J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C.

& Walsh, T. (eds.). Komodo dragons: biology and conservation (zoo and aquarium biology and conservation series), pp. 129-164. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Ciofi, C. 2004. Varanus komodoensis.. In Pianka, E.R., King, D.R. & King, R.A.

(eds.). Varanoid Lizards of the world, pp. 197-204. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Ciofi, C. & Bruford, M.W. 1999. Genetic structure and gene flow among Komodo

dragon poulations inferred by microsatellite loci analysis. Molecular Ecology 8(1): S17-S30.

Ciofi, C., Smith, B.R. & Hutchins, M. 2002. Conservation in situ and ex situ

contributions. In Murphy, J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C. & Walsh, T. (eds.). Komodo dragons: biology and conservation (zoo and aquarium biology and conservation series), pp. 129-164. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Ciofi, C. & de Boer, M.E. 2004. Distribution and conservation of the Komodo

Monitor (Varanus komodoensis). Herpetological Journal 14: 99-107. Claussen, D.L., Finkler, M.S., Smith, M.M. 1997. Thread trailing of turtles: methods

for evaluating spatial movements and pathway structure. Canadian Journal of Zoology 75: 2120-2128.

Clobert, J., Opliger, A., Sorci, G., Ernande, B., Swallow, J.G. & Garland Jr., T. 2000.

Trades off in phenotypic traits: Endurance of birth, growth, survival, predation, and susceptibility to paratism in a Lizard, Lacerta vivipara. Functional Ecology 14: 675-684.

71

Collinge, S.K. 2001. Introduction spatial ecology and biological conservation. Biological Conservation 100: 1-2.

Dahl, F. & Willebrand, T. 2005: Natal dispersal, adult home ranges and site fidelity

of mountain hares Lepus timidus in the boreal forest of Sweden. Wildlife Biology 11: 309-317.

Daltrop, D.N.J. & Villani, M.G. 2000. Foundations of spatial ecology: the reinfication

of patches through quantitative description of patterns and pattern repetition. Entomologica Experimentatlist et Allpicata 96: 119-127.

Saric, J., Jensen, L.J., Ouzounova, R., Rojas, I. & Bork, P. 2005.

Extraction of regulatory gene/protein networks. Bioinformatics 22(6): 645-50. Dasmann, R.F. 1964. Wildlife biology. New York: John Willey & Sons. Inc. Drake, K.L. & Alisauskas, R.T. 2004. Breeding dispersal by Ross’e Geese in the

Queen Maud Gulf metapopulation. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 27(1): 331-341.

Dunn, E.R. 1927. Results of the Douglas Burden expedition to the island of Komodo.

I. Notes on Varanus komodoensis. American Museum Novitiates 286: 1-10. Dunn, E.R. 1928. Results of the Douglas Burden expedition to the island of Komodo.

V. Observation on habitats and distribution of Varanus komodoensis Ouwen. American Museum Novitiates 316: 1-10.

van Dyck, H. & Baguette, M. 2005. Dispersal behavior in fragmented habitat: routine

or special movement. Basic and Applied Ecology 6: 534-545. Emlen, S.T. & Oring, L.W. 1977. Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of

mating systems. Science 197: 214–223. Ellis, C, 1998. The land of Komodo dragon. Singapore: Times Edition Pte. Ltd. Elphick, M.J. & Shine, R. 1998. Longterm effects of incubation temperatures on the

morphology and locomotor performance of hatchling lizards (Bassiana duperreyi, Scincidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 63(3): 429-447.

ESRI. 1999. ArcView GIS 3.2. Relands: Environmental System Research Institute. Fitzgerald, M., Shine, R. & Lemckert, F. 2002. Spatial ecology of arboreal snakes

(Hopochepalus stephensii Elapidae) in an eastern Australian forest. Australian Journal of Ecology 27: 537-545.

72

Friend, M., Toweill, D.E., Brownell Jr., R. L., Nettless, V.F., Davis, D.S. & Foreyt, W.J. 1996. Guidelines for proper care and use of wildlife in field research. In Bookhout, T.A. (ed.). Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth edition, pp. 96-105. Bethesda: The Wildlife Society.

Funk, D.H. & Sweenwy, B.W. 1990. Electrophoretic analysis of species boundaries

and phylogenetic relationships in some taeniopterygid stoneflies (Plecoptera). Transactions of the American Entomological Society 116: 727-752.

Funk, W.C., Blouin, M.S., Corn, P.S., Maxell, B.A., Pilliod, D.S., Amish, S. &

Allendorf, F.W. 2005. Population structure of Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris) is strongly affected by the landscape. Molecular Ecology 14: 483–496. Doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02426.

Galanti, V., Preatoni, D., Martinoli, A., Wauters, L.A. & Tosi, G. 2005. Space and

habitat use of the African elephant in the Tarangire-Manyara ecosystem, Tanzania: implications for conservation. Mammalian Biology. Doi: 10.1016/j.mambio.2005.10.001.

Gans, C. & Pough, F.H. 1982. Biology of the reptilia, volume 13, physiology part D,

physiological ecology. London: Academic Press. Gardner, R.H., O’Neill, R.V., Turner, M.G. & Dale, V.H. 1989. Quantifying scale-

dependent effects of animal movement with simple percolation model. Landscape Ecology 3(3/4): 217-227.

Galois, P., Leveille, M., Bouthiller, L., Daigle, C. & Parren, S. 2002. Movement

patterns, activity, and home range of the Eastern Spiny Softshell turtle (Apalone spinifera) in Northern Lake Champlain, Quebec, Vermont. Journal of Herpetology 36(3): 402-411.

Gaulke, M. & Horn, Hans-Georg. 2004. Varanus salvator (nominate form). In

Pianka, E.R., King, D.R. & King, R.A. (eds.). Varanoid lizards of the world, pp. 245-258. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Gibbons, J.W. & Semlitsch, R.D. 1987. Activity patterns. In Seigel, R.A., Collins,

J.T. & Novak, S.S. (eds.). Snakes: ecology and evolutionary biology, pp. 396-421. New York: Macmillan Publishing.

Gompper, M.E., Gittleman, J.L. & Wayne, R.K. 1998. Dispersal, philopatry, and

genetic relatedness in a social carnivore: comparing males and females. Molecular Ecology 7: 157-163.

Grant, P.R. 1978. Dispersal in relation to carrying capacity. Proceeding of Natural

Academy of Science, USA 75: 2854-2858. Green, B., King, D., Braysher, M. & Saim, A. 1990. Thermoregulation, water

turnover and energetics of free-living komodo dragons, Varanus komodoensis. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Physiology 99 (1-2): 97-101.

73

Greenwood, P.J. 1980. Mating systems, philopatry and dispersal in birds and mammals. Animal Behavior 28: 1140-1162.

Greenwood, P.J. 1984. Mating systems and the evolutionary consequences of

dispersal. In Swingland, I.R. & Greenwood, P.J. (eds.). The ecology of animal movement, pp. 116–131. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Greenwood, P.J. & Swingland, I.R. 1984. Animal movement: approaches,

adaptations, and constraints. In Swingland, I.R. & Greenwood, P.J. (eds.). The ecology of animal movement, pp. 1-6. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Greenwood, P.J. & Harvey, P.H. 1982. The natal and breeding dispersal in birds.

Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 13: 1-21. Greenwood, P.J., Harvey, P.H. & Perrins, C.M. 1978. Inbreeding and dispersal in the

great tit. Nature 271: 52-54. Gregory, P.T., Macartney, J.M. & Larsen, K.W. 1987. Spatial patterns and

movements. In Seigel, R.A., Collins, J.T. & Novak, S.S. (eds.). Snakes: ecology and evolutionary biology, pp. 366-395. New York: Macmillan publishing.

Goetz, B.G.R. & Thomas, B.W. 1994. Use of annual growth and activity patterns to

assess management procedures for captive tuatara (Sphenodon punctatus). New Zealand Journal of Zoology 21: 473-485.

Guarino, F. 2001. Diets of a carnivorous lizard, Varanus varius. Wildlife Research

28: 627–630. Hadany, L., Eshel, I. & Motro, U. 2004. No place like home: competition, dispersal,

and complex adaptation. Journal of Evolution Biology 17: 1328-1336. Haigen, Xu & Fengxiang, Yang. 1993. Age Classification and growth model of

Phrynocephalus Przewalskii. Ecological Modelling 70(1-2): 127-135. Heatwole, H. 1976. Reptile ecology. Queensland: University of Queensland Press. Henderson, P.A. 2003. Practical methods in ecology. Malden: Blackwell Publishing. Hien, P. 2003. Erster photographischer nachwies von ungewohnlich gefarbten

Varanus komodoensis (Ouwens, 1912) Bei Riung, Flores, Indonesia. Sauria 25(3-9): March 2003.

Higgins, K.F., Oldenmeyer, J.L., Jenkins, K.J., Clambey, G.K. & Harlow, R.F. 1996.

Vegetation sampling & measurement. In Bookhout, T.A. (ed.). Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth edition, pp. 567-591. Bethesda: The Wildlife Society.

74

Higham, T.E., Davenport, M.S. & Jayne, B.C. 2001. Maneuvering in an arboreal habitat: the effects of turning angle on the locomotion of three sympatric ecomorphs of Anolis lizards. The Journal of Experimental Biology 204: 4141–4155.

Hooge, P.N. & Eichenlaub, W. 1997. Animal movement extension to Arcview,

Version 1.1. Anchorage: Alaska Biological Science Center, U. S. Geological Survey.

Hooge, P.N., Eichenlaub, W. & Solomon, E. 1999. The Animal Movement Program.

Anchorage: Alaska Biological Science Center, U. S. Geological Survey. Horn, Hans-Georg. 2004. Varanus salvadorii. In Pianka, E.R., King, D.R. & King,

R.A. (eds.). Varanoid Lizards of the world, pp. 235-243. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Horn, Hans-Georg & Gaulke, M. 2004. Varanus salvator (subspecies). In Pianka,

E.R., King, D.R. & King, R.A. (eds.). Varanoid lizards of the world, pp. 259-271. Indianapolis: Indiana Univ. Press.

Husak, J.F. & Fox, S.F. 2003. Spatial organization and the deer enemy phenomenon

in adult female collared lizards, Crotaphytus collaris. Journal of Herpetology 37(1): 211-215.

Ibrahim, A.A. 2002. Activity area, movement patterns, and habitat use of the desert

monitor Varanus griseus, in the Zaranik protected area, North Sinai, Egypt. African Journal of Herpetology 51(1): 35-45.

James, C.D. 1996. Ecology of the pygmy Goana (Varanus brevicauda) in Spinifex

Grasslands of Central Australia. Australian Journal of Zoology 44: 177-192. Jenssen, T.A. 2002. Spatial awareness by lizard Anolis crysttellus : why should non

ranging species demonstrated homing behavior ? Herpetologica 58(3): 364-371.

Jessop, T.J., Sumner, J., Rudiharto, H. Purwandana, D., Imansyah, M.J. & Philips,

J.A. 2004. Study on nest distribution, utilization, and selection by Komodo dragon, Varanus komodoensis: implication for conservation and management. Biological Conservation 117: 463-470.

Jessop, T.J., Madsen, T., Ciofi, C., Imansyah, M.J., Purwandana, D., Rudiharto, H.,

Ariefiandy, A., Phillips, J.A. 2006. Island differences in population size structure and catch per unit effort and their conservation implications for Komodo dragons. Biological Conservation (Article in press).

Johnson, G. 2000. Spatial ecology of the eastern Massasauga (Sistrurus c. catanatus)

in a New York peatland. Journal of Herpetology 34: 186-192.

75

Johnson, A.R., Wiens, J.A., Milne, B.T. & Christ, T.O. 1992. Animal movements and population dynamics in heterogeneous landscapes. Landscape Ecology 7(1): 63-75.

Katajisto, J. & Moilanen, A. 2005. Kernel-based home range method for data with

irregular sampling intervals. Biological Conservation (Article in press). Kawecki, T.J. & Holt, R.D. 2002. Evolutionary consequences of asymmetric

dispersal Rates. The American Naturalist 160(3): 333-347. Kenward, R. 1993. Wildlife radio tagging; equipment, field techniques, and data

analysis, third edition. London: Academic Press. Kernohan, B.J., Millspaugh, J. J., Jenks, J.A. & Naugle, D.E.. 1996. Estimating 24-hr

use patterns in White-tailed Deer from diurnal use. Journal of Environmental Management 48: 299-303.

Kernohan, B.J., Millspaugh, J.J., Jenks, J.A. & Naugle, D.E. 1998. Use of an adaptive

kernel home-range estimator in a GIS environment to calculate habitat use. Journal of Environmental Management 53: 83-89.

King, D.R. & Green, B. 1999. Goannas: the biology of Varanid lizards. Sydney:

New South Wales Press Ltd. King, D.R., Pianka, E.R. & Green, B. 2002. Biology, ecology, and evolution. In

Murphy, J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C. & Walsh, T. (eds.). Komodo dragons: biology and conservation (zoo and aquarium biology and conservation series), pp. 23–41. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

King, S.R.B. & Gurnell, J. 2005. Habitat use and spatial dynamics of Takhi

introduced to Hustai National Park, Mongolia. Biological Conservation 124: 277–290.

Koenig, W.D., van Vuren, D. & Hooge, P.N. 1996. Detectability, phylopatry, and the

distribution of dispersal distance in vertebrate. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 11(12): 524-517.

Konuma, A., Tsumura, Y., Lee, C.T., Lee, S.L. & Okuda, T. 2000. Estimation of

gene flow in the tropical-rainforest tree Neobalanocarpus heimii (Dipterocarpaceae), inferred from paternity analysis. Molecular Ecology 9: 1843–1852.

Krebs, C.J. 1999. Ecological methodology. Second edition. California: Addison-

Wesley Educational Publisher. Krebbs, C.J. 2002. Ecological Methodology version 6.1: program for ecological

methodology. Second edition (1999). Vancouver: University of British Columbia.

76

Kull, T., Kindlmann, P., Hutchings, M.J. & Primack, R.B. 2006. Editorial: Conservation biology of orchids: Introduction to the special issue. Biological Conservation 129: 1-3.

Lancia, R.A., Nichols, J.D. & Pollock, K.H. 1996. Estimating the number of animal

in wildlife populations. In Bookhout, T.A. (ed.). Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth edition, pp. 215-253. Bethesda: The Wildlife Society.

Lande, R. 1988. Demographic models of the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis

caurina). Oecologia 75:601-607. Lande, R. 1988. Genetics and demography in biological conservation. Science 241:

1455-1460. Langbein, J., Scheibe, K.M., Eichhorn, K., Lindner, U. & Streich, W.J. 1996. An

activity-data-logger for monitoring free-ranging animals. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 48: 115-124.

Lawson, D., Jensen, H.J. 2006. The species-area relationship and evolution.

http://uk.arxiv.org/abs/q-bio.PE/0412024 [July 20th, 2006]. Lebreton, J.D., Hines, J.E., Pradel, R., Nichols, J.D. & Spendelow, J.A. 2003.

Estimation by capture-recapture of recruitment and dispersal over several sites. OIKOS 101: 253–264.

Lemm, J.M., Edwards, M.S., Grant, T.D. & Alberts, A.C. 2004. Comparison of

growth and nutritional status of juvenile Komodo monitors (Varanus komodoensis) maintained on rodent or poultry-based diets. Zoo Biology 23: 239-252.

Lenormand, T. 2002. Gene flow and the limits to natural limits. Trends in Ecology

and Evolution 17: 183-189. Limpus, C.J. & Walter, D.G. 1980. The growth of immature Green Turtles (Chelonia

mydas) under natural conditions. Herpetologica 36(12): 162-165. Llewelyn, J., Shine, R. & Webb, J.K. 2005. Thermal regimes and diel activity

patterns of four species of small elapid snakes from south-eastern Australia. Australian Journal of Zoology 53: 1-8.

Losos, J.B. 2004. Adaptation and Speciation in Greater Antillean Anoles. In

Dieckmann,U., Doebeli, M., Metz, J.A.J. & Tautz, D. (eds.). Adaptive Speciation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Madsen, T., Stille, B. & Shine, R. 1996. Inbreeding depression in an insolated

population of adders Vipera berus. Biological Conservation 75: 113-118.

77

Magnusson, W.E. 1979. Dispersal of hatchling crocodiles (Crocodylus porosus) (Reptilia: Crocodilidae). Journal of Herpetology 13(3): 227-231.

Manel, S., Schwartz, M.K., Luikart, G. & Taberlet, P. 2003. Landscape genetics:

combining landscape ecology and population genetics. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18(4): 189-197.

Mathies, T., Felix, A. & Lance, V.A. 2001. Effects of trapping and subsequent short-

term confinement stress on plasma corticosterone in the Brown Treesnake (Boiga irregularis) on Guam. General and Comparative Endocinology 124: 106–114.

Mattison, C. 1992. Lizards of the World. London: Blandford. McDaniel, C.J., Crowder, L.B. & Priddy, J.A. 2000. Spatial dynamics of sea turtle

abundance and shrimping intensity in the U. S. Gulf of Mexico. Conservation Ecology 4(1): 15. http://www.consecol.org/vol4/iss1/art15/ [March 2, 2006].

McMaster, N.L. & Herman, T.B. 2000. Occurrence, habitat selection, and movement

patterns of juvenile Blanding’s Turtle (Emydoidea blandinggii) in Kejimkujik National Park, Nova Scotia. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 3 (4): 602 – 610.

McNab, B.K. & Auffenberg, W. 1976. The effect of large body size on temperature

regulation of the Komodo dragon, Varanus komodoensis. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Physiology 55(4): 345-350.

McNeil, J.A., Thomas, B.H. & Standing, K.L. 2000. Movement of hatchling

Blanding’s turtles (Emydoidea blandingii) in Nova Scotia in response to proximinity to open water: a manipulative experiment. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 3(4): 611-617.

Melville J. & Swain, J. 1999. Home range characteristics of an alpine lizard,

Niveoscincus microlepidotus (Scincidae), on Mt. Wellington, Southern Tasmania. Wildlife Research 26: 263-270.

Meylan, S., Belliure, J., Clobert, J. & de Fraipont, M. 2002. Stress and body condition

as prenatal and postnatal determinants of dispersal in the common Lizard (Lacerta vivipara). Hormones and Behavior, 42: 319-326.

Mills, L.S., &. Allendrof, F.W. 1996. The one-migrant-per-generation rule in

conservation and management. Conservation Biology. 10: 1509-1518. Milne, B.T. 1991. Lessons from applying fractal models to landcape patterns. In

Turner, M.G. & Gardner, R.H (eds.). Quantitative methods in landscape ecology, pp. 199-235. New York: Springler-Verlag.

78

Molnar, R.E. 2004. The long and honorable history of monitors and their kin. In Pianka, E.R., King, D.R. & King, R.A. (eds.). Varanoids of the world, pp. 10-65. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Monk, K.A., de Fretes, Y. & Reksodiharjo–Lilley, G. 1997. The ecology of Nusa

Tenggara and Maluku. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nams, V.O. 2004a. Fractal version 4.08. Canada: Department of Environmental.

Sciences, NSAC. Nams, V.O. 2004b. Detecting oriented movement of animals. Animal behaviour

(Article in press). Nams, V.O. & Bourgeois, M. 2004. Fractal analysis measures habitat use at different

spatial scales: an example with American marten. Canadian Journal of Zoology 82: 1738-1747.

Nitfield, M.T., Barret, M.W. & Silvy, N. 1996. Wildlife marking techniques. In

Bookhout, T.A. (ed.) Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth edition, pp. 140-168. Bethesda: The Wildlife Society.

Olupot, W. & Waser, P.M. 2001. Activity patterns, habitat use and mortality risks of

mangabey males living outside social groups. Animal Behavior 61: 1227–1235.

Olsson, M. & Madsen, T. 2001. Between variations in determination hatchling

survival in the sand lizard, Lacerta agilis. Functional Ecology 15: 443-450. Olsson, M. & Shine, R. 2003. Female-biased natal and breeding dispersal in an alpine

lizard, Niveoscincus microlepidotus. Journal of Linnean Society 79: 277-283. Otter, K. & Ratcliffe, L. 1996. Female initiated divorce in a monogamous songbird:

abandoning mates for males of higher quality. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 263: 351-354.

Pallant, J. 2005. SPSS survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using

SPSS for Windows (Version 12). Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Pavey, C.R., Goodship, N. & Geiser, F. 2003. Home range and spatial organization of

rock-dwelling carnivorous marsupial Pseudantechinus macdonnellensis. Wildlife Research 30: 135-142.

Pearson, D., Shine, R. & Williams, A. 2005. Spatial ecology of a threatened phyton

(Morelia spilota imbricata) and the effects of anthropogenic habitat change. Australian Journal of Ecology 30: 261-274.

Pelletier, D., Roos, D. & Cicione, S. 2003. Oceanic survival and movements of wild

and captive-reared immature green turtles (Chelonia mydas) in the Indian ocean. Aquatic Living Resosurce 16: 35-41.

79

Pepin, D., Renaud P.C. & Decuq, F. 2006. Identifying activity patterns from activity

counters in ETHOSYS1 collars on red deer. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 96: 103–114.

Perry, G. & Garland, T. 2002. Lizard home ranges revisitied: effects of sex, body

size, diet, habitat and phylogeny. Ecology 83(7): 1870-1885. Pet, J.S. & Subijanto, J. 2001. Enforcement and protection of Komodo National Park.

The Nature Conservancy Coastal and Marine Programme Indonesia. Phillips, J.A. 1995. Movement patterns and density of Varanus albigularis. Journal

of Herpetology 29 (3): 407-416. Phillips, J.A. & Packard, G.C. 1994. Influence of temperature and moisture on eggs

and embryos of the White-Throated savanna monitor Varanus albigularis: implication for conservation. Biological Conservation 69(2): 31-136.

PHKA. 2000. 25 years master plan for management Komodo National Park, Book 2:

data and analysis. Jakarta: PHKA, The Nature Conservancy, Manggarai District Authority.

Piepgras, S.A. & Lang, J.W. 2000. Spatial ecology of Blanding’s turtle in Central

Minnesota. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 3: 589-601. Pianka, E.R. 1986. Ecology of natural history of desert lizards, analyses of the

ecological niche and community structure. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Pianka, E.R. 1993. The many dimensions of a lizard's ecological niche, Chapter 9. In

Valakos, E.D., Bohme, W., Perez-Mellado, V. & Maragou, P. (eds.). Lacertids of the Mediterranean Basin, pp. 121-154. Greece: Hellenic Zoological Society of University of Athens.

Pough, F.H., Andrews, R.M., Cadle,. J.E., Crump, M.L., Savitzky, A.H. & Wells,

K.D. 2001. Herpetology. Second edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Powell, R.A. 1989. Effects of resource productivity, patchiness, and predictability on

mating and dispersal strategies. In Standen, V. & Foley, R.A. (eds.) Comparative socioecology: the behavioral ecology of humans and other animals, pp. 101-123. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publishing.

Prahasta, E. 2002. Sistem Informasi Geografis: Tutorial ArcView. Bandung: Penerbit

Informatika. Primack, R.B. 2004. A primer of conservation biology, third edition. Sunderland:

Sinauer Associates, Inc.

80

Primack, R.B., Supriatna, J., Indrawan, M. & Kramadibrata, P. 1998. Biologi Konservasi. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Indonesia.

Qualls, C.P. & Andrews, R.M. 1998. Cold climates and the evolution of viviparity in

reptiles: cold incubation temperatures produce poor-quality offspring in the lizard Sceloporus virgatus. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 67(3): 353-376.

Qualls, F.J. & Shine, R. 2000. Post-hatchling environment contributes greatly to

phenotypic variation between two populations of the Australian Garden Skink, Lampropholis guichenoti. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 71(2): 315-341.

Reed, J.M. & Oring, L.W. 1993. Philopatry, site fidelity, dispersalm and survival of

spotted sandpipers. The Auk 110(3): 541-551. Reed, J.M., Silbernagle, M.D., Evans, K., Engilis Jr., A. & Oring, L.W. 1998.

Subadult movement patterns of the endangered Hawaiian stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni). The Auk 115(3): 791-797.

Rheaney, L.T, & Whiting, M.J. 2003. Picking a tree: habitat use by the tree agama,

Acanthocercus atricollis atricollis, in South Africa. African Zoology 38(2): 273–278.

Rohr, D.H. & Malone, B.S. 2001. Activity times and body temperatures in an

Australian CoPperheads (Serpentes: Elapidae). Australian Journal of Zoology 49: 223-233.

Roper, T.J., Ostler, J.R. & Conradt, L. 2003. The process of dispersal in badgers

Meles meles. Mammal Review 33: 314–318. Rosenfield, R.N. & Bielefeldt, J. 1992. Natal dispersal and inbreeding in the Cooper’s

Hawk. The Wilson Bulletin 104(l): 184-185. Roze, D. & Rousset, F. 2005. Inbreeding depression and the evolution of dispersal

rates: a multilocus model. The American Naturalist 166(6): 708-721 + 17 pages of appendices.

Salmon, M. & Wyneken, J. 1987. Orientation and swimming bahevior of hatchling

loggerhead turtles Caretta caretta L. during their offshore migration. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 109: 137-153.

Samuel, M.D. & Fuller, M.R. 1996. Wildlife radio-telemetry. In Bookhout, T.A.

(ed.). Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth edition, pp. 370-418. Bethesda: The Wildlife Society.

81

Sarno, R.J., Bank, M.S., Stern, H.S. & Franklin, W.L. 2003. Forced dispersal of juvenile guanacos (Lama guanicoe): causes, variation, and fates of individuals dispersing at different times. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. Doi: 10.1007/s00265-003-0604-5.

Sastrawan, P. & Claudio, C. 2002. Population distribution and home range. In

Murphy, J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C. & Walsh, T. (eds.). Komodo dragons: biology and conservation (zoo and aquarium biology and conservation series), pp. 42–77. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Schemnitz, S.D. 1996. Capturing and handling wild animals. In Bookhout, T.A. (ed.).

Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth edition, pp. 106-124. Bethesda, Maryland: The Wildlife Society.

Schwartz, C. & Arnason, N. 1996. A general methodology for the analysis of capture-

recapture experiments in open populations. Biometrics 52: 860–873. Seber, G.A.F. 1982. The estimation of animal abundance and relate parameters. New

York: MacMillian. Shine, R. 1988. Parental care in reptiles. In Gans, C. & Huey, R. B (eds.). Biology of

the reptilia. Vol. 16, pp. 275-330. New York: Alan R. Liss. Shine, R., Harlow, P.S. Keogh, J.S. 1996. Commercial harvesting of giant lizards: the

biology of Water Monitors Varanus salvator in Southern Sumatra. Biological Conservation 77: 125- 134.

Sinclair, E.A. 1998. Morphological variation among populations of the quokka,

Setonix brachyurus (Macropodidae: Marsupialia), in Western Australia. Australian Journal of Zoology 8(46): 439.449.

Smith, L.L., Robert, B., Joby, M. & Clement, S. 1999. Home range and microhabitat

use in the Angonoka (geochelone yniphora) in Madagaskar. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 3(3): 393-400.

Storz, J.F. 2005. Nonrandom dispersal and local adaptation. Heredity 95: 3–4.

Doi:10.1038/sj.hdy.6800683. [25 May 2005]. Sun, Li-Xin, Shine, R., Debi, Z., Zhengren, T. 2001. Biotic and abiotic influences on

activity patterns of insular pit vipers (Gloydius shedaoensis, Viperidae) from north-eastern China. Biological Conservation 97: 387-398.

Sutherland, G.D., Harestad, A.S., Price, K. & Lertzman, K.P. 2000. Scalling of natal

dispersal distance in terrestrial birds and mammals. Conservation Ecology 4(1): 16. http://www.consecol.org/vol4/iss1/art [April 21 2005].

Te Wong, S., Servheen, C.W., Ambu, L. 2004. Home range, movement & activity

patterns, & bedding sites of Malayan sun bears Helarctos malayanus in the rainforest of Borneo. Biological Conservation 119: 169–181.

82

Thompson, G. 1992. Daily distance traveled and foraging areas of Varanus gouldii

(Reptilia: Varanidae) in an urban environment. Wildlife Research 19: 743-753.

Thompson, G. 1993. Daily movement patterns and habitat preferences of Varanus

caudolineatus (Reptilia: Varanidae). Wildlife Research 20: 227-231. Thompson, G. 1994. Activity area during the breeding season of Varanus gouldii

(Reptilia : Varanidae) in an urban environment. Wildlife Research 21: 633-641.

Thompson, G.G., De Boer, M., & Pianka, E.R. 1999. Activity areas and daily

movements of an arboreal monitor lizard, Varanus tristis (Squamata: Varanidae) during the breeding season. Australian Journal of Ecology 24: 117-122.

Thompson, G.G. & Thompson, S.A. 2001. Behaviour and spatial ecology of Gilbert’s

dragon Lophognanthus gilberti (Agamidae: Reptilia). Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia 84: 153-158.

Trakhtenbrot, A., Natan, R., Perry, G. & Richardson, D.M. 2005. The importance of

long distance dispersal in biodiversity conservation. Diversity and Distribution 11: 173-181.

Tucker, A.D., Limpus, C.J., McCallum, H.I. & McDonald, K.R. 1997. movements

and home ranges of Crocodylus johnstoni in the Lynd River, Queensland. Wildlife Research 24: 379–396

Tweed, E.J., Foster, J.T., Woodworth, B.L., Oesterle, P., Kuehler, C., Lieberman,

A.A., Powers, A.T., Whitaker, K., Monahan, W.B., Kellerman, J. & Telfer, T. 2003. Survival, dispersal, home range establishment of reintroduced captive-bred puaiohi, Myadestes palmeri. Biological Conservation 111: 1-9.

Walsh, T.D.C., Birchardd, G.F. & Tirtodiningrat, K.M.T.A.. 2002. Captive

management and growth. In Murphy, J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C. & Walsh, T. (eds.). Komodo dragons: biology and conservation (zoo and aquarium biology and conservation series), pp. 178–195. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Wapstra, E. & Swain, R. 2001. Geographic and annual variation in life history traits

in a temperate zone Australian skink. Journal of Herpetology 35(2): 194-203. Waser, P.M. 1996. Patterns and consequences of dispersal in gregarious carnivores.

In Gittleman, J.L. 1996. Carnivore behavior, ecology, and evolution. Vol. 2, pp. 267-295. New York: Cornell University Press.

83

Webbs, J.K. & Shine, R. 1997. A field study of spatial ecology and movement of threaten snake species Holocephalus bungaroides. Biological Conservation 82: 203-217.

Wei-Gu, Du & Xiang, Ji. 2003. The effects of incubation thermal environments on

size, locomotor performance and early growth of hatchling soft-shelled turtles, Pelodiscus sinensis. Journal of Thermal Biology 28: 279–286.

White, G.C. & Clark, W.R. 1996. Microcomputer Applications in Wildlife

Management & research. In Bookhout, T.A. (ed.). Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth edition, pp. 75-95. Bethesda: The Wildlife Society.

White, G.C, & Garrot., R.A. 1990. Analysis of wildlife radiotracking data. San

Diego: Academic Press. Whitaker, P.B. & Shine, R. 2004. A Radiotelemetric study of movements and shelter-

site selesction by free-ranging Brownsnakes (Pseudonaja textile, Elapidae). Herpetological Monographs 17: 130-144.

Wolff, J.O. 1999. Behavioral model systems. In Barret, G.W. & Peles, J.D. (eds.).

Landscape ecology of small mammals. New York: Springer-verlag. Wong, D.W.S. & Lee, J. 2005. Statistical analysis of Geographic Information with

ArcView GIS and ArcGIS. New Jersey: John Willey & Sons, Inc. Xiang, Ji & Wei-Gu, Do. 2000. The effects of thermal and hydric environments on

hatchling success, embryonic use of energy and hatchling traits in a colubrid snake, Elaphe carinata. Journal Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A 129: 461-471.

Zar, J.H. 1999. Biostatistical analysis 4th edition. Prentice Hall Inc. USA.