QI 'n'rL QI - app.dnp.go.thapp.dnp.go.th/opac/multimedia/ebook/59_102/59_102.pdf · qt I 2553 30 ntIyJ1 2556 (3 !J) 4 1. Ininwr ii niicd (Mammatia: Carnivora) Ranging ecology and

QI QI

'n'rL

(w'N 1 09VINU 2553 Ell 30 1'tIJ1tJt 2556)

'. - I Q.) QJ QJ d

'1fl JYW1J ft fl'l°iJ 'U

(Mammalia: Carnivora)

lu c'win

n1u11vi$?J- iii LAU4h

1

qt

I 2553 30 ntIyJ1 2556 (3 !J)

4 1. Ininwr

ii niicd (Mammatia: Carnivora)

Ranging ecology and interactions between small and large carnivores (Mammalia: Carnivora) in Thung Yai

Naresuan Wildlife Sanctuary, western Thailand

4 V 2. ¶U1In1LL J'J

(1) i. ucpm uIi W

49 LLfl1u1J L'? 1 LJl flLW 10150

(2) rniiin ( - 1fyr)

17fl9f1WfliUCW1LEfl fl flfl11flflJY1

LI Ln'1fl

49 Ti- J LU LJU n1wimmufll 10150

I'W' 02-470-7571 I1-1 02-452-3455

(3) MI. LLWIIU

unì4 iuni

4 • 4o 3. 11n1n'flJ

flL1flh 1.Jm i1fl1fl 1flflfl1Y

JULJU 83 8 IL lflJ LUtJLV1tJ1J

flLA1WV 10150

02-470-7571 ti 02-452-3455

4. 3 J

LUI1Y1 1 u1J 2553 Auqmlminll 30 t'uu1uu 2556

5. LflU ULY uiijn

2

.• fl iuti iiruf, nenrtment orNann; Park Wj,fl' P!it (f'flcrv1,,,

1lJJ415

1111J

niUflUL144 ni in nnn iniTh

1) flJVLflh11J1

2) flW fl1VLL1flJ Lff1A15 %'13JNi

3)

2554

flLfl'flW1J 2555 LJL1 12-23 L€U 1Ln1.nU't1J U1

1l LlJLfl 6.92 (95% minimum convex polygon) YH1r 2.42 1S12J.

LLL?1uJJ 2 ci'T 2.15 LLat 1.31 5.85 m5naj. iri'n 1.02 4UT1.flJ 1.99 r.n3J.

hJL2flT fyj1J(V

nL'iJ Ln i in rn,JiJ I lJUW1Lfl

wrui ci'tu (Liu)

iu (1JN ijc'L,j) LJU1'n I L4L U

1LN flj LL1 (ji 12) MIUviumminuku LJ11fl Lfl WJ1

(uii) L JNi13J

U1LJLL'flY1

L-dwo-A i4hNyuli 1J iJ 1Ni 2 iinntu 'tiid nini

thnuJn1 L1w)rn

nLLthJtU JnnY1 In fl1fl1U

(n)

ti n

nnuin 76-100

76-100) iinin

i intunin inn un(iWiat 2600)

p

fli flLCi 95 78 --di

tLU1 Mtl - -

LI tifli fl1flJflJ LLfl1flL1Lj

,- .,

. . - . - - JJ1 1flfl41flJ

Iiii I 1 1 fl1j

(1 6nn3nnn1 53 6j3J) flLL

12 wm4ulU 111J

LL1 10 . ulJ k-ulu"lizp diiuynj

LLfl1fl CJ1'

uidi-itu 1UN ILF LI LL 40 W. ,Y1LL1fl4

ndi IL1U UILflflt1flfl1T) 11 tLIiln1 SLn

ntiih fl1L ULJU1f) I CU flL fl3J

LLn11n'1 n1U n -wrii i Ini- è6

L1fl1 flJIW1

ULLUfl.J itni LLLTh4L CU ULThJflII

u1iu I LQ1n1 1CWVfl

1flflL11LLl4UJ0.

thi flUIL 11L1fl WJ1YCU14'1

LLfl fl'hJiLIfl 79 [95% Cl, 32 - 1911 I'/.fl3J. IL?I 225 [106 - 4771 LtzJii 2

76 [45 - 1281 " /W5.fl1J. LLM 93 [57 - 1501 i13JWW1U

2 J J1UlII1-U

IJ

loolulon3TIIJMUILLUU 15.3 LLat 36.3 c

LIICfl/WT ci113J41J IL iJ101 30.5 LLat 35.4 UII Ifl /IcrT1 J1J '1J''1 1ULLUU Lila J'?JEN

ILL EU1C.J1 '1U flIflflflNitJ ( nU-rJniiU) Nwju 19 1J 40

I11'5 LLNnNrnJ1n ( 1Jfl3Jfl1IU-2CflUU) itn'u 36

Na

CU i'th U'J 1fl1 Ui II flfl'1

iJLIVYnJi Ii1fl€flJ1'JiU ifliflU'?i'üUiN LIJU

Ii iIIWJfl'11IJT1JiU

CU LW1ITh UNn IJ'J 'UIi1fl'1 'LUILII'i.IJi

4

LLfl1fl'1tJflTh ULL 1 2 'tflWi l3JLLfl hJ*Wfj

U ½13J 1fl1fl Ul3J

u nul i 26-50 hJTiLLfl 11 tJ1 75-100

34 LiiTiwn 45 Milloal 'h 2 TI nni 43 LLJ

ar 41 Jfl 1JJ1L 2ThW1J LTi11JLLLJ11J (o 33

24) 2 Ti (i 11 iuv 15)

1ftfl 1Li' LI LL JLYh1'U (üu 30) 1Li?J1b

1u?iTi n*u'b (u 54) JLL iiJ Ln11L fThT

flfl1 flflflUflTh flJ')

fl1 TtJflJtirn (fl J) LI JJYW (iw

.z1) riiu I'ii iniiin

innin iLvicj

J flfl1LI411 ILL flLfl iYI..1

MIU . LL1Jflthfl It3JJ I

1fl LL Jfl12J

1Th1IL 1.6 6rlllO ii tziuv (M.M.) Un 2.7 6hllO LLL1U ijitj €d'i1iTi

2 1 1LLnr?J.nI LIN L W14I1JU 5.7 /10 LLI 1LI1

Ili3J1CU 0.4 cI/10

II1 I TiflYUJ ticu

i-ij iLL LLL flfl1J 50 nflLJItJY,J *'L,,4

nit*i IIN flTL iflflL flLLU

&llM'A'113JMU'ILLUUlA

hIE.Ji'i L1IL

iinndii cu (jL) LI ninTdiJh ( LLLIL3J11)

I .JL'?i'?11i LJ' 2 mummmoianmil 10-11 6h LIt1J2J fliU

unndiu

5

lol V-5-um Wuailfi -51 m-55 1&j

n1nr -.

1. fl11 r1J flLflWh

2. fl1 LL U1 LflL w1L1qj fl1LL J IL Y1A1 EJfl

3.

flflTãLLLWN

unthuri (Mammalia: Carnivora) n1 nulJui

' u 28 IdN nn 6 tTh 20 n 5

15 Iani) (Nakhasathien and Stewart-Cox, 1990; Lekagul and McNeely, 1977;

Steinmetz and Mather, 1996; Conforti, 1996) 1L1 n1 i1rnJ1

(wu nn) LLOWUN

Ui%1T Lf1 3Lh.JEY1W LJU &) nLd1L1JV1 J

iwI (Rabinowitz, 1991) , Lfl flL /WJ'Y1LLU. ii

Ln1U 1na LLgILL1L) (Conforti, 1996)

(van de Butt, 2003)

(L'du (Rabinowitz, 1991) &Nalm'niwh'5'mjai

Conforti (1996)

fl 1'?JJ1Lfl zrimmu flLU.flW1

nin milu nn ri (Conforti, 1996) IL LLL14a1J

(Prayong and Srikosamatara, 2006; Rabinowitz, 1991;

Rabinowitz, and Walker, 1991; Simcharoen et at., 1999; Duckwcrth, 1997) '1J1 L1.L'I Ti?i 2

ininwntj (I IL thjin.nu) LflW1 L'1'LJ LL3.J.h ZL ('LJn

JJU'Lfl) (Mukherjee et at., 2004) Lifl fl'ifl1 1 fl'iflJfl'fl J''hiflTi

iirn Ln niqn 1'flJ 1 LU1Ln1L'J1JLJTh

n1JrnA LL 1'flflUflJ'U (Walker and Rabinowitz, 1992; Rabinowitz, 1991;

Grassman et at., 2005; Lynam et at., 2005; Steinmetz et at., 2006; n1com Lekagul and McNeely, 1977;

Duckworth, 1997; Duckworth et at., 2005; Grassman, 2000; Grassman et at., 2005a)

aanmi (Grassman et at., 2005a)

(Grassman et at., 2005b) LLN'Ja (Rabinowitz, 1990; Simcharoen et at., 1999)

(Rabinowitz 1990; Grassman, 1998) (Simcharoen, 1998) LLfl'b

(Grassman et a(., 2005c) IU1 iflflW1L wi (home range) nnh (habitat use) DIFAU

LJlni'n nnni 1SIWhi, u4iwi iu uiniw

1flfl'11.iY1

1fl 1UJ1

L'J'U

i (Grassman, 1999) 1 flL fl'fl (Rabinowitz and Watker, 1991) iJui

vha coyote (Canis (atrans) Lot swift fox (Vulpes

velax) (Thompson and Gese, 2007) Lotu.mlii coyote t'u gray fox (Eurocyon cinereoargenteous) uit bobcat

(Felis rufus) (Fedriani et at., 2000) LJ1.JU 1Lfllt3J

13fl)t1LLtU 1flfr fl U0J31J jn-r .jüiw

wii iri nn -i unni

MUVIViAIM~-1 iiu inu i.jguinigiii wviha$ (Nakhasathien and

Stewart-Cox, 1990; Conforti, 1996; Chutipong et at., 2014)

jnn nin nit in tirn (resource partitioning)

(I iii Lu€n) I'cgh

(viu i lirunaiiu lui niii)

iu (i.'u J fl'ULL Thic) nnnii

1Y1 ln n1.nc fl11'L2i

fl flL1 11J

U1 3J

T1J

tJn

(nu-wi Rabinowitz and Walker 1991) iu

11fl 1J'U1Lfl tu

7

flTJ fli ic i n'NTh' M. 2517

ma'UMM"~%h %41 '1 i Lfl1 1fl L11 (3,622 V5. mi. 2,279,500 1i

2 'l A@ mQ@ULJI LLw1n)

i:Jii:Ji VI4Q 1 1L L

'/111tIfl13iEJJ M.M. 2534 t0tiEni1 UNESCO

Zlfl€flfl1?l

JnWi'-i 3 crn jth.i (qwnJ 61 maimij) qtrn (qfr1rnJ 61 n3imiTug)

(u-i unuu) 1nthuIwLQi 2,337 uJw wi11 la.M. 2529-2539 tiThJ3flcu

iithiai (in'i'i 100 jii.) ad 5 AU nnww 61 ii'titjiuu (van de

Bult, 2003) LQ3J1fl 28 iiia (Thai Meteorological Department, 2005)

flL1 JTh1J

MILLI 200 (uji'L'ic "Ld) 1,800 i1 n'i11 1 UL%1?1

1t4)fl

L 1TUfl Lfl OJN11%tIEI 1L

h4flJ1 L1U (Jli1

i13JY

i1n4a-lu iin it1J (aiui 45-47) nj't'iJdti 2 flu€ iJir.i

LLMIOU h tiu (euzi 28-31) ,hiiii (5-mat 15) iaa (u 4) 114Lhi

(8a 5) (Nakhasathien and Stewart-Cox, 1990; Kutint ira and Bhumpakphan,

1989)

69 ici win 52 ana Li.i 28 ' 'o-Mn EJn' 289 Jl cnn 177 aqa

'Lu 52 '.wi iunu 'Lini 48 cnn 34 gina 'Lu 12 ii LI I LUUfl 'Linii 15 ijN cnn

8 ana 'Lu 5 II tJirn.iici 'Lini 67 'iii cnn 49 OQO 'Lu 20 -AA (Kutintara and Bhumpakphan, 1989) 1I4

(plant

geographical characteristics) Lkul 3 I'JIWEJflu 'L1II6 LTh1 flIL uIJn3J'1 (Indo-Burma) gulvilvui Undo-

China) II6u1flI (Annamatic) iiau inn (Indo-Malaya) (Kutintara and Bhumpakphan, 1989)

(home range)

LL'rfr?J 1J1.fli 43'1J LLL

11fl1fTW1

u-in EVIJU J3J1 fl1flLLLfl tun iniir (Mesh live-trap)

1julm 50 x 50 x 120 '. (n x wn x n) W1

fl Jifl L 1flJ

11nnn ni L flt W1U J'1I.JC1 tr1.flT51

2553 51i5vrimj 2554 r'h ( nLL'L4cii) mu

28 1 ( uiui 2 F1 5-1) (i'i 1) um iu 7

Lflflfl tiLL fl m4IthLI) uchri 1 L1 nthiiiI' fltfl

6 n€uJ1u flJfl1 LUJ1cYY) IL L1UWF S1LI 1WVWIfThfl

I fli 1JflCUL1fl UJuJuTh'v1141flu (home range)

11nnh 1IIJn1ruu,41nu ni Lui'n 2

'Lu 2 '1L'1 t 'i (06.00-08.00

u) LLiiu (18.00-20.00 u) 1 uniuijijicuin 2-3 acn LEJW1

NUJLJ1fl'1 (bi/triangutation) 1n i'Inh LuIthIIfl'J Arc View 3.3 ([SRI Inc., Redlands, CA,

USA) Lu n LJTh1 LLa 'LJfl'l1tfl'U

Maximum Convex Polygon (MCP 95% LI 50%) fixed Kernel (Kernel

95% LLa 50%) ddiaiwinviininiu€di LL u113.nu

LuuLuun1nn'Luu']

--

nw)'n'ijg 2554 unn -w 2555 u1u uuLIa II1flh'u'LlJ

L'Lurn -nnu 3)

65 LIuI 50 (MCP

95% IL Kernel 95% jgi'u) 3 'w 2 vnimajat

63-78 (MCP 95%) II i'€jua 66-83 (Kernel 95%) j'ij

2 m ulniILa - *1Iu u uLIi 1.02 3.78 ovmi

IILn Lin ii iiuinwiu'L'J cuniin.

II L1J1fl (run unwvl) uu'Luuuni inn ilu

@0 12-14 1 13Jr 1L core area (MCP 50%) 2 11 Thni (Grassman et at.,

core area (MCP ut Kernel 50%) nijhj

Y1fThLfl6Y) 1 nIZL3J

i41nJJ (1nn uv)a 12-23 i€n) cirI (n=5)

nnl 5.2-6.2 m7nj. (95% KerneL Uft MCP g1J; Grassman et at., 2005b) v1nJ$t'u

nuirnni.a' uij (n= 1) nrfru (i1-i 3) nnti

i€*r (n=1) inn n nni JiIi Grassman et al. (2005b) itz'i Lhrni

(75-139 wi

LtJiJiJñ'i.J 67 Im iij) i €nahiIiiWfti

ij d bcljJ1n1'n (<10 ii tui) ni

Grassman et at. (2005b) • ..

'Ltuuwmnnii ui n 1ui niijv core area i •

iinnnu (,.jnyi 1 mi. nu. vinill

2 ninin)

fli flefl

L ii a -i Lfl in'i in LWM1J'

flTL tJ

'L1n1Lnu1flL fl,JLrnEJJ1J Lfl L11iLflY1

injhJu ijajiLu (in)

LL51 (1i ukLNLu) &m& 60 iiui (€ti

a 12) (nin 1) Ji1L13J1in ji)iiJ Odll L1%JU UL'?iJ1U

LLa.n-n Fj ntiulun5 nh11.h11Mauiflfl11n1fflJ vmu

Thrni i L1.iu 1vv1Na 2 thni Jt'U IkL6 i1ii ni,rnan'i (Carbone et al.,

1999) n jni 'iiNa iin

iun1i

(iiin) ij'ui wiii (rn 2)

10

fl75 -- fl1 LflTLflU 5 ny1flJ LLfi Jsrn.ni 2 cI') LLLJL

ci,ni 3 hwi 5 'tJni WYUJ 2-3

i 20 L 'UJgflEflfl11

tL LL flWlJ1fl

flLfl1'1LJ L 20 LULJ U1ErLJ UUf)iThJFJ L1JI'L

nThJ*u (n)

flL1 10-40 tij. Lot 240 rdaj. 4uliJ ('ii)

11Lthbi (tangled structure) () i€ni () 'nit

,JnJdI-u (u) unJn EUtJM (LthLhJ 4 c'u 1: 1-25%; 2: 26-50%;

3: 51-75%; LL 4: 76-100%) ( 1IJT'1 L n11.LL1J13J

1L1*h'U Iirrnn1i 2 'ua "ii" ugi ""

LL '1 .LLL1Ji4 LL () 'UW

flJ fI 1UJUfl4ffl 1JflSflfl1'ti

Lfl I JJ 3 J'tLLfl 1) 1fllJ€1 2) ij jwi ig 3) ciTj

Iinni Ctn m emergent tree) n tini di'1tIthirrj Arc View 3.3

11u1L1 LLYflTt4W) " il Lhfl'r4U" LLn1fl 11J1

J1

N1LLfl5(J -- LL flflW13J 2555

5 c' LL11 4 flT

LUL 1.

5 U1flLfl ILiJi

76-100 ad inu n

aJnT1

anin n'Thanin ard-i (iui 76-100) LLi A.

AULAI Lfl' U n-mJ nA alAN Lhnil (u

26-50) LL flflT 'flU 1LLflfl L1J (vN

(Joshi et a(., 1995; Mudappa, 2006) ad nnnwm- i

LtJ,n 2

aannnauLd- 1 a ni uanina iniu

11

fllnL 95 L Ja 78 ' u

11 'tJLJ€t1J • 0

LLflLflYUflJ

(maximum tree height) hn'iw in wiPn

~Ublj -vim flWh Lila IJtli 1LL Lflii(

Ln t1UL Lv ( nnnnni 53

UL?1 1ULfl W5flSflflktiJiflnhi 12 UJJhJ FtJni LDfl

wm~-iwvm-umi5ij

10 i3J.Iruld 1'1' d1$11UfI'Y12J

diL'Kif'ii LAUL1 111 l3JLungnLL 40 . nJW%LLthJ

ni di4 LL flflf11T L'1Lfli fl

(home range) &m iNn Li1i nJ

rn niUflJY1 1iLL1JtL1J

LiflU'?Jii

UiLL1&U ui1cni iaiJi cu

Lfli J UL 1n1 n1 'hininLL cijaiiqjniiinnn-rvi

12

nhj iwr

LflUlU%1l

2

LJN

6 LLfl IIA37 L11i L11J LLL3J'1T

(nui ut1iJ) LLfl111J

hL1

nitJnJi (SEF) Ji j (MDF) Li (DDF) LLNU (MXF) ini'

(uv) (w) ArcView 3.3

LLLLt L1hJ lIfl flcl tJ) 1i3Ji1.S L1nL1Jfr15

iiii '1tni 1nJ $ 'WILf

, ,- ,

LU JL'V11.

linnn,.ii1,j' 2 2 tJL inJ

l,JJ1J-W1 Lfl1WflW.4 nni&t'ti fl1.JW1 LI W13 in

cij'LJi'ii 00 M9ivAPmmik (Iul ni) LI nihn-wi (nTjj/taA

rr)

innditinii ini ,J 5

U. ij'1,J (i LLI/1Mc11i) tiJa.

Wfl4 20 Laim I iu @viqMim-5hMinmAnmFjmvi

L%I1I'1J 0.13 LOAM-115' IU 3J1flJ 7.15 Llat 6.11 LOAM1 I -Ili ijif'tj

LL

.unini'u II n1ni ni in 1.UEWl (% canopy) u

5 L:jm,5 IUn1 u.1IJu 4 'd 1 (<25%), 2 (26-50%), 3 (51-75%), Lot 4 (>75%)

4 inn (% ground) 2 I i1JILtJIit 20 'iii

a 10 ¶flJ. lolu ill ~mvrll MIIJUU-Iill4 5, 10, 15 LIU 20 LJY

(Malcolm & Ray, 2000)

13

S. a

-- flu 1flL 1 Lfl1LflWflflWJ (rodents) Nnwrin5lk

(Sherman live trap; Sherman Traps, Inc,. Tallahassee, Florida) lU 2 (aiiiuU) LUfl111

unduunu 2 1 lULL fl1flhL flfl.ttU 4 ' 'UdJ (naa16) lului

iuunnuuuu 5 LU LLcaL'Ji'u 200 UJ lULL fl'flciuUTh 12 n lwiuin.

fl1U 15 L,J15 nil LL dEJ1'1L1a1 5-6 uj-i'Wi 1L€14

lJfltJUfl JLLai LL 'IZ1i1Un flu fl41J Uflfl LLiL1a1 18.00-07.00 U.

LYI1IU L 1J ULLifllU

•ti' win&MjI 06.00 U. nUi unur n LU1Y1I

1J€111 ciiun u -wTu 1A1 ULi'Jl1J14 (Monet tag

No. 1) LEM Ufll'lLLUfl*) LLa JJU fJ 1U IJIt&UMUMUILLUU fltL3J) tnu'uu

(capture - mark - recapture) lUfll l iflhlLWIU1lULLJ'lrn. "0" LL "1" ItULJU

imwil-un-ii9i,n'@ (occasion) il package "secr" (Efford, 2013) IuIJ5LLn51j R (R Core Team 2013) tJul

(n=4

lorili ANOVA LLa1nFr W1.LLa I l'flTh11aJLL1J1J Tukey HSD test (with

adjusted p-value = 0.1)

Na -- lflfllUlfl Il'flfl1tfllU 16 U lUJL1a1 2 NIAI U11711U mflfl4UlLLU (nun

3n) LL 1LiI11VI WIMAI 3'J)

LL111

(F3.12=9.414, p=0.002

LIft F312=5.509, p=0.013 u3Ju 'u) 2

J (rn'v an) 1U 2 l 3JFY11JLL1 flIlfU LL1 2 UThr1a

2 LL1UU UJLL'n (nu 48)

UlL1fl1 lUU UW1lflilUYfl.Pi1Ll'lifl LUJ3J1113J

(unnu

lLLUflFl Iuauii.ia) 1UL LnIll(UlU 2

nuia 1U4ULi1I ibfqi4hmAI

Uil' lU UE Lt UTh JLL (u'bn) LLa)uNa3JNlu (uU'tJ) 1Ufil1U

1'UUuflflifl'efllUaULLLaLUUi

J1LaL0 IflJ1 lUlUflmi'VUL fla1JJ

(Venkataraman et al., 2005; Nakagawa et a(., 2006)

14

fl flC4Ufl1,J oo a

1YfUPi LL fl1fl1iWF J

LLfl11 (wi 800 1,000 Lai) V *1 V V 01 4 a 01

'?flhYWI Ufl 1L fl L L LL11W

't UU in iJLfli LJtM 'fl flTfl11. fl1Jn'1U L"JU L4LUinI1U

JLnU (t 1L4i) nin

L %bNU Iii flWifiU1 (Nakagawa et at., 2006; Wells et at., 2007)

m-Auvnnilhija -- I3JL 1 fliLLflh i3JtL1JkU

nin l,mfl 6 nti

Loa L'JU it ini i iwi tLL1t 4'I131 LL94l

fl 1 1Ufl1JflTh 14 JYltZ%1 (U

nj.) Ui.3'l1J LLa 1WYF n1JflJ Ltth

LYfl 3Ji1'LJ LI LaiUL3JJ 1JiIfl I ifliJfl1fli

(Rabinowitz and Walker, 1991; Grassman, 1999; Phetdee, 2000)

inniiUIii ifl'iii i1flt1flfl

IiLncuffl AIC (Akaike Information Criteria; Burnham and Anderson, 2004)

i rnii tii AICc (iijIL

h.'Lunwth igw I 1J10J- i1J (LuTh ni 'UJthin ILani'thinJ COMO

nILLiUa [0,11)

1U)1fl I3JW AICc (MICc) nnn- i 2 in'biiThn AICc

(AICc = 0.0) i i3JiflhirT1ffl

(wi)

-- LI Ii WLLfl nitiniwi Iii 1flWN I LcJII JE ' 2 wiinwi

U 'U.JLWfli'U2J1n (Welch Two Sample t-test: t=-0.579, d.f.=60.78, p=0.5647) (ii 6)

'tvullT]LLn fl iL i1Jin1nnnT1'LtflfV1 2 (t=2.989, d.f.= 114.57, p=0.003) Jil

iJ inin Cu fl UEJa 26-50 'LukLn (35%

nkm n= 102) LIua 75-100 l'ii (32% Taivhnki, n=41) in1n i

34 hJJLLn LLM~@Fiat. 45 lJciac 'L'uii' 2 tJ I1C nua 43 (n=102) ILIU

at 41 (n=41) l ni 1iJII IiJi1J 11 iN II1IIaN1U (aua 33 LL

'aua 24) IU J1NN11JJ1..Sni 2 i1 (5miat 11 LIa iana 15)

nliIi IL fl1J iil 1UL'1ifJ (u 30) 4i

l MDA niJhni (n 54) @FAW101hLL61

15

2 2 J rnyi

6 ii IMJI 52 1flTh 143

20) (ti 19) MvU (aua 15) ('aia 14) IUJ'1 ii1 (fria 10)

tJ It It • .1; 0 V V It 0 0 - - 01

wii (Kruskal-WaUis test; X2 = 142, d.f.= 3, p<0.0001) 1L LL0T 'Z6

ninuuit I' Lth 15.3 LL 30.5

2J11J L11J%4rnLL1.iu 36.3 um. 35.4 ctLLL L T/L icrv 'h iiva -iiJ

nnt a (AAICc <2.0) in 6 'ii (ii 7) 'iuii

43.n't 'J1LN4JJ. iitrJ IL LL3J11'fl 'tLLfl ATIV0112141041 (attitude) n w

(% canopy) (stream)

(predator) 13J1J

(wi > 0.8) 1aJ2iJ1flfl LILa) LL4Lifl1 LWfl(1

(nnnh wi) IL 340th

LLU1U L°fl.I1Wfl iLLth ni (i3J wi =

0.91) 'VU1J

n,0 ju 3 n~3jflhfl fl WiJ1fl LLnhJ1.'1J

t IL J&J IL i.in'tni i

ngT1E LI LL 1ntflJ1%

iuTiciI (h ,hNri'hJ) nn iri (tih j) (rni 5) ftt

nui

1n1 'flrLi nJn11h4n LIaJn?1Lhfl11'n (Chuang & Lee,

1997)

nuii

L flN LI1.fl.J

2 1II aL IL LIt 1iI, cflZ1T1 (rni

5) L LLL UIQL1J LflL 3Jfl Nfl1fl f!i',Jfli?1fl1fl

U'] 2 lflUL lb (Nakashima et at., 2010; Zhou et at.,

2008)

S31flfl LflflUUflrlU ILV nrin-i

~IfflJAT)NU WLiULL37LAUJWT (Rabinowitz & W&.ker, 1991; Phetdee, 2000)

16

a v a a a n1JLUr)

huiXmi n) viju

fl1 LL 3fl1LJ 1flL fl 1n1 1rnifl3J

mfla-itiflimuirinnii (spatial aggregation) 12fl1

L1fl

(Jacomo et at., 2004; Harmsen et at., 2009)

i -ib:I Ll SflnLLth'11 I

95 wj1 X 44

L1''I jJg 95 JJ1JL1 0.5 mag

(iiu um6iuh hu

%'€rnrnJ IL 'cn1LI titiw u'?iLN1i) 1tJcIJi

ni

11LLU NlI 1Ln

(u tii)

iii n1 €Nnn rn.inn'i (spatial scale)

(temporal scale) t tii LnLQ1L,J

17

Idi riiin Ln'u L flflJ 'JJ 1' L'1J fl1L'lflhVL

(Karanth et al., 2004) fl1flUUfl1nLn 13Ji

1LtJ3J1LaLJ (Mohd-Azlan & Sharma, 2006) ni'niij (h

Dajun et aL, 2006; Kauffman et a(., 2007)

in ci'iwh ni'ih in innu

ginm€nn-wi

nnndiun' (Stealth Cam STC-1590; Stealth Cam, LLC, TX, USA) iLthJn1W1'U

8 'L1 LL1s%iU nflfl 55 I at 47 @m 'lthLn LL 19 c Lot 22 o. 4 , , ,'

nULUMON ci izi incni

1Li1J i 2 J (1i$ 9)

i.z(an) 1*1U L1 1'b L?J1J I@FJ

14 fl131 L flL1AflflUYU

'nu11n3ywu 40-45 'm. n'ja€1 24 ''b uni nani

ii'c (inni 1LL 20.6-27.2 nJ. (ni 9)

2-3 1i

LLai12J1CI

I iniinni 1iILiJl LUJ (i1ji

LIM) LI 'tjni iwurnrnu (1

IniiN 2 inni1LLUni1UJ1L1

Li1WItJ 2 cI1 iLLtJflLLiiflhJ 2 10-11 ci'i

iaiTi (ni 8) ad1i3.1

Mllul1twoiflh1i1Wli1A1'

L'lflJ

aiUL')1Jfl IrnNi 1jLL,JJ 11L1iUNtJ'Lfl41 (ni 6)

*ii (Herorctos moloyanus) IL iin (Ursus thibethonus) (Ngoprasert et at.,

2012)

18

- no 11IU14'tfl 9I1 IIUW

r''rtrricnt ot National Part. Wildl,t nd Plant Conservation i't'-a

(capture history) 1 '3jw.'1. IUiJJ "0" LL

'tci "0" LL nilnn niiin iiJrn (occasion) ui "1" un1,

nii u 'L '1JI1 1111 'i'T1')

R (R Core Team 2013) DIFJI package 'secr' (Efford, 2013) Lfl1LUIJ'L

maximum likelihood model 1nndnhL Jfl (spatially explicit capture-

recapture, SECR) (Borchers & Efford, 2008) LL fl11IJE

nnL fla tfl flfl LLU11 fl1JtA

buffer strip width (W)

(effective trapping area, A(W))

-- fl1u LLNi 9-10 LLiaJ a13LJYfl,,j

iui iJ (iinu*/10 ii 'auj) 1Wi'u,ct n iJ11ni (n'ni 9) titj'ti.zIwn Frim

1.6 /10 MITIAMUM5 u, 2.7 /10 r5.nJ.

211Ii'1J 11UNII 2 L EJ-3L1U 5.7 *)/1 0 m.m. 1LL11I1J

LLLN 0.4 6hlio .fl3J. V1J

(95% CI l4) tnnnni i'b

1nfY11'1t1O4'1 4u1UL%T1

LL'lf) (ri 9)

1nn.Z

uw nn u" nLu ocelot

(8-18 nn.) n1n Vfl1 LL.J'L1 WJ'/1

ocelot 'Lnaìui VIUM vdi th (5.85-9.47 */10 Kolowski &

Alonso, 2010) IL 1JLJ (5.9 /10 l.fl3J.; Diltion & Ke(ly, 2007) 113J't1in UUn1nW1A2i

11tTh i2( 2

polygon Jn1L fl fl1-tJ ni tin

(ESA) i'1r4ni

in (Efford, 2004; Obbard et at., 2010)

n Lii 1J flfl'fl'Li1'UJTI UWI1LL11'

LLfla IL1J'IJ LLflui fliJ

iLiiuLL iNfl (jrrw 4n,'u) dii iiU Liii iLVUtJJ

Ar

(iiuh) iin1 11JM1LL'U'U

un flhLd1 'Th'U i4ii1J i1J iLL

50 (iintih)

19

Ufl 11 1J

antnafl

L'?JJ 1'Tflf1W.4 L1U1Jfl

a€urn jnuLn -jrjini.zingrn t uia Mu Suazo-

Ortuño et at., 2011) n LL L1h%1 .( .2 • 0' a

2iflJ . U • • a . .t . a t. • a'

LL11L1L 1 LJIJ'1. fl1fl

ni tEnian1ulnn1w

,?J1rW1fl L U'LULUJ'fl' Ln inn UJi ii1tvvi. 2

't1JLLLLaSi'1UTh LL (Rajaratnam et at.,

2007) 1*i , n

LL LLNi nLnWiY1irn4t lLLfl WVU 'U1JflL%U

tfl LUJ izri OJIMAMATUITI 2 Thinii

WiTh. Y] nnLn'L'1iW.rn n'lti1JLJTh

'th thnnm5uniamim anbcu.,vmniFjmvq nw (zib

ua'iu) LL iiiflLLA LLnflThl1J rn

LLJtJ

LLJ 1L'1OhJ

LLnini1Ln14)'hJ

uiai 2 Th1 flYfl flhiLilJflia'E.i'UJ flifli UlJ€YW1J

1i"I1.J LI iflLfllJi1' I in ninI,LIIainiI'..rJi i'?1

iII1'cLjiflJ ILn'flfliUfli' 'h.i3J ii'fl Lfl1

IIIii1hJf'u (LI nI urnjcnnin iniii.nn

IiJIfl iini1L0d) Ua uwin-in-imu

tniflLi1nU

20

11I 1

UL 4fl 1fl'W3J 2553 - .JTWJ 2554

(i) irnnTh (nn) ntJL

I11 LL11i1J. (uu) 6 -

(u.itj) 2.7 11

(un) 4.7

(Xi) 3.3 -

(n) 5.6 -

MhLflla (') 5.8 -

3.1 -

R9E (i) 11.5

1LJ (i) 8.3 -

OAUAD (r) 2.2 -

iui (iu) 2.1

1LY1J () 3.9 -

() 1.6 -

L11b (un) 4.2 -

iruuJ (n) 2.3

(@ 2.1 -

() 6 MMFJ

L'1l111 gnkmmla (r) 5.1 -

L'flh flW.iL1' (r) 5.1 -

LJU nn) () 1.4 -

J)L (ii) 2 -

(LThi) 3.4

4'1J (U) 14.6

(LThJ) 5.2

J1..JL () 6.2 mmViq

(r ') 5.4 -

1T (11n) 2.2 -

maxlb~ (UJu) birnrn -

icn () > 60 -

21

M-15qlm 2 ifl flcu L1Jfl3J

1lJJ1J41l4 fl LTh'1.ifl V(1' fl111. 2554 5in5nflqflIj 2555

1Lfl L13JiflJ

V1JEJ () 2 . - 30 j. 2554; 153

23 fl.v. - 4 fl.ft 2555

(iu) 2 M. - 30 J. 2554 24

LL3flYfl (i) 2 n.m. - 30 1J. 2554 49

JL1€ (L3J) 23 fl.. - 4 lift 2555 189

VW1D' (ti) 23 flY. - 4 n.e. 2555 74

Nol () 23 n.. - 4 n.i. 2555 142

LJ11U 43JJ () 23 fl.fi. 11 riM. 2554; 67

16 - 29 2555

1flII4I J1 fl11L 1U. 1U 1 I1I3J1

itr -1 n n-i nivrijn

LL.J11T 1A1fl

U1L1 flIlir)11'lJtflh4lJflY1 biti

nh111J

3 1 41 1WILfl nh nind 1ti 2554 flflfl?hJ

2555 nniiinl' Minimum Convex

Polygon (MCP 95% at 50%) u, Fixed Kernel (Kernel 95% ui 50%) ntiJnm ArcView 3.3

I'flr1Ln MCP 95% [MCP 50% Kernel 95% Kernel 50%

IflJ (LtJ) 6.92 0.87 5.24 0.52

'XI'A@'UAUIJ 1.99 0.35 3.78 0.49

LLflIT (iiu) 1.02 0.15 1.45 0.21

0AULA1@1 (uii) 2.15 0.14 1.05 0.16

(ulli) 1.31 0.07 0.51 0.07

LLi3() 5.85 0.59 3.06 0.26

() 2.42 0.38 2.62 0.34

22

-v - v1 4 MU

5 4j 4

(i) 40 42

6J () 41 40

mwio 1 (i) 40 33

2 (ti) 40 40

l41 3 () 40 40

23

5 jnianal (Use) 5 (i 2 c'h I14

3 ) (Random)

ni i'n3J (category) i n3.J (level) un0n

(mean) (standard error; SE)

level n3ath

W1'3 Use LL1 Random Iu fl'WIflJL11J1J Log likelihood ratio (G-test) test of independence

Wilcoxon rank sum test

nwiJthni

Use at Random unhwh P-value fl JnTIIcInJ (alpha level = 0.05)

UTlJE

L1U1v5a (n=3)

P-value

(n=2)

P-vatue Use (SE) Random (SE) Use (SE) Random (SE)

(%) 1-25% 1-25% 0.0076 76-100% 51-75% NS

flfl.JU0 (%) 26-50% 26-50% NS 76-100% 51-75% <0.0001

13i1Thn l3Ji1n NS l3ith1n Jin NS

th1fu iThni 0.0002 LThnj NS

NS al NS

aui€ (3J.) 26.1 (0.38) 30.9 (0.33) <0.0001 24.9 (0.42) 22.8 (0.62) 0.0427 Pul

iiai (.i.) 33.4 (0.66) 41.5 (0.86) <0.0001 33.4 (0.68) 32.9 (0.76) NS

131UaU (j.) 28.0 (0.95) 29.6 (0.91) NS 25.7 (0.89) 25.8 (0.85) NS

L1flI1 1.J81J

61.8 (2.85) 46.8 (1.97) <0.0001 53.3 (2.67) 52.2 (3.84) NS

mu (J.) 12.8 (0.67) 12.1 (0.78) NS 12.2 (0.52) 11.9 (0.68) NS

72f1uvJZY (i'WLni)

J1Ufl'113 ;,10 %j. 16.0 (0.73) 15.5 (0.69) NS 23.8 (0.91) 23.8 (0.84) NS

L1tLflfl'3 ;A0 'lili. 3.8 (0.17) 2.9 (0.18) <0.0001 4.2 (0.43) 3.6 (0.23) NS

LItLlñ88flNi

(g) 2.9 (0.16) 3.1 (0.20) NS 3.2 (0.43) 3.4 (0.23) NS

1JlM1 NS 143J1J

24

OV11-14 6

nnndnli' ivn 2 J wh 2553 C& unnu'u 2555

MUM UZiTR UWn

(.i.) ± SE

1LQgiUJ1U%1

(.) (hi)

55 2,486 325 ±21 5 5.fl. 2553 - 27 . 2554 864 (705 - 1,065)

47 2,328 395 ±69 7 n.i. - 10 M.M. 2554 903 (840 - 1,027)

19 1,312 753 ±110 20 'vui. 2554 - 26 n..

2555

869 (728 - 1,142)

LJ%1b 22 842 862 ±75 16 M. - 30 0J.8. 2555 912 (835 - 982)

7 (MICc < 2.0) 6 'iiThi

K ahtfl1.A parameter VITMlulmoa, w, 1unmth.i

LU 1 , LL A@ log-likelihood

K AAICc w1 LL

%UJ1l altitude 2 0 0.34 -58.85

% canopy 2 0 0.48 -96.89

fruit 2 0 0.50 -62.0

rodent RAI 2 0.37 0.41 -62.18

fruit 2 0 0.23 -52.07

forest types 4 0.27 0.20 -50.1

rodent RAI 2 1.08 0.13 -52.61

NULL 1 1.95 0.09 -54.07

nTiJ stream 2 0 0.84 -66.58

predator 2 0 0.94 -38.16

altitude u % canopy

20 u.wr n n€N), fruit rodent RAI (n- nn

nncn), forest types (thn'i 4 ii Lrnl), NULL (b thL ),'stream lu

nn nm), predator ( ni —

lYJ - u

25

WrF 8

n'wiJ 2554 iflJ 2554 611

vqwnift 2555

Trnn nu'jiwi

Jn 1lJflhL'.flY flfl1YIfl1J

5 5.m. 2553 - 27 3i.ft 2554 2,486 15 9

7 n.v. - 10 vi.m. 2554 2,312 24 10

Nal 20 'i.u. 2554 - 26 n.vi 2555 1,312 43 10

16 .ft - 30 W.U. 2555 842 37 10

9 (ml/1 0

95 nfl JiIJ spatial explicit capture - recapture Li 2 Jii

rn ('w, effective sampling area, ESA) nnifl ,

cnnn jn-iin'wnu U fl fl1U fl11ThThtJ

(model average)

rnniirnn vomijoimucwni

n& (mi.) ±SE (/10 zi 95% CI

2553/2554 20.6 55 ±27 1.6 (0.5 - 4.9)

2554 L1'l 27.2 37 ±19 2.7 (0.9 - 8.4)

2554/2555 21.4 18 ±6 5.7 (2.3 - 14.1)

2555 mwlli 24.9 280 ±91 0.4 (0.2 - 0.8)

26

117J (LthJ) i1,ja (ffl

iiqJi 12%

n-infl 1 flL 7 T'

27

1YW1 2 (home range size [km2]) a~aj,

logarithm scale) 7 nmn '1un - ii

n'1sic ( wiii) (t'iia iiu i) i'wni

(R2)

8

LM

4J'lJ (uiu) 7 1 y7.S171x-1.8802

R2 =0.6617

*

5

(C 3

•

00 0A 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

Iog(l4tnr'i, nn.)

(r)

PTA 3 nm (n) ncju'wn (w) (j)

ninm (nj/irr) 2 vn 2

[n1jl4J1 iTji] L1iriU [niTJ wet anJiJi] 'Ititi

95 TK1-4 SSW1-4

1n nJwm 4u TK5-8 SSW5-8

800

700

29

I cD

Jny 4 n JJLitflJ (n) ni° (ii) 'nw (ni/L

rv) () nn - ia.Ti (Yl, Y2) nnn (%a [TK]

inU [SSW]) mwomm Tukey HSD o

(a, b) (adjusted p-value = 0.1)

(a) ('j)

SSWY1 SSWY2 TK.Y1 TK.Y2

SSW.Y1 SSWY2 TK.Y1 TK.Y2

30

m1w 5 i'Lth (effect size of transformed coefficient) Zuni

hn LIfl 6 64 nl3j Loom' (iii 7) czg

'iI niiJ iwiiJ€

(LTJc), (njJ), aiJ ('nTJi)

LJ) ui NULL ith

tclu 2 wi€ ( -in 0.5) L1L1 alum '1J'fl

(n 0.5)

95

irnh (0.5)

0.9 fruit

rodent RAI 0.8 1

I fruit rodent RAI predator

+

Qj 0.5 4 -------------------------------------------------------------

0 altitude

0.4

'3) 03 22 %canopy

0.2

U4 0.1

0.0 stream

i

011

tn 6 dn 6 flflflflflI9JJ

b1LLfl ni '1

111t ,fl. fl LflWU1 In

JN'1'fl'ltJ (idu nmnji)

32

nJn-

1fl1 111Jfl.flJU1

U1LLLJLLfl (NSTDA - CPMO)

Ji 11U

ii'ni4 utn (un

Ilifi) nu1lj1 (un ILL nn) viilmWn

bI nn

. 3J1IU?JL (jy) irwn 1w iui uio

LL'.VIJ L1IEJ JflT11'tZ n11tn1n1nn,4c94't3J

LL 1 LL

üi ih ki iin i'S ( thn€thN) jju . LD WD

(KMU1T) 015. u'Jc (WWF Thailand) zi,J (WCS) . (KMUTT) 1iLJu

flflfl1J LLLLLU LI fl1] L I3JtThU

UCU 015. @10 5%1 1f51J06 LI (WCS Thailand) LIfl'flW

(Sherman) 'Ln11 1LJVLJUL1 2

Jii LI n3 . i5. L1c 191 (University of Kentucky, Louisville) 1n1JZit1i

1tIJ1LIa1 (,Jn t1un15J)

33

I, a

Anon. 1997. Application of remote sensing and GIS for monitoring forest land use changed in Thung Yai

Wildlife Sanctuaries (in Thai). Page 140. Forest Research Centre, Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University,

Bangkok, Thailand.

Borchers, D. L. and M. G. Efford. 2008. Spatially explicit maximum likelihood methods for capture-recapture studies.

Biometrics 64:377-385.

Burnham, K. P. and D. R. Anderson. 2004. Multimodet inference: Understanding AIC and BIC in model selection.

Sociological Methods & Research 33:261-304.

Carbone, C., G. M. Mace, S. C. Roberts, and D. W. Macdonald. 1999. Energetic constraints on the diet of terrestrial

carnivores. Nature 402:286-288.

Chuang, 5.-A. and L.-L. Lee. 1997. Food habits of three carnivore species (Viverricula indico, Herpestes urvo, and

Melogale moschota) in Fushan Forest, northern Taiwan. Journal of Zoology (Lond.) 243:71-79.

Chutipong, W., A. J. Lynam, R. Steinmetz, T. Savini, and G. A. Gale. 2014. Sampling mammalian carnivores in western

Thailand: Issues of rarity and detectability. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 62:521-535.

Conforti, K. 1996. The status and distribution of small carnivores in Huai Kha Khaeng/Thung Yai Naresuan Wildlife

Sanctuaries, west-central Thailand. Master of Science. University of Minnesota, Minnesota, USA.

Dajun, W., L. Sheng, W. J. McShea, and L. M. Fu. 2006. Use of remote-trip cameras for wildlife surveys and evaluating

the effectiveness of conservation activities at a Nature Reserve in Sichuan Province, China. Environ. Manage.

38:942-951.

Dillon, A. and M. J. Kelly. 2007. Ocelot Leopard us parda(is in Belize: the impact of trap spacing and distance moved

on density estimates. Oryx 41:469-477.

Efford, M. G. 2004. Density estimation in live-trapping studies. Oikos 106:598-610.

Efford, M. G. 2013. secr: Spatially explicit capture-recapture models. R package version 2.7.0. http://CRAN.R-

project.org/package= secr

Fedriani, J. M., T. K. Fuller, R. M. Sauvajot, and E. C. York. 2000. Competition and intraguild predation among three

sympatric carnivores. Oecologia 125:258-270.

Grassman, L. I., Jr. 1999. Ecology and behavior of the Indochinese leopard in Kaeng Krachan National Park, Thailand.

Nat. Hist. Bull. Siam Soc. 47:77-93.

Grassman, L. I., Jr., M. E. Tewes, N. J. Silvy, and K. Kreetiyutanont. 2005a. Spatial organization and diet of the leopard

cat (Prionailurus ben'oiensis) in north-central Thailand. Journal of Zoology 266:45-54.

Grassman, L. I., Jr., M. E. Tewes, and N. J. Silvy. 2005b. Ranging, habitat use and activity patterns of binturong Arctictis

binturong and yetlow-throated marten MartesJlavigu(a in northcentral Thailand. Wildlife Biology 11:49-57.

Grassman, L. I., Jr., M. E. Tewes, N. J. Silvy, and K. Kreetiyutanont. 2005c. Ecology of three sympatric felids in a mixed

evergreen forest in north-central Thailand. Journal of Mammalogy 86:29-38.

I-Iarmsen, B. J., R. J. Foster, S. C. Silver, L. E. T. Ostro, and C. P. Doncaster. 2009. Spatial and temporal interactions of

sympatric jaguars (Panthera onca) and pumas (Puma concolor) in a Neotropical forest. Journal of

Mammatogy 90:612-620.

34

Jacomo. A. T. d. A., L. Silveira, and J. A. F. Diniz-Filho. 2004. Niche seperation between the maned wolf (Chrysocyon

brachyurus), the crab-eating fox (Dusicyon thous) and the hoary fox (Dusicyon vetulus) in central Brazil. J.

Zoot. (Lond.) 262:99-106.

Joshi, A. R., J. L. David Smith, and F. J. Cuthbert. 1995. Influence of food distribution and predation pressure on spacing

behavior in palm civets. Journal of Mammalogy 76:1205-1212.

Karanth, K. U. and M. E. Sunquist. 1995. Prey selection by tiger, leopard and dhole in tropical forests. Journal of Animal

Ecology 64:439-450.

Karanth, K. U., R. S. Chundawat, J. D. Nichols, and N. S. Kumar. 2004. Estimation of tiger densities in the tropical dry

forests of Panna, Central India, using photographic capture-recapture sampling. Animal Conservation 7:285-

290.

Kauffman, M. J., M. Sanjayan, J. Lowenstein, A. Nelson, ft M. Jeo, and K R. Crooks. 2007. Remote camera-trap methods

and analyses reveal impacts of rangeland management on Namibian carnivore communities. Oryx 41:70-78.

Kolowski, J. M., and A. Alonso. 2010. Density and activity patterns of ocelots (Leopordus pordalis) in northern

Peru and the impact of oil exploration activities. Biological Conservation 143:917-925.

Kutintara. U., and N. Bhumpakphan. 1989. Management Plan for Thung Yai Naresuan Wildlife Sanctuary

(Kanchanaburi and Tak Provinces) (in Thai). Page 263. Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University, Bangkok,

Thailand.

Lekagul, B., and J. A. McNeely 1977. Mammals of Thailand. Association for the Conservation of Wildlife (as

updated 1998), Bangkok, Thailand.

Malcolm, J. ft and J. C. Ray. 2000. Influence of Timber Extraction Routes on Central African Small-Mammal

Communities, Forest Structure, and Tree Diversity. Conservation Biology 14:1623-1638.

Maffei, L., A. J. Noss, E. Cuellar, and D. I. Rumiz. 2005. Ocelot (Fells pardoUs) population densities, activity, and ranging

behaviour in the dry forests of eastern Bolivia: data from camera trapping. Journal of Tropical Ecology 21:349-

353.

Mohd-Azlan, J. and D. S. K. Sharma. 2006. The diversity and activity patterns of wild felids in a secondary forest in

Peninsular Malaysia. Oryx 40:36-41.

Morrison, M. L. 2001. A proposed research emphasis to overcome the limits of wildlife - habitat relationship

studies. Journal of Wildlife Management 65:613-623.

Mudappa, D. 2006. Day-bed choice by the brown palm civet (Paradoxurusjerdoni) in the Western Ghats, India.

Mammalian Biology 71:238-243.

Nakagawa, M., H. Miguchi, and T. Nakashizuka. 2006. The effects of various forest uses on small mammal communities

in Sarawak, Malaysia. Forest Ecology and Management 231:55-62.

Nakashima, V., E. Inoue, M. Inoue-Murayama, and J. R. A. Sukor. 2010. Functional uniqueness of a small carnivore as

seed dispersal agents: a case study of the common palm civets in the Tabin Wildlife Reserve, Sabah,

Malaysia. Oecotogia 164:721-730.

Nakhasathien, S. and B. Stewart-Cox. 1990. Nomination of The Thung Yai-Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary to be a

UNESCO World Heritage Site. Wildlife Conservation Division, Royal Forest Department, Bangkok, Thailand.

35

Ngoprasert, D., D. H. Reed, P. Steinmetz, and G. A. Gale. 2012. Density estimation of Asian bears using photographic

capture-recapture sampling based on chest marks. Ursus 23:117-133.

Obbard, M. E., E. J. Howe, and C. J. Kyle. 2010. Empirical comparison of density estimators for large carnivores. Journal

of Applied Ecology 47:76-84.

Phetdee, A. 2000. Feeding habits of the Tiger (Panthera tigris Linnaeus) in Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary by fecal

analysis. Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand.

R Core Team 2013. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing,

Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org/.

Rabinowitz, A. R. 1989. The density and behaviour of large cats in a dry tropical forest mosaic in Huai Kha Khaeng

Wildlife Sanctuary, Thailand. Nat. Hist. Bull. Siam Soc. 37:235-251.

Rabinowitz, A. R. 1991. Behaviour and movements of sympatric civet species in Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary,

Thailand. Journal of Zoology 223:281-298.

Rabinowitz, A. R., and S. R. Walker. 1991. The carnivore community in a dry tropical forest mosaic in Huai Kha

Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary, Thailand. Journal of Tropical Ecology 7:37-47.

Rabinowitz, A. R. 1993. Estimating the Indochinese tiger Panthera tigris corbetti population in Thailand. Biological

Conservation 65:213-217.

Rajaratnam, R., M. Sunquist, L. Rajaratnam, and L. Ambu. 2007. Diet and habitat selection of the leopard cat

(Prionaiturus bengalensis borneoensis) in an agricultural landscape in Sabah, Malaysian Borneo. Journal of

Tropical Ecology 23:209-217.

Rosenzweig, M. L. 1966. Community Structure in Sympatric Carnivora. Journal of Mammalogy 47:602-612.

Schreiber, A., R. Wirth, M. Riffle, and H. Van Rompaey. 1989. Weasels, Civets, Mongooses, and their relatives: An Action

Plan for the Conservation of Mustelids and Viverrids. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.

Simcharoen, S. 1998. Home range and habitat use of a male Asiatic jackal (Canis oureus) at Khao Nang Rum Wildlife

Research Center, Thailand. Nat. Hist. Bull. Siam Soc. 46:3-15.

Simcharoen, S., P. Boontawee, and A. Phetdee. 1999. Home Range size, habitat utilization and daily activities of Large

Indian civet (Viverra zibetha) (in Thai). Progress report in research activity 1999, Wildlife Research Section,

RFD: 43 - 64.

Simcharoen, 5., A. Pattanavibool, K. U. Karanth, J. D. Nichols, and N. S. Kumar. 2007. How many tigers Ponthero tigris

are there in Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary, Thailand? An estimate using photographic capture-recapture

sampling. Oryx 41:447-453.

Steinmetz, R. and R. Mather. 1996. Impact of Karen villages on the fauna of Thung Yal Naresuan Wildlife Sanctuary: A

participatory research project. Nat. Hist. Bull. Siam Soc. 44:23-40.

Steinmetz, R., D. L. Garshelis, W. Chutipong, and N. Seuaturien. 2011. The Shared Preference Niche of Sympatric Asiatic

Black Bears and Sun Bears in a Tropical Forest Mosaic. PLoS ONE 6:e14509.

Steinmetz, R., D. L. Garshelis, W. Chutipong, and N. Seuaturien. 2013a. Foraging ecology and coexistence of Asiatic

black bears and sun bears in a seasonal tropical forest in Southeast Asia. Journal of Mammalogy 94:1-18.

Steinmetz, R., N. Seuaturien, and W. Chutipong. 2013b. Tigers, leopards, and dholes in a half-empty forest: Assessing

species interactions in a guild of threatened carnivores. Biological Conservation 163:68-78.

SuazoOrtuno, I., J. Alvarado-Diaz, and M. Martinez-Ramos. 2011. Riparian Areas and Conservation of Herpetofauna in a

Tropical Dry Forest in Western Mexico. Biotropica 43:237-245.

The Thai Meteorological Department. 2005. Rainfall and Temperature of Thomg Pha Phum and Urn Phang between

1997 and 2005. The Thai Meteorological Department, Bangkok, Thailand.

Thompson, C. M., and E. M. Gese. 2007. Food webs and intraguild predation: community interactions of a native

mesocarnivore. Ecology 88:334-346.

van de Butt, M. 2003. The vegetation and flora of the Western Forest Complex using rapid ecological assessment and

vegetation types description in the WEFCOM area. Page 60. Western Forest Complex Ecosystem Management

Project, National Park, Wildlife and Plant Conservation Department, Bangkok.

Venkataraman, M., K. Shanker, and R. Sukumar. 2005. Small mammal communities of tropical forest habitats in

Mudurnalai Wildlife Sanctuary, southern India. Mammalia 69:349-358.

Wells, K., E. K. V. Kalko, M. B. Lakim, and M. Pfeiffer. 2007. Effects of rain forest logging on species richness and

assemblage composition of small mammals in Southeast Asia. Journal of Biogeography 34:1087-1099.

White, G. C., D. R. Anderson, K. P. Burnham, and D. L. Otis 1982. Capture-recapture and removal methods for sampling

closed populations. LA-8787-NERP. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA.

Zhou, Y.-B., J. Zhang, E. Slade, L. Zhang, F. Palomares, J. Chen, X.-M. Wang, and S. Zhang. 2008. Dietary shifts in

relation to fruit availability among masked palm civets (Poguma Larvata) in central China. Journal of

Mammalogy 89:435-447.

37

1Lflfl flJ1flJ

Nal

Ll1): LW)1')

LV1: UJU

'Mau: INJI

148.330 MHz

lumRijlk 4 JflWi3J 2554

Ll?1: LJ

'LJ: IJ8FJ

1thfl: 148.400 MHz

'ij1i: 10 J1T5'W,J 2554

148.430 MHz

tI1JI: 12 Jfl'wJ 2554

38

: -

-' -

m-nmikimnimu: 148.450 MHz

lUm4lilk 14 mjflIIT'U6 2554

;• I * I

' ..

4 .1

wrim)ija@nn@~mq: 148.290 MHz '

- -

39

(home range) iJ1i MCP 95%

un. 50% Lot Kernel 95% uz 50%

40

(home range) LM MCP 95%

LLat 50% i Kerne 95% Uat 50%

40

V i

in-c (iAirnJi) : 1(FflN

MOP 50%

MOP 95%

MOP 50% :0.872 sq. km.

MOP 95 %: 6.920 sq. km.

Animal location

Kernel 50%

LIII Kernel 95%

Kernel 50 %: 0.516 sq. km.

Kernel 95 %: 5.235 sq. km.

:40,000.

41

Animal location

I I

mcp_95

MOP 50 %: 0.379 sq. km.

MOP 95%: 2.419 sq. km.

Animal location

I I

khr_95

Kernel 50 %: 0.336 sq. km.

Kernel 95 %: 2.621 sq. km.

9) I 9)

Y1n-i051 Offp)j : iifl L'

' = - = /

' . J

it' j tTI . 2i -

' J . / I

- Al m- - )\\

-

wlj

0 .5 1 2)

4L

- 9)

MIATICHIfIv9JOIDMIAMO(Wfffrj) : 1i11N

Animal location

MCP 50%

Lillil MCP 95%

MOP 50 %: 0.590 sq. km.

MOP 95 % :5.851 sq. km.

Animal location

Kernel 50%

Kernel 95%

Kernel 50 %: 0.257 sq. km.

Kernel 95 %; 3.057 sq. km.

46

M l

1t x8?8 1/7 hao P1R Hud, Th/AhoItp 2

(S - / I

i •i ( . - 1J, '( --

-

2 M r(. & 1.40,000

Animal location

Kernel 50%

LI-Il Kernel 95%

Kernel 50 %: 0.072 sq. km.

Kernel 95 %: 0.513 sq. km.

9)

(tflJ: 1iiti): fiftl

\S

2 iA jJf i( ..

t .5

c 5 )

; c / ' r 113 \

- U 1

-

- - - - - - -

Animal location

-1 MCP 50%

LIII MCP 95%

MOP 50 % 0.072 sq. km.

MOP 95 %:1.304 sq. km.

44

__y'.\, tT_icit___ _ 41

if

— Iwo I"

_\-_

WREN toyqo 0!

\

iFRtf '- N t

'\lt N I \/-/ I '', - - WWI a -

Ii/

141

_I0 .5 1 2 . 1.40,000

Animal location

Kernel 50%

Kernel 95%

Kernel 50 %: 0.159 sq. km.

Kernel 95 %: 1.050 sq. km.

11 . o n flnanmcnt otNac'naI Park. Wildhfb and Plans (:nnservaucn

cz 11f4 -U9J (!vmJJ: : cV1P1J

qj

L [

ç

!'// 4

'I

II( - -

Z/ psi fu l u

_.

71 ay MIME L' :7 777,,:7 I ' '

-v. I

i

, Ap Y .

'I • iikhd

'B78

_____ \

-_o

/

. . - st

- noun 1L )t'

Animal location

I_] MCP 5O%

[ ___j

MOP 50%: 0.138 sq. km.

MOP 95 %: 2.145 sq. km.

4,

Animal location

MCP 95%

MOP 50 % 0.145 sq. km.

MOP 95 %: 1.017 sq. km.

41 ezA

11 'cii (awfuju) : CHmol

F-iI / 0\

/IKhaip kHua,Thi/to '_

/

ZT5T 7' (

L / -

- • 1 ( ___._--_------..------4-

V'- ) / k.

; S. _ '- _ _ _S

• -

X \S /

i lt

I • .t7';,/ 2' 5-

I

r L \s

'5 .5 •555_5 'ç)'.

0 .5 1 2 \S '

Kmjt '

1:40,00O

Animal location

Kernel 50%

Kernel 95%

Kernel 50 %: 0.212 sq. km.

Kernel 95 %: 1.451 sq. km.

Animal tocauon

MCP 50%

MCP 95%

MOP 50 % : 0.349 sq. km.

MOP 95 %: 1 .989 sq. km.

2)

1i?i1 1ahn owyn,M) : qj

x878

Animal location

Kernel 50%

Kernel 95%

Kernel 50 %: 0.491 sq. km.

Kernel 95 %: 3,782 sq. km.

4/