Intl. J. of Mol. Ecol. and Conserv. 2013, Vol. 3, No. 2, 2-10
http://ijmec.sophiapublisher.com
3
utilization and management (Shotuyo, 2012).
This study examines the vertebrate resources of Alabata
Nature reserve, to lay a foundation for its sustainable
utilization and trust for generation yet unborn.
1
Material and Methods
20
sample plots each of 25 m×25 m were laid
randomly (Figure 1). Animals were assessed for 24
months in each plot cutting across wet and dry seasons.
Animals were surveyed weekly using King Census
and Line Transect methods modified for this study
using direct and indirect modes (Figure 2) of wildlife
stock assessment for an accurate collection of data due
to the dense nature of the vegetation in some areas.
Direct count method was used for all animals sighted
during the cutting of tracks and laying of plots. The
indirect method of sampling was also used. All
indicators of animal presence or activities in the plots
sampled were recorded. The signs or indicators used
for assessing the presence of animals include:
a. Animal droppings
b. Call counts
c. Nest counts
d. Body parts dropping (e.g. feathers, hairs)
e. Dens and Burrows
f. Tracks and trails
g. Foot print
h. Feeding remnants
Figure 1 Alabata nature reserve
2
Results
121
vertebrate species, belonging to 56 families were
recorded (Table 1). 27 families were represented by
just a single species each, while 13 families had 2
species each (Table 2). The family
Colubridae
was
Figure 2 Animal sighting indicator of the study area
Note: 1: Direct sighting; 2: Indirect sighting
represented by 10 species, while Rattudae and
Sciuridae had a single species respectively. Birds were
the most encountered (more than 60%) followed by
mammals (more than 20%) while the other
reptalia
constitutes the remaining (less than 20%) (Figure 3).
Figure 3 Order of animals sighted in the nature reserve
3
Discussions
Animals in the order rodentia, especially Cane rat
(
Thryonomys swinderianus
),
Giant rat (
Cricetomys
gambianus
)
and Ground squirrel (
Xerus erythropus
)
were
the most abundant in the study area. Indices of their
activities include feeding remains, droppings and burrows.
The Maxwell duiker (
Cephalopus maxwelli
)
was also
recorded in appreciable portion. Happold (1973) and
Roberts (1986) stated that the trophic ecology and need for
protection against predators of animal species in an area
explains basis for their habitat distribution.
The Cane rats were predominant in areas with dense
grasses and rampant herbaceous vegetation where there is
also good cover. They feed on thick stemmed grasses and
occasionally on tree barks (Happold, 1987) as shown by
their runways, feacal droppings and feeding remains. The
Giant rat (
Cricetomys gambianus
)
feed on fruits,