SPECIES RICHNESS AND DIVERSITY OF MAMMALS ACROSS ELEVATION GRADIENT IN GUNUNG STONG, KELANTAN

Tekspenuh

(1)by. LO SHEA LING. A report submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Applied Science (Natural Resources Science) with Honours. FACULTY OF EARTH SCIENCE UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA KELANTAN. 2017. i. FYP FSB. SPECIES RICHNESS AND DIVERSITY OF MAMMALS ACROSS ELEVATION GRADIENT IN GUNUNG STONG, KELANTAN.

(2) I declare that this thesis entitled “title of the thesis”is the result of my own research except as cited in the references. The thesis has not been accepted for any degree and is not concurrently submitted in candidature of any other degree.. Signature. : ___________________________. Name. : ___________________________. Date. : ___________________________. ii. FYP FSB. DECLARATION.

(3) This project would not have been possible without the kind support and help of many individuals and organizations. I would like to extend our sincere to all of them. First and foremost, I would like to thanks my supervise, Mr. Kamarul Ariffin B. Kambali @ Hambali for his invaluable comments. Besides my supervisor, I would like to thank my co-supuervise Mr. Hamzah bt Hussin for insightful comments and hard questions. My sincere thanks also go to Mr. Nik Mohd Maseri Bin Nik Mohamad and Madam Ainaa Syazwani bt Mohd. Amir for their care and advice when examination and correction of my thesis. My thanks go again to Mr. Nik Mohd Maseri Bin Nik Mohamad for comments, sharing of knowledge and advices in conducting my project throughout this period. His continuous support, advises as well as his understanding, expertise and help throughout final year project completion, Then to his wife Mrs. Nik Mahizam for accompany me to set up the camera traps, as well as lab assistant Mr. Ahmad Auzan Bin Azhar, UMK master student Mr. Saiful, and my friend Ng Tsae Chiann and Tay Chia Cze for their knowledge and support when I conducting my field work in Gunung Stong. Besides that, it also has been the core of my success in completing this project. Last but not least, my deepest appreciation and thanks to my lovely family members, my lecturers, my fellow friends and Gunung Stong State Park Tour guide for their continuous support. They have been the source of inspiration through their encouragement, financial support, help, patience and care during this project.. iii. FYP FSB. ACKNOWLEGDEMENT.

(4) PAGE NUMBER TITLE. i. DECLARATION. ii. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. iii. TABLE OF CONTENTS. iv. LIST OF TABLES. vi. LIST OF FIGURES. vii. LIST OF SYMBOLS. viii. ABSTRACT. ix. ABSTRAK. x. CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION. 1. 1.1 Background of Study. 1. 1.2 Problem Statement. 3. 1.3 Objectives. 4. 1.4 Significance of Study. 4. CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW. 5. 2.1 Study Area. 5. 2.2 Camera trap. 6. 2.3 Rapoport’s Rule. 7. 2.4 Mid-domain Effect. 8. 2.5 Pattern of Species Richness. 9. 2.6 Factors that will Influence the Species. 10. Richness and Diversity along Mountain 2.6.1 Historical Factors. 10. 2.6.2 Climate. 11. 2.6.3 Habitat Heterogeneity. 12. 2.6.4 Geographic Area. 12. 2.6.5 Species-energy Relationship. 13. 2.6.5.1 Niche Position. 13. 2.6.5.2 Niche Breadth. 14. 2.6.5.3 Trophic Level. 14. iv. FYP FSB. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(5) 15. 2.6.5.5 Dynamic Equilibrium. 15. 2.6.5.6 Diversification Rate. 15. 2.6.5.7 Range Limitation. 16. 2.6.6 Competition. 16. 2.6.7 Predation. 17. CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS AND METHODS 3.1 Materials. 17 17. 3.1.1 Software. 17. 3.1.2 Camera Traps. 18. 3.2 Methods. 19. 3.2.1 Sampling. 20. 3.2.2 Identification. 20. 3.2.3 Calculation. 21. 3.2.3.1 Species Richness. 21. 3.2.3.2 Species Evenness. 20. 3.2.3.3 Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index. 22. CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION. 23. 4.1 Results. 23. 4.2 Factor that causes the species richness of mammals in. 28. Across the elevation gradient of Gunung Stong in Hump-shaped graph 4.3 Background of captured species. 32. 4.4 Factor that influencing the capturing rate. 35. CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 37. 5.1 Conclusion. 37. 5.2 Recommendations. 38. REFRENCES. 41. APPENDICES. 49. Appendix A. 49. v. FYP FSB. 2.6.5.4 Consumer Pressure.

(6) Table Title. Page Number. 3.1. Materials use in this research. 17. 3.2. The habitat at each of the camera sites. 21. 4.1.1. Number of mammalians species detected by using. 25. camera trap across the elevation gradient in Gunung Stong 4.2. Shannon-wiener diversity index at each elevation in. 27. Gunung Stong 4.6. Monthly rainfall in Kelantan, Malaysia from January to November. vi. 39. FYP FSB. LIST OF TABLES.

(7) Figure Title. Page. Number 2.1. Map of study area.. 6. 2.2. Graph of number of species against elevation.. 9. 2.3. Graph of species richness against elevation.. 9. 3.2.1 Map of Gunung Stong indicating the sampling. 20. Site of this study. 4.1.1. The graph for number of species against elevation.. 26. 4.1.2 The rarefaction graph for species diversity at each. 27. elevation in Gunung Stong.. vii. FYP FSB. LIST O FIGURES.

(8) ha. Hectare. IUCN. International Union for Conservation of Nature. m. Meter. N. North. a.s.l. Above sea level. viii. FYP FSB. LIST OF ABBREVATION AND SYMBOL.

(9) ABSTRACT A study of species richness and diversity of mammal across the elevation gradient of the mountain was conducted in Gunung Stong, Kelantan. The main objective of this research is to determine the number of the mammal species and diversity of mammal across an elevation gradient in Gunung Stong. Several camera traps were used to capture the photographs of mammal in Gunung Stong, with salt as the bait. A total of 83 individuals that consisting of 12 species was detected in all points. The graph of species richness against elevation was in humped shaped. Therefore, 468.5m has the most abundant species compared another elevations. The factors that cause the humped shape graph of species richness along elevation of the mountain are mid-domain effect and climate. However, altitude is not the only determinant for species richness; food source, water sources and size of natural forest are also determinants. More study is needed for this study research to obtain more data.. ix. FYP FSB. SPECIES RICHNESS AND DIVERSITY OF MAMMALS ACROSS ELEVATION GRADIENT IN GUNUNG STONG, KELANTAN.

(10) ABSTRAK Kajian ini mengenai kekayaan spesies dan kepelbagaian mamalia di ketinggian kecerunan gunung telah dijalankan di Gunung Stong, Kelantan. Objektif utama kajian ini adalah untuk menentukan bilangan spesies mamalia dan kepelbagaian mamalia di sepanjang ketinggian kecerunan di Gunung Stong. 7 kamera perangkap telah digunakan untuk menangkap gambar mamalia di gunung stong dengan mengunakan garam sebagai umpan. Jumlah 83 individu yang merangkumi 12 spesies telah dikesan di Gunung Stong. Graf kekayaan spesies terhadap ketinggian adalah berbentuk bongkok. Oleh itu, ketinggian gunung 468.5m mempunyai spesies paling banyak berbanding dengan ketinggian lainlain. Faktor-faktor yang menyebabkan graf bentuk bongkok kekayaan spesies di sepanjang ketinggian gunung adalah kesan pertengahan domain cuaca. Walaubagaimanapun, ketinggian bukanlah satu-satunya penentu bagi speacies kekayaan; sumber makanan, sumber air dan keluasan hutan semulajadi adalah juga faktor penentu Kajian yang lebih diperlukan untuk kajian ini untuk mendapatkan lebih banyak data.. x. FYP FSB. KEKAYAAN SPESIES DAN KEPELBAGAIAN MAMALIA DI KETINGGIAN KECERUNAN DI GUNUNG STONG, KELANTAN..

(11) INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of Study Malaysia is tropical rainforest (Manokaran, 1992). It has highly in species richness or diversity compare with others biome (Baltzer & Thomas, 2002). This is due to the abundance of rainfall allows forest trees to stay green all the year to support a richness of flora and fauna and a level of biological production that is greater than occurs in any other natural ecosystem in the world (Drinnen, 2000). Besides that, it also provides material that human require in their daily life (Drinnen, 2000).. Unluckily, these masterpieces of biological diversity and complexity are under the ongoing risk of damage from human activity (Maloney, 1985). Tropical forest changes are the main factor to the current global biodiversity disaster, shockingly our scientific understanding of the relationship between tropical deforestation and species extinctions is very weak (Heywood & Stuart, 1992; Heywood et al. 1994). Human activity impacts result in decreased mammalian species richness (Woodroffe, 2000). As habitats decrease, the creating reserves to conserve and preserve mammalian species are essential. Currently, effective way to conserve and manage biodiversity through conserving the location with high species richness (Myers et al., 2000). In other words, species richness act as the indicator of conservation value (Meir et al., 2004). Therefore, to perform effective conservation management in protected area, well understanding the diversity and richness species is vital. The main goal of this research is to obtain the mammal species richness and the diversity in Gunung Stong State Park (GSSP).. 1. FYP FSB. CHAPTER 1.

(12) understanding the connection of habitats and habitat disturbance, is essential for biodiversity conservation at landscape scales (Parrish et al., 2003; Zipkin et al. 2010).. According to McGinley and Duffy (2007) study of species diversity have two key points which are species richness and evenness of species. Species richness is defined as the number of species in a community, in a landscape or marine scape, or in a region (Levin et al., 2009). It used to measure the maximum number of species in a community (Levin et al., 2009). The higher number of species represented result of high in richness level. On the other side, the evenness of species is frequency of individual in each species represented the level of evenness it (Heip et al., 1998). It expressed how species can distribute evenly within different species (Heip et al., 2001). The scientist has created the diversity indices for measuring species diversity; Shannon-Wiener Index (Shannon 1948; Wiener, 1961) and Simpson’s Index (Simpson, 1949).. Gunung Stong Mountain is in the area of Gunung Stong state park, a protected area managed by the Kelantan Forestry department. Gunung Stong Mountain is tropical rainforest and it has a high richness in species and diversity. At the elevation of 1422 meters consists dense forests, rock, shelter and mountain stream (Mariana et al, 2005). The Gunung Stong waterfalls at 492 meters a.s.l. and is believed to be the highest waterfall in Southeast Asia region (Mariana et al., 2005). Besides that, there are several types of forests or habitat of Gunung Stong. Gunung Stong Mountain are a unique mosaic of protected areas, recreation, home to a diverse of fauna and flora (depending on the. 2. FYP FSB. Knowledge of the species and communities that occur within protected areas, and.

(13) elephant, tiger, bears, gibbons, hornbills and a range of other exotic animals (Maseri, 2009). Due to this protected area are habitat for flora and fauna species which listed under IUCN Red List endangered and this area may consist of endemic species thus this is the reason as the concerning to conservation. Besides that, GSSP has seen selectively logged in the late 1980s, the forest is now re-generating.. 1.2 Problem Statement Human activity impacts result in decreased mammalian species richness (Woodroffe, 2000). Besides, gradually increasing human population have adversely affect mammalian populations due to human- wildlife-animal conflicts, poaching, and encroachment info wilderness areas (Hayward et al., 2005). At 1985, Gunung Stong and the surrounding forest areas were logged and cleared for agriculture (Maseri, 2009). Conservation of lowland forests to other land-use to mean that wildlife retreats to other nature forests that are decreasing in size, and often at higher altitudes. Therefore, such research in analyse the studies that dealing with species changes with taxonomic group along elevation gradients is very important for identifying the main future needs (Fischer et al., 2011). The information on the species richness and diversity of mammal across mountain can be used as evaluate community accumulations and the health of ecological areas (Boulinier et al., 1998). In turn, this can let them deeper understanding of the issues they faced eliminate speculation and lets them bring more information and less hearses to the problem-solving process. Ecological information not. 3. FYP FSB. altitude, moisture, slope, and soil contents) (Maseri, 2009). Especially mammal like.

(14) also can provide the types and quantity of habitat needed to sustain species richness and prevent species from endangerment (Davis & Wagner, 2003).. 1.3 Objective To determine number of mammal species and diversity of mammal across elevation gradient in Gunung Stong mountain.. 1.4 Significance of study As far as we know, there do not seem to be any record of camera-trapping done in the Gunung Stong State Park (GSSP), though WWF- Malaysia (2007) did some work in the adjoining forest reserves of Gunung Stong Utara, and Gunung Basor. This study could be the first documentation of camera-trapping work in GSSP and could be used as an initial database for future studies, to enhance the conservation and management effectiveness of GSSP.. 4. FYP FSB. only provide information about species behaviour in foraging, resting and breeding, it.

(15) LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Study area GSSP (Gunung Stong State Park) Malaysia has an area 21,950 ha, it’s situated in the North-West Kelantan in the district of Kuala Krai (Maseri & Mohd-Ros 2005). Maseri and Mohd-Ros (2005) stated that this state park is a strategically positioned large forest block that includes the Titiwangsa Range, the Belum Temenggor and the Ulu Muda forests in Malaysia, and connects with the stretch of forests in the Hala Bala Wildlife Sanctuary and the Bang Lang National Park in southern Thailand. In GSSP there are several mountain peaks which are Gunung Ayam, Gunung Tera and Gunung Stong. The study is conducted along the route to one of the mountains, Gunung Stong. (Figure 2.1). It’s located in Dabong Kelantan. Gunung Stong have about seven different vegetation zones which are forested on limestone, lowland dipterocarp forests, hill dipterocarp forests, upper dipterocarp forest, montane oak forests, montane ericaceous forest and other habitat (Maseri, 2009).. 5. FYP FSB. CHAPTER 2.

(16) FYP FSB Major Town River Main road Forest Reserves. Figure 2.1: Map of study area (Source: WWF-Malaysia, n.d.). 2.2 Camera Trap Rovero (2013) stated that camera trap is a photo camera with a weatherproof housing to prevent damage and combination of mechanism lets the camera to be triggered. 6.

(17) Most of the modern camera traps have a passive infrared sensor (PIR) to detect a heat and the motion of the animals. It’s was an ideal tool for remote areas, because it not required accessed daily (Ancrenaz et al., 2012). Camera-traps can be used widely in any research of topics (Rovero, 2013). Camera trapping can be effective in both small and large areas. This tool is ideally suited to sample small to large sized ground dwelling mammals (Ancrenaz et al., 2012). Mammals can be difficult to study because many are nocturnal, elusive, and have diverse life history traits. Carnivores are particularly hard to monitor because of their large home ranges and small populations (Long et al. 2011). Camera trapping is effective for investigating many mammalian species (Trolle & Kery 2003). Mammals can be difficult to study because many are nocturnal, elusive, and have diverse life history traits. Carnivores are particularly hard to monitor because of their large home ranges and small populations (Long et al., 2011). Camera trapping is effective for investigating many mammalian species (Trolle & Kery 2003).In addition, camera trapping is also emerging as a powerful tool to detect human illegal activity. Furthermore, raising environmental awareness of local communities and planning conservation management can be done by camera traps study (Lisek, 2013). Other benefits of infrared camera traps include individual photographs of animals, decreased man-power, and this method requires little training (Srbek-Araujo & Chiarello 2005).. 2.3 Rapoport’s Rule Rapoport’s rule is explained that species that able live at higher elevation mean they have a broad range climatic condition and have a wide elevation range Steven (1989).. 7. FYP FSB. automatically take photos or video of animals or subjects that passing in front of them..

(18) Furthermore, Steven (1989) also suggested that species disperse or live in unfavourable areas which they are able to survive but are unable to keep their population. Besides, the ranges of species might be weaker at lower elevations than at high elevations, and the rescue effect would suggest that richness should decline with elevation (Stevens, 1989). Overall of this rule explains about ‘rescue effect’ would lead low elevation have a higher species richness than at high elevation, if those species at high move to down to lower elevation.. 2.4 Mid-Domain effect Mid domain effect is also a powerful explanatory variable in elevational gradient diversity pattern (Watkins et al., 2006). The mid-domain hypothesis explains the richness of species diversity (Colwell & Hurtt, 1994). Colwell et al. (2004) suggested that midelevation peaks in the species richness rise because of the increasing overlap of species ranges towards the centre of the domain, as the extent of the elevational ranges of species is bounded by the highest and lowest elevations. Hawkins et al. (2005) Mid-domain effect will be form when a mid-elevation of species richness was created when random placement of species enclosed by a bounded geographical. Moreover, Hawkins et al. (2005) recently criticized mid-domain models because the range size frequency distribution that generates the mid-domain peak in species richness within a bounded domain using mid-domain models cannot exist without environmental and historical influences.. 8. FYP FSB. In other word of rapoport’s rule is known as rapoport hypothesis (Steven, 1989)..

(19) There is two forms graph of species richness against elevation was found which is monotonic and humped shape (Rahbek, 2005). Monotonic graph (Figure 2.3) is shown that species richness will decrease as elevation of mountain increase (Rahbek, 2005). On the other hand, Rahbek (2005) explain that humped shape graph (Figure 2.2) are species richness highest proximate at the middle of the elevation of the mountain. Watkins et al. (2006) states that the hump shaped graph will be found commonly.. Figure 2.2: Graph of number of species against elevation (Wiens et al., 2007).. 9. FYP FSB. 2.5 Pattern of Species Richness.

(20) FYP FSB Figure 2.3: Graph of species richness against elevation (Trigas et al., 2013).. 2.5 Factors that will influence the species richness and diversity along mountain Manokaran (1992) Proposed that tropical rainforest is the correlation between diversity of plant life with diversity of animals and microorganisms. The flora and fauna of rainforests can differ even over small spaces. Changes in vegetation structure with an elevation of the mountain are ultimately driven by adiabatic cooling or though wind exposure (Barry, 2008). There are varies factor that influencing the richness of species and diversity, including Climatic, biological, geographical, energy and evaluation factors (Rahbek, 1995; Lomolino, 2001).. 2.5.1 Historical Factors Historical factors have been recommended to shape species richness gradients (Brown & Lomolino, 1998; Ricklefs, 2004). Older area is more diverse, due to the species. 10.

(21) colonize or adapt to these environments (Pianka, 1966). Tropics with high species richness clarified stability environments and adaptation of diverse taxa (Fischer, 1960). Nonetheless, Rohde (1992) criticized that evolutionary time cannot use to explain the elevation gradients in species richness. However, recent research has proven that historical factors will influence patterns of species distribution (Ricklefs, 2004).. 2.5.2 Climate Species richness has broad-scale patterns in different elevational patterns because the climatic variables like temperature, rainfall and productivity are the most common reason (McCain & Grytnes, 2010). Most obvious evident that prove climatic variations have changes according to elevation patterns is temperature (Hawkins et al., 2003; Evans et al, 2005). As increasing in elevation from 100m the temperature decreases by an average of approximately 0.68 C (Barry, 2008). Additionally, Climate may affect elevational species-richness patterns in several ways (Barry, 2008). First, climatic tolerances of the studied species may put limitations on how many species can adapt at the different elevations (Grytnes & McCain 2010). Furthermore, Grytnes and McCain (2007) also proposed that rainfall often follows a more complex relationship with altitude and maximum rainfall is often found at intermediate elevations, but is also known to increase with elevation. Primary productivity is dependent on temperature and precipitation (Grytnes & McCain, 2010).. 11. FYP FSB. that experience historical changes are not saturated, because it have not enough time to.

(22) Many studies have expressed positive relationship among habitat heterogeneity and animal species diversity (Tews et al., 2004). Habitat is defined as the dominant vegetation formation, e.g. forest or wetland (Ricklefs & Miller, 1999). Habitat heterogeneity is reflected terrestrial ecosystem vegetation in the form of vertical or horizontal and landscape structure (Tews et al., 2004). There are 12 terms that have the same meaning as habitat heterogeneity (Tews et al., 2004). Bazzaz (1975) proposed complex structure of habitat may provide more niches and diverse ways of exploiting the environmental resources and thus increase in species diversity. Most of the habitat physical structure of environment by plant communities and it has considerable influence on the distributions and interactions of animal species (McCoy & Bell, 1991). The taxonomic group, parameter of vegetation structure and the spatial scale, habitat heterogeneity will influence species diversity, as habitat heterogeneity increase might resulting species diversity decrease (Sullivan & Sullivan, 2001). Moreover, effect of habitat heterogeneity is depending on each consideration of habitat of species (Tews et al., 2004).. 2.5.4 Geographic Area A geographic area is one of the factors that have been presented to explain the elevation gradient of species richness (Willig & Bloch, 2006). Willig and Bloch (2006) proposed that the main idea of this factor is that tropical zones support more species because they consist of larger areas. Basically, few questions if larger areas are predisposed to support greater richness compared to smaller areas (Brown & Lomolino,. 12. FYP FSB. 2.5.3 Habitat Heterogeneity.

(23) zones or other issues related to latitudinal gradient (Rohde, 1998; Rosenzweig & Sandlin, 1997). Moreover, the size of eco-geographic zones will increase as extinction rates decrease and speciation rates had increased (Blackburn & Gaston, 1997). In other terms, species that live in big zones have large geographic scope and higher likeliness of undergoes allopatric speciation when the phenomenon of barrier formation (Blackburn & Gaston, 1997). This results reduction extinction possibility because they have high adaptation in high population. Therefore, safety zones populations have high degrees of speciation, whereby low rates of extinction would support bigger species richness (Willig & Bloch, 2006). As a result, tropical eco-geographic zones toward the elevation of gradient are occurring midpoints where those are tropical bounds (Rosenzweig, 1992; Willig & Bloch, 2006).. 2.5.5 Species-Energy Relationship There are several ecological rules referred in explanation of the species-energy relationship (Huston, 1979; Rosenzweig, 1995). Increased population size, niche position and breadth, dynamic equilibrium, more trophic levels, consumer pressure, range limitation and diversification rate are mechanisms that may create positive relationships between species richness and available energy (Evans et al., 2005).. 2.5.5.1 Niche Position The niche position mechanism (Abrams, 1995) and the increased population size mechanism have the same sense in predicting positive relationships between species. 13. FYP FSB. 1998), however an argument has arisen about the point of which area of eco-geographic.

(24) (Evans et al. 2005). However, the niche position mechanism predicts that niche position specialists will show much stronger species-energy responses while the opposite trend is true for the increased population size mechanism (Evans et al., 2005). In addition, the niche position mechanism makes the assumption that the amount of rare resources will increase as available energy increases (Evans et al., 2005).. 2.5.5.2 Niche Breadth Evan et al. (2005) made a prediction that energy availability may increase may increase the copiousness of resources from niche breadth mechanism. Their positive species-energy relationships when niche overlap and competitive exclusion is low (Evans et al., 2005). However, reductions in niche breadths because of an increase in certain resources’ availability is usually short-term (Feinsinger & Swarm, 1982; Evans & Jarman, 1999) and this mechanism may therefore result in non-permanent changes in communities.. 2.5.5.3 Trophic Levels There is a positive relationship between the numbers of trophic levels and the availability of energy in an area had shown trophic levels mechanism (Evans et al., 2005). When origin species adapted with the addition trophic levels and a positive correlation of available energy and species richness ascends will occur (Oksanen et al., 1981). According to Evans et al. (2005) the limitation of available energy and other factor for instance, history, disturbance and availability of the area are weak in influence trophic levels.. 14. FYP FSB. richness, abundance and energy afterward the effects of sampling have been controlled.

(25) The consumer pressure mechanism is positive in species energy relationships (Evans et al., 2005). There positive species energy relationships when competitive exclusion between prey species reduced (Kullberg & Ekman, 2000), because this mechanism hypothesize the growth of consumer’s abundance and species richness follow by increasing energy availability (Janzen, 1970), that will be raising consumer pressure on their prey.. 2.5.5.5 Dynamic Equilibrium Dynamic equilibrium is one of the mechanism have expressed positive speciesenergy relationships (Huston, 1979). This mechanism proposed that high energy areas following disturbance have lower extinction rates that drive resulted in a positive speciesenergy relationship (Huston, 1979; deAngelis, 1995). These manifestation populations in these areas recover quickly after a disturbance happened (Evans et al., 2005).. 2.5.5.6 Diversification Rate The diversification rate mechanism is the only mechanism linking positive species-energy relationships with the speciation rate (Poulin, 1999). Rohde (1992) proposed that ‘energy levels are used to determine evolutionary speed’. Positive connection between the diversification rate and energy is the resulted if the increasing mutation rates with increases in solar energy (Rohde, 1992). Cardillo (1999) found that the diversification rate at low latitudes is higher than in high latitudes. Furthermore, there are studies shown that species diversity related to surrounding temperature follows by an. 15. FYP FSB. 2.5.5.4 Consumer Pressure.

(26) addition, Allen et al., (2002) suggest that an increase in temperature will speed up the speciation rate which controlled by biochemical reactions.. 2.5.5.7 Range Limitation Evans et al., 2005 suggested range limitation mechanism is about that richly energy area can be met at the high physiological require by most species. Besides that, species will distribute at areas that met their physiological need (Evans et al., 2005). Nevertheless, there is a correlation between species richness and solar energy is unimodal because some of the species can survive in extremely hot areas, in other word mean that species that distributed according energy rich areas have weak adaptation climatic tolerances than the energy poor area (Evans et al., 2005).. 2.5.6 Competition Dobzhansky (1950) and Williams (1964) proposed that natural selection is influenced by the requirement of the physical environment, whereas biological competition is the part of key to evolution in the tropics. This factor has appeared the limit to food sources and habitat desires in the tropics, and a unit habitat space living diversity of species. There is a connection between disastrous and death factors, it may due to natural selection altered tropics with numerous courses (Dobzhansky, 1950). Moreover, predation hypothesis predicts very nearly the opposite mechanisms of control of diversity than do the competition hypothesis (Vitt, 2006).. 16. FYP FSB. elevation gradient of mountain and elevation of the mountain (Allen et al. 2002). In.

(27) Paine (1963) stated that the tropics are abundant with predators or parasites and that these are the mechanism that controlled prey populations. Besides that, predation and parasites can control the level of competition of interspecies as well as intraspecies. The controlled competition in low level allows the addition and co-existence of new prey types, then in turn support new predator. Therefore, these evidences show that mechanism use in both evolutionary and dispersal additions of new species to communities. Community structure will shift along the diversity gradient, as the diversity gradient increase, the number of predator species will increase along it (Pianka, 1966). The studies have shown evidence statement of trophic structure will shift along a diversity gradient is the research of Grice and Hart (1962) of predatory species in the marine zooplankton increases along a latitudinal diversity gradient. In addition, the predation boosts migration and speciation, thus causing in increased species diversity (Fryer, 1959).. 17. FYP FSB. 2.5.7 Predation.

(28) MATERIALS AND METHODS 3.1 Materials The table 3.1 shows all the materials that will be used to conduct this study Sampling.. Table3.1: Material use in this research. Experiment Sampling. Materials and Apparatus -7 cameras traps - Geographical Information System (GIS) - Global Positioning System (GPS). Identification. -Reference book: I. Francis (2008) “Mammals of southeast Asia”. 3.1.1 Software Geographical Information System (GIS) is a system designed for storing, analysing, and displaying spatial data (Wieczorek & Delmerico, 2009). There are many functions of GIS but in this study GIS will be used to assign ground coordinates to a map (Wieczorek & Delmerico, 2009). This study requires accurate coordinate to set up camera trap. Therefore, GIS will be used to analysing correct coordination before deploy camera.. 3.1.2 Camera trap Camera trap that using in this study is Bushnell. It has 14MP high quality full colour resolution, photo quality with 24 HR, day or night mode. The pre-trigger speed is 0.2 –second. The programmable trigger interval is 1 sec to 60 minutes. Bushnell camera. 18. FYP FSB. CHAPTER 3.

(29) PIR sensor that can sense motion activated out to 60ft. To be able to deploy at any size object, this camera has an adjustable web belt. All photographs or video that’s been captured will be stored in SD card. The advantages of this camera trap are this camera have hybrid capture mode mean is can take video and photo for every trigger.. 3.2 Methods 3.2.1 Sampling Camera trap will be used to survey all ranged mammals which all mammals can be detected by the camera. For camera trapping, human hiking trail will be used as the transect line for choosing sites and set up camera trap. Then, either to left or right of the transaction line (side of trail). Then 7 camera trap will be deployed at 7 different elevation points. Besides that, the sign of wildlife like foot print, trail, animal waste will also be factor for the site selection. The distance for one camera trap to another is approximately 100m. Each of the coordinate station will be recorded by using electronic gadget (GPS), it will easy for the collection of camera trap. Cameras will be deploying for 2 months at each location. The camera will be set on the tree trunk with the suitable angles and height. Test photos which captured the whole study site clearly and without obstruction. The cameras will be collected after 2 months, then camera data transferred and save in the computer. To prevent theft the camera was deployed in the area that have covered with bush and with some distances from human track. Furthermore, to enhance detection of multiple 19. FYP FSB. trap have function of multi-image mode with 1 or 3 images per trigger. This camera has.

(30) more than 1m away.. S6: Camera traps lost. S4: Camera trap lost. S2. S5. S7. S1. S3. Figure 3.2.1: Map of Gunung Stong indicating the sampling site of this study. 20. FYP FSB. species sites were baited using coarse salt. Bait was placed in front of the camera, no.

(31) No. 1. 2. 3.. Point P1 P2 P3. Altitude, m 298.3 371.2 468.5. 4. 5.. P4 P5. 737.8 1420. Habitat Lowlands dipterocarp forest Lowlands dipterocarp forest Lowlands dipterocarp forest (near to Camp Baha) Hill dipterocarp forest Ericaceous forest (Gunung Stong summit). 3.2.2 Identification The photograph will be arranged by individual locations and will be examined to identify individual species. Francis (2008) "Mammals of Southeast Asia" will be used to identify of each captured individual mammal family, species, and genus.. 3.2.3 Calculation 3.2.3.1 Species Richness Levin et al. (2009) defined Species richness as the measured the total amount in each individual (species) existing at a certain area, community, landscape, and region. It is vital to know the species richness in the study areas, because we can evaluate the conservation status of the data.. 21. FYP FSB. Table 3.2: The habitat at each of the camera sites..

(32) Most of researcher used Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index as diversity indices. Even though there are other indexes that can be used for it, this index used the simplest way in term of calculations (Krebs, 2014). The equation used for the calculation is:. 𝐻 = −𝑠𝑢𝑚 (𝑝𝑖 ln [𝑝𝑖]). Where pi is the number of individuals of a species over the total number of individuals overall.. 22. FYP FSB. 3.2.3.2 Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index.

(33) RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Results At the end of the 63-day (from 12/08/2016 to 14/10/2016) survey period, photographs were arranged by individual site locations. Station 3 (N05˚20'26.00", E101˚58'01.06"), and 6 (N05˚20'10.06", E101˚56'43.00") were removed due to camera trap was stolen. As a result of removing these two sites, all analyses were calculated using the remaining 5 Station. Photographs were examined to identify individual species detected using Francis (2008) “A Guide to the Mammals of Southeast Asia”. Data at each site were examined and species lists were compiled for each camera location (Table 4.1). The total number of species was calculated for each camera site. Throughout the 63-day sampling survey a total of 12 mammalian species and 83 individuals (Table 4.1) were detected in Gunung Stong. These detections included small, large and medium carnivores, herbivores, and omnivore’s mammal (Table 4.1). Across the elevation, different level has different in species and frequencies were recorded. The 12 mammalian species that’s been captured are unknown species (2), Helarctos malayanus (1), Pardofelis marmorata (4), Tapirus indicus (1), Sus scrofa (39), Muntiacus muntjak (9), Arctictis binturong (3), Capricornis sumatraensis (1), Rattus tiomanicus (17), Manis javanica (1) and Callosciurus caniceps (5). Moreover, one was critically endangered species (Manis javanica), one endangered species (Tapirus indicus), three assigned as a vulnerable species (Helarctos malayanus, Artictis binturong, and Capricornis sumatraensis), one near threatened species (Pardofelis marmorata) and the. 23. FYP FSB. CHAPTER 4.

(34) Callosciurus caniceps) by the IUCN Red List of threatened species (IUCN, 2016). From table 4.1.1 the highest number of species is located at point 3 (468.5m) which has about 10 species consists of 35 individuals photograph detected. While, at the elevation of 1420m (point 5) only two species were detected with has the lowest number of species compare to the other 4 points.. 24. FYP FSB. rest are listed as least concern (Sus scrofa, Muntiacus muntjak, Rattus tiomanius and.

(35) Point 1 (297.3m). Point 2 (371.2m). Point 3 (468.5m). Point 4 (737.8m). Point 5 (1420m). N 05°20'28.06". N 05˚20’33.06”. N 05˚28’26.00”. N 05˚20’25.03”. E 05˚20’10.09”. E 101°58'17.52". E 101˚58’16.00”. E 101˚58’01.06”. E 101˚57’29.09”. E 101˚56’16.00”. Unknown species. 0. 0. 1. 0. 0. 1. Helarctos malayanus. 0. 0. 0. 1. 0. 1. VU. Pardofelis marmorata. 2. 0. 2. 0. 0. 4. NT. Tapirus indicus. 0. 1. 0. 0. 0. 1. EN. Sus scrofa. 10. 13. 15. 5. 0. 43. LC. Muntiacus muntjak. 3. 1. 2. 3. 0. 9. LC. Arctictis binturong. 0. 1. 1. 0. 1. 3. VU. Unknown species. 0. 0. 1. 0. 0. 1. -. Capricornis sumatraensis. 0. 0. 1. 0. 0. 1. VU. Rattus tiomanicus. 0. 7. 10. 0. 0. 17. LC. Manis javanica. 0. 0. 1. 0. 0. 1. CR. Callosciurus caniceps. 0. 0. 1. 0. 4. 5. LC. Total of individual. 15. 23. 35. 9. 5. 83. Numbers of species. 3. 5. 10. 3. 2. Trap-days. 63. 63. 63. 63. 63. Species. 25. 25. Total. IUCN Status. FYP FSB. Table 4.1.1: Number of mammalians species detected by using camera trap across the elevation gradient in Gunung Stong.

(36) Gunung Stong is shown in figure 4.1. There is a significant increasing trend in total species richness from 298.5m to 468.5m. From 468.5m to 1420m, there is clear decrease. Thus, the high mammal species richness in Gunung Stong province is peaked at middle elevation at 468.5m. This value is accounts for about 75% of the total number of mammal species been detected by camera trap. This also can be proved by the rarefaction graph in Figure 4.2. It has shown that Point 3 (468.5m) was the mid-peaked because it shows the higher and longer curve compared to other 4 points. In other word, point 3 stated as midelevation peaked is because it has higher number of species than other point.. 10 9. 468.5m. Number of species. 8 7 6 371.2m. 5 4. 737.8m. 3. 1420.0m. 297.3m. 2 1 0 0. 200. 400. 600. 800. 1000. 1200. Elevation (m). Figure 4.1: Number of species against elevation.. 26. 1400. 1600. FYP FSB. The patterns of mammal species richness provinces along elevation gradient.

(37) Species richness. 12 P1. 10. P2 8. P3 P4. 6. P5. 4. Total. 2 0 0. 10. 20. 30. 40. 50. 60. 70. 80. 90. Number of individual. Figure 4.2: The rarefaction graph for species diversity at each elevation in Gunung Stong.. Table 4.2: Shannon-Wiener diversity index at each of elevation in Gunung Stong. Shannon-Weiner diversity index, H 0.884 1.070 1.621 0.934 0.500. Point. .. 1 2 3 4 5. The hump-shaped pattern of the species diversity province along elevation gradient Gunung Stong also can be shown by Shannon-Wiener diversity index (Table 4.2). The Shannon-Wiener diversity index form point 1 to point 3 are significantly. 27. FYP FSB. 14.

(38) Besides that, it is also shown that Point 3 was the peaked mid-elevation of this mountain and is the most diverse species compare to another point. The pattern of the initial increase in species richness with elevation, then by a peak and followed a decline with the continuous elevation gradient increase. It has similar to the study of the patterns of ant species richness along elevational gradients in an arid ecosystem in Spring Mountains, Nevada, U. S.A which the ant species richness across the elevation graph is in a humpshaped (Sanders et al., 2003).. 4.2 Factor that causes the species richness of mammals across the elevation gradient Gunung Stong in hump-shaped graph.. Mid-domain effect The distribution of species richness along elevation gradients is influenced by a series of interacting biological, geographical, energy, climatic and historical factors (Rahbek, 1995; Lomolino, 2001). Further, the environmental variables will change according to elevation and every elevation represents a complex gradient (Austin et al., 1996). This observed hump-shaped species richness patterns of mammals in Gunung Stong is in accordance with the factor of habitat heterogeneity and optimum resource combination in the intermediate portion of the elevation gradient. The mid- elevation peak ranges with an optimal combination of environmental resource and provide more niches more preferable for many species to coexist (Lomolino 2001; Brown, 2001), therefore, more species of mammals were found in this elevation level in Gunung Stong. Also the elevation of point 3 overlaps between low elevation and high elevation species (mixed 28. FYP FSB. increasing in species diversity. While, species diversity decrease from point 3 to point 5..

(39) a trend of mixed habitats and resources in mid-elevation areas could be partial reason for the high species richness of the mammal at mid-elevations in Gunung Stong.. Climate Climatic patterns in the high elevation of the mountain might influence the species richness in Gunung Stong at high elevation. Hawkins et al. (2005) and Evans et al. (2005) stated that temperature was the most obvious evidence that prove climatic variations changes according to elevation patterns and every increase of elevation from 100m the temperature decrease by an average of approximately 0.68˚C (Barry, 2008). Elevation determines temperature and the decreasing temperatures from low elevation (297.8m) to the mountain peak in Gunung Stong could be responsible for the low species count. While, point 3 have higher species compare to 298.5m and 371.2m is may be due to the temperature (environment condition) is favourable for mammals to survive (Brown, 2001). Grytnes and McCain (2010) stated the productivity is dependent on temperature and precipitation. Climate condition restricts the productivity, which in turn limits the population sizes and total number of individuals. (Brown, 2001). Thus, low temperature will decrease the primary productivity. Usually, the factor that has correlation with productivity is indicated the more individual factors, which predicts that the positive relationship between diversity and productivity is due to the ability of high productive areas to support more individuals within a community and thus, more species (Srivastava. 29. FYP FSB. community) and it has the greatest species richness compared to other the 4 points. Such.

(40) regulating rates of physiological process and influencing growth, development of plants and plant productivity. As some mammals are herbivores which rely on producer as the food source to sustain life, the production or growth of plants will give a big impact to the mammals. Many factors have been proposed to explain this variation food-chain length among natural communities, including productivity, disturbance, ecosystem size (area or volume), habitat heterogeneity, species richness, design and size constraints, optimal foraging, and the history of community organizing (Pimm 1982; Post 2002; Elton (1927)). Therefore, the higher species at point 3 elevation is due to the temperature is still in the favourable condition to have high productivity to support mammals in this elevation. Therefore, several biological, physical and chemical factors will also affect the species richness in high elevation and temperature are one of the reasons from the several factors.. Other potential factor Availability of food and water source Species distribution is the manner in which a biological taxon is spatially arranged (European commission, n.d.). The pattern of distribution is not permanent for each species. Distribution patterns can change seasonally, in response to the availability of resources, and other factors. Possibly, there is link between the availability of resources and elevation at 468.5m to be abundances with species. This site is a low dipterocarp forest and have mountains stream nearby. Thus, sites have met the basic requirements of the mammals to survive, which is available food, water and shelter, because it’s available with water resources, aquatic living organisms, fruit, trees as the habitat and others. 30. FYP FSB. and Lawton, 1998). (Heferkamp, 1987) indicate that temperature is essential for.

(41) requirements of mammals. Besides that, this camera site is near to camp sites (Camp Baha) in Gunung Stong. The camp Baha site is a low dipterocarp forest with a mountain stream. It’s also a pit stop for the visitor to rest or overnight before attempting the steeper level. At camp baha, visitors can take their rest, enjoy their meals and have a nice bath in the river (Maseru, 2009). One of the factors that attracted wildlife to site 3 (camp baha) is food left-over and remnants left by campers, thus the more numbers recorded.. Forest Fragmentation Habitat destruction typically leads to fragmentation, the division of habitat into smaller and more isolated fragments separated by human-transformed land cover (Ewers & Didham, 2006). Fragmentation not only causes loss of the amount of habitat, but by creating small, isolated patches it also changes the properties of the remaining habitat (van den Berg et al. 2001). When the origin habitat is destroyed due to land use change of fragmentation which lead wildlife seeks these remaining natural habitats sanctuaries (Virgos, 2001). Compressed into these smaller areas, they is greater intra and inter-species. competition and some may migrate to habitats usually not conducive to them. This could be the reason for the greater species richness in point3. Furthermore, 468.5m elevation have all the basic requirements for wildlife to survive compared to other elevations. Therefore, wildlife that choose to survive in the mountain will choose point 3 as habitat it may because of richness of resources. In addition, wildlife that is captured in all the. 31. FYP FSB. Factors as well. There is not one site like 468.5m that have met all these basic.

(42) for food resources around the area.. 4.3 Background of captured species Helarctas marmorata (Sun Bear) The sun bear live in extensive areas of forest and sometimes may be found at logged forest or plantation (Francis, 2008; Wong, 2002). There is one individual sun bear has been captured in this study. Wong (2002) discovered 5 bears in primary forest and that few are found in logged forests in Ulu Segama Forest Reserve, Lahad Datu, Sabah. Besides that, Ahmad et al. (2005) also detected sun bear in Gunung Stong State Park. The sun bear is listed as vulnerable in the IUCN Red list of Threatened Species (Fredriksson, 2008).. Tapirus indicus (Malayan Tapir) Normally this species can be found in intact rainforest. Besides that, it can be survive in high elevation up to 2000m and it often found near streams (Francis, 2008). In this survey, only one Tapirus indicus been captured in at elevation of 371.2m in Gunung Stong. While, previous study have 18 individual of Tapirus indicus was captured at Bayek saltlick, Neram and Wan Bulan in Krau Wildlife Reserve (Traeholt et al., 2009). This species has listed as Endangered due to the effect of habitat loss, over hunting and others causing decline of population about 50% in the past 36 years(Traeholt et al., 2016).. 32. FYP FSB. cameras may not necessarily be different individuals, but same individuals, as they search.

(43) Four individuals was captured at low elevation which in point 2 and point 3. P. marmorata occurs in tall and secondary forest (Francis, 2008). In Borneo, major of marble cat records were collected from Sabah, Malaysia, and other were also found from Brunei Darussalam, Sarawak (Malaysia), North Kalimantan, East Kalimantan, Central Kalimantan, and West Kalimantan (all Indonesia) by Rustam et al. (2016). McCann (2016) found 13 marbled cats at Virachey National Park the highest mountain ridges in northeast Cambodia that dominated with bamboo. This species is listed as nearly threatened in IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (Ross et al., 2016).. Sus scrofa (Wild boar) The most abundant species detected in Gunung Stong was S. scrofa (wild boar). Species such as S. scrofa were found in a wide variety of habitats, including mature forest, disturbed areas, secondary forest, gardens and plantations. (Francis, 2008), this species were the most captured using camera trap at the 4 point except for point 5 (the highest elevation). Gunung Stong was covered with mixed dipterocarp forest, which reflects the high number of Wild boar, one of the species that is commonly found in most types of forest (Francis, 2008). Besides that, the highest in number of species S. scrofa may due to lack of natural predator to hunt. Ickes (2003) obtained 41 S. scrofa at lowland rain forest of Pasoh Forest Reserve in Negeri Sembilan. In Southeast Asia, S. scrofa observed in various forest site which is Lowland or hill dipterocarp forest, dry dipterocarp forest, coastal forest, and Coastal dipterocarp forest (Yong, 2010). Therefore, this species has. 33. FYP FSB. Pardofelis marmorata (Marbled Cat).

(44) 2008).. Muntiacus muntjak (Kijang) This species was found in wide variety of forest habitat. It can live in tropical forest, dry dipterocarp and lowlands or hills (Francis, 2008). Therefore, in this study M. muntjak at all elevation except for the point 5. In addition, Francis (2008) stated that, M. muntjak dominant at low hill ranges and the forest coast line. Thus, Ong, et al. (2013) found this species at ridges of Gunung Kuli Research Station, in Imbak Canyon Conservation Area, Sabah. This species has assigned as least concern in IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (Timmins et al. 2016).. Arctictis binturong (Binturong) This is the only species had been detected at the highest elevation (1420m) and other two at low elevations (371.2m and 487.5m) of Gunung Stong. In other word this species can be survive at all spectrum environment and elevation gradient. Binturong can be obtained in tall and secondary forest but it also can be found at cultivated areas near to forests (Francis, 2008). Previously, Rode-margono (2014) spotted two binturong on ground, trees or bamboo in Gunung Gede Pangrango, Indonesia. This species has assigned as vulnerable in IUCN Red List of Threatened Species due to decline population (Willcox et al., 2016). The factor that lead to decline population is due to habitat loss, hunting and trapping. 34. FYP FSB. listed as Least Concern in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (Oliver & Leus,.

(45) This species commonly found on steep terrain especially in limestone outcrops or hill forest (Francis, 2008). Only single individual was captured at point 3 (471.2m) in Gunung Stong. Previously, Ahmad et al. (2005) also detected this species in Gunung Stong. In 21 years, the C. sumatraensis population has decreased about 30% of because of over-exploitation and habitat loss, thus it has listed as vulnerable under IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (Duckworth, 2008).. Rattus tiomanunicus (Malayan Field Rat) This is the second abundant species that had been captured especially in this survey. (Francis, 2008). Previously, Jayaraj et al. (2016) had recorded this species at Pasir Mas, Kelantan. This species also captured by Ramli and Hashim (2009) in Kenaboi Forest Reserve, Jelebu, Negeri Sembilan. This species can be found in secondary forest, plantation, garden, scrub and grassland, but rarely in house settlement or tall dipterocarp forest (Francis, 2008). This species is listed as Least Concern in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (Aplin, 2016).. Manis javanica (Malayan Pangolin) M. javanica is insectivores found at mid-elevation (468.5m) in Gunung Stong. this species can be found in tall and secondary forest, but some time it can be found in cultivated areas (garden) and it often seen on roads at night (Francis, 2008). Out of. 35. FYP FSB. Capricornis sumatraensis (Southern Serow).

(46) and only one image was captured by Novarino et al. (2005). The high level of hunting and poaching have driven the pangolin listed as critically endangered in IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (Challender, 2016).. Callosciurus caniceps (Grey-bellied Squirrel) This species commonly were found in all type forest, including plantation, cultivated areas, gardens or intact forest. Moreover, it can survive at high elevation (1500m) but mostly in lowlands (Francis, 2008). Five individual of this species has been captured in mid-elevation peak elevation (468.5m) and highest elevation (1420m). This species also was captured by Jayaraj et al. (2016) at Gunung Chamah. While, Ramli and Hashim (2009) found 4 individuals of this species in Kenaboi Forest Reserve, Jelebu, Negeri Sembilan. This species is listed as Least Concern in IUCN Red List of Threatened Species by Duckworth et al. (2016).. 36. FYP FSB. Malaysia, M. javanica also can be found at in Taratak Forest Reserve, Sumatra, Indonesia.

(47) CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Conclusion As a conclusion, this study has provided new records of species richness and diversity of mammals across elevation gradient in Gunung Stong by using the cameratrap technique. Half of the captured species was listed as least concern (LC) in IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, while the other species are listed as critically endangered, endangered, vulnerable, near threatened. This information could aid in improving the management effectiveness of GSSP, a protected area under the Kelantan Forestry Department. The humped graph of species richness along the elevation gradient shows the species richness and diversity of mammals across the elevation gradient in Gunung Stong which causes by the factors of mid-domain effect and climate. However, mid domain and climate are not only the factors that causes the abundant species at mid-elevation peak, it possibility due to availability resources and forest fragmentation.. 5.2 Recommendation The data obtained in this study could be used as a base for further studies especially on distribution, density, population and possible management interventions. The absence of iconic large mammals like the tiger and elephant, could be a cause for further addition studies on their distribution of population. Besides that, sites for camera set up and. 37. FYP FSB. CHAPTER 5.

(48) factors that may be influencing the capture rate of mammals in Gunung Stong:. Sampling effort According to Ahmad et al. (2005) Gunung Stong is available with iconic large mammals like tigers and elephant. However in this study, these two large mammals were not detected. It may due to the insufficient number of camera trapping days to detect, thought tigers were captured by camera in the nearby Gunung Basor Forest Reserve (WWF, Malaysia, 2007) have found first tiger in the study period of 108-268 days in Gunung Basor. This study has only deployed camera trap for 63days in Gunung Stong which is only approximately 33% of the length of time of their study in Gunung Basor. Prolonging the camera trapping time could capture these mammals.. Sites for set up camera trap In this study, the camera traps were set up alongside suspected animal trails. After collected and analysis photograph, four sites do not only captured pictures of wildlife but human being too, as some were placed near to hiking trails. Usually, the presence of humans will inhibit wildlife, but in the case of a protected area like GSSP, wildlife is generally less shy, but to increase the capture rate, perhaps more isolated trails should be selected.. 38. FYP FSB. weather in Gunung Stong have influences the capture rate. The following below was the.

(49) Weather also play a large role in each of these biotic components, possibly changing foraging, nesting, or caching activity patterns and therefore greatly affecting population estimates (Steinhoff, 2009), especially for small mammals. Therefore, rainy season can influence the detection of small mammals (Gentry, et al., 1966). As an example, usually from August the rainfall increases until the maximum in December, and this corresponds to the sampling periods (August to September, 2016) of sampling is conducted in the following months, the results could be different.. Table 4.6: Monthly rainfall in Kelantan, Malaysia from January to November (Source: Official website of Malaysian Meteorological Department, 2016). Month. Average monthly Rainfall, mm 0 100 0 50 200 200 150 100 250 300 350. January February March April May June July August September October November. 39. FYP FSB. Weather.

(50) Abrams, P. A. (1995) Monotonic or unimodal diversity-productivity gradients: what does competition theory predict? Ecology, 76, 2019-2027. Ahmad, Z. A. W., A.K. Johanssen, M.R. Darmaraj, O. Ansel, D.S.K. Sharma & Surin Suksuwan. (2005). Camera-trapping and Observations of the Larger Animals in West Kelantan Forest Complex. In: Shaharuddin Mohamad Ismail, Dahalan Hj. Taha, Abdullah Sani Shafie, Jalil Md. Som, I. Faridah-Hanum & A. Latiff (eds.). (2005). Taman Negeri Gunung Stong, Kelantan: Pengurusan, Persekitaran Fizikal, Biologi dan Sosio-Ekonomi. Jabatan Perhutanan Semenanjung Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur. Aplin, K. (2016a). Rattus tiomanicus. Retrieved November 18, 2016, from The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/19368/0 Allen, A. P., Brown, J. H. & Gillooly, J. F. (2002) Global biodiversity, biochemical kinetics, and the energetic-equivalence rule. Science, 297, 1545-1548. Ancrenaz, M., A. J. Hearn, J. Ross, R. Sollmann & A. Wilting, 2012. Handbook for Wildlife Monitoring Using Camera-traps. BBEC Publication, Sabah Parks and Japan International Cooperation Agency. 71 pp. Austin MP. Pausas JG. & Nicholls AO. (1996). Patterns of tree species richness in relation to environment in south-eastern New South Wales, Australia. Australia Journal of Ecology, 21,154-164. Baltzer, L. J. &Thomas C.S. (2002) Tropical Forests. Encyclopaedia of life sciences.1-8 Bazzaz, F.A. (1975) Plant species diversity in old-field successional ecosystems in southern Illinois. Ecology, 56, 485–488. Barry, R.G. (2008). Mountain Weather and Climate. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Blackburn, T. M. & Gaston, K. J. (1997). The relationship between geographic area and the latitudinal gradient in species richness in New World birds. Evolution Ecology, 11, 195- 204. Boulinier, T., Nichols, J. D., Sauer, J. R., Hines, J. E., & Pollock, K. H. (1998). Estimating species richness: the importance of heterogeneity in species detectability. Ecology, 79(3), 1018-1028. Brown, J. H. & Lomolino, M. V. (1998). Biogeography. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland. Brown J. (2001). Mammals on mountainsides: elevational patterns of diversity. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 10,101-109. Cardillo, M. (1999). Latitude and rates of diversification in birds and butterflies. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, 266, 1221-1225. Challender, D., Nguyen Van, T., Shepherd, C., Krishnasamy, K., Wang, A., Lee, B., Panjang, E., Fletcher, L., Heng, S., Seah Han Ming, J., Olsson, A., Nguyen The 40. FYP FSB. REFERENCES.

(51) Colwell, R.K. & Hurtt, G.C. (1994). Non-biological gradients in species richness and a spurious Rapoport effect. The American Naturalist, 144, 570–595. Colwell, R. K., C. Rahbek, & N. J. Gotelli. (2004). The mid-domain effect and species richness patterns: what have we learned so far? American Naturalist, 163, 1–23. Davis, A. & J. R. Wagner. (2003). Who knows? On the importance of identifying “experts” when researching local ecological knowledge. Human Ecology, 31(3), 463-489. deAngelis, D. L. (1995) Relationship between the energetics of species and large-scale species richness. In: Linking species and ecosystems. (eds. by C. G. Jones and J. H. Lawton), pp. 263-272. Chapman and Hall, London. Dobzhansky, T. (1950). Evolution in tropics. American Science. 38, 209-221 Drinnen, K. (2000). Tropical rainforests. Chapter 3: Tropical rainforest plants. (Eds. 3), (pp. 25). Moody Gardens Balveston Island. Duckworth, J.W., Steinmetz, R. & MacKinnon, J., Capricorns sumatraensis. Retrieved November, 25, (2016), from The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/3812/0 Elton, C. (1927) Animal ecology. Metapopulation models: the rescue effect, the propagule rain, and the core-satellite hypothesis. Am Nat, 138:768–776. European Comission, (n.d). Species Distribution. Retrieved December, 10, (2016), from European Commission: http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/theme/sd Evans, M. C. & Jarman, P. J. (1999) Diets and feeding selectivities of bridled nail tail wallabies and black-striped wallabies. Wildlife Research, 26, 1-19. Evans, K. L., Warren, P. H. & Gaston, K. J. (2005) Species-energy relationships at the macroecological scale: a review of the mechanisms. Biological Reviews, 80, 1-25. Ewers, R.M. & Didham,R.K.(2006). Confounding factors in the detection of species responses to habitat fragmentation. Biological Reviews 81: 117–142. Feinsinger, P. & Swarm, L. A. (1982) Ecological release, seasonal variation in food supply and the hummingbird Amazilia tobaci on Trinidad and Tabago, West Indies. Ecology, 63, 1574-1587. Fischer, A. G. (1960) Latitudinal variations in organic diversity. Evolution, 14, 64-81. Fischer, A., Blaschke, M. & Bässler, C. (2011). Altitudinal gradients in biodiversity research: the state of the art and future perspectives under climate change aspects. Waldökologie, Landschaftsforschung und Naturschutz, 11, 35-47. Francis,M. C. (2008). A Guide To The Mammals OF Southeast Asia. UK: New Hollan Publishers(UK) Ltd.. 41. FYP FSB. Truong, A., Nguyen Van, Q. & Chung, Y., Manis javanica. Retrieved November, 25, (2016), from http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/12763/0.

(52) Fryer, G. (1959). Some aspects of evolution in Lake Nyasa. Evolution, 13,440-451. Grice, G. D., & Hart, A. D. (1962). The abundance, seasonal occurrence and distribution of the epizooplankton between New York nd Bermuda. Ecol. Monogr., 32, 287309. Grytnes, A. J. & McCain, M. C. (2007). Elevational trends in biodiversity. Encyclopedia of biodiversity, 1-8. Grytnes, A. J. & McCain, M. C. (2010). Elevational gradients in species richness. Encyclopedia of biodiversity, 1-10. Haferkamp, M.R. (1987). Environmental factors affecting plant productivity. Motana Agr. Exp.Sta., Bozeman., 132, 1-10 Hawkins, B. A., Field, R., Cornell, H. V., Currie, D. J., Guegan, J.-F., Kaufman, D. M., Kerr, J. T., Mittelbach, G. G., Oberdorff, T., O'Brien, E. M., Porter, E. E.& Turner, J. R. G. (2003). Energy, water, and broad-scale geographic patterns of species richness. Ecology, 84, 3105-3117. Hawkins, B.A., Diniz-Filho, J. A. F & Weis, E. A. (2005). The Mid-domain effect and diversity gradients: is there anything to learn? The American naturalist, 5, 140-143 Hayward, M. W., White R. M., Mabandla K. M. & Pakama P. (2005) Mammalian fauna of indigenous forest in the Transkei region of South Africa: an overdue survey. South African Journal of Wildlife Research, 35(2), 117-124. Heip, C. H., Herman, P. M., & Soetaert, K. (1998). Indices of diversity and evenness. Oceanis, 4, 61-87. Heip, H. R. C., Herman, M. J. P. & Soetaert, K. (2001). Indices Of diversity and eveness. Institut océanpgraphique, oceanisi, 4, 61-87 Heywood, V.H. & Stuart, S.N. (1992) Species extinctions in tropical forests. Tropical deforestation and species extinction. In: T. C. Whitmore & J. A. Sayer (eds), pp. 91-117. Chapman & Hall, London. Heywood, V.H., Mace, G.M., May, R.M. & Stuart, S.N. (1994) Uncertainties in extinction rates. Nature, 368, 105. Huston, M. A. (1979) A general hypothesis of species diversity. The American Naturalist, 113,81-101 Ickes, K. L. (2001). The effects of wild pigs (sus scrofa) on woody understory vegetation in lowland rain forest of Malaysia. (Unpublished Degree Dissertation). B.A. Swarthmore College. Ickes, K. & S. C. Thomas, (2003). Native, wild pigs (Sus scrofa) at Pasoh and their impacts on the plant community. In: Okuda, T., Manokaran, N., Matsumoto, Y., 42. FYP FSB. Fredriksson, G., Steinmetz, R., Wong, S. & Garshelis, D.L. (2008) Helarctos malayanus. Retrived November 21, 2016, from The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/9760/0.

(53) Janzen, D. H. (1970) Herbivores and the number of tree species in tropical forests. American Naturalist, 104, 501-528. Jayaraj, V. K., Faisal Ali, A. K., Isham, A., Ean, W. C., Mohd Rohanif, M. A., Amirrudin, A. (2016). Diversity and conservation status of small mammals in Kelantan, Malaysia. Songklanakarin J. Sci. Technol , 38(2), 213-220. Kullberg, C. & Ekman, J. (2000) Does predation maintain tit community diversity? Oikos, 89, 41-45. Krebs, C.J. (2014). Ecological Methodology. (3. Ed). In preparation. Retrieved 02/05/2016, from http://www.zoology.ubc.ca/~krebs/books.html. Levin, S. A., Carpenter, S. R., Godfray, H. C. J., Kinzig, A. P., Loreau, M., Losos, J. B., & Wilcove, D. S. (2009). The Princeton guide to ecology. Princeton University Press. Lisek J. C. (2013). Camera trap assessment of the mammalian assemblages within the Tuli wilderness area, Botswana. (Master Thesis) University of Central Missouri. Lomolino, M.V. (2001) Elevation gradients of species-density: historical and prospective views. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 10, 3–13. Long, R. A., T. M. Donavan, P. Mackay, W. J. Zielinski, & J. S. Buzas. (2011). Predicting carnivore occurrence with noninvasive surveys and occupancy modeling. Landscape Ecology 26:327-340. Manokaran, N. (1992). An overview of biodiversity in Malaysia. Journal of Tropical Forest Science, 5(2), 271-290 Maloney, B. K. (1985). Man’s impact on the rainforests of West Malaysia:the palynological record. Journal of Biogeography, 12, 537–558. Mariana, A., Zuraidawati, Z., Ho, T. M., Mohd Kulaimi, B., Saleh, I., Shukor, M. N. & Shahrul-Anuar, M. S. (2005). A survey of ecoparasites in gunung stong forest reserve, Kelantan, Malaysia. Southeast Asia journal trop med public health, 5, 1125-1132. Maseri, N.M. & Mohd-Ros, A.H. (2005). Managing Gunung Stong State Park: A conceptual framework, pp. 31–43. In: Shaharudin M.I., T. Dahalan, S.S. Abdullah, M.S. Jalil, I. Faridah-Hanum & A. Latiff (eds.). Taman Negeri Gunung Stong, Kelantan: Pengurusan, Persekitaran Fizikal, Biologi dan Sosio-Ekonomi. Siri Kepelbagaian Biologi Hutan 5. Jabatan Perhutanan Semenanjung Malaysia, 442pp. Maseri, N.M. (2009). Guidebook to Gunung Stong State Park. Petaling Jaya: WWF Malaysia. Maseri, N.M. (2009). Gunung Stong State Park Preliminary management plan.. 43. FYP FSB. Niiyama, K., Thomas, S. C. & P. S. Ashton (eds.), Pasoh: Ecology of a Lowland Rain Forest in Southeast Asia. Springer-Verlag, Tokyo. Pp. 507–520..

(54) McCain C. M., & Grytnes J. A. (2010). Elevational gradients in species richness Pp. 1– 10 in Jansson R., editor. , ed. Encyclopedia of life sciences (ELS). John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester, U.K. McCann, G. E. (2016). Marbled Cat Pardofelis marmorata at Virachey National Park, Ratanakiri, Cambodia . Southeast Asia Vertebrate Records. 72-74 McCoy, E.D. & Bell, S.S. (1991) Habitat structure: the evolution and diversification of a complex topic. Habitat structure: the physical arrangement of objects in space (ed. by S.S.Bell, E.D. McCoy and H.R. Mushinsky), pp. 3–27. Chapman & Hall, London. McGinley, M., & Duffy, J. R. (2007). Species diversity. Encyclopedia of Earth. Manokaran N (1992). An Overview of Biodiversity in Malaysia. Journal of Tropical Forest Science, 5(2), 271-290. Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., daFonesca, G.A.B. & Kent, J. (2000). Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature, 403, 853–858. Novarino, W. (2005). Population monitoring and study of daily activities of malayan tapir (Tapirus indicus) through the use of the camera trapping techniquein Taratak Forest Reserve, Sumatra, Indonesia. Rufford Small Grant (for Nature Conservation) in association with the Whitley Laing Foundation. Oksanen, J., Fretwell, S. D., Arruda, J. & Niemelä, P. (1981) Exploitation ecosystems in gradients of primary productivity. American Naturalist, 118, 240-261. Oliver, W. & Leus, K., Sus scrofa. Retrieved November, 24, 2016, from The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/41775/0 Ong, K.Y., Kunai, J. G., Pamin, D., Matsubayashi, H., Bernard, H. & Ahm, A.H. (2013). Notes on the mammal fauna in and around the Gunung Kuli Research Station, in Imbak Canyon Conservation Area, Sabah, Malaysia. Journal of tropical biology and conservation, 10, 1-9. Paine, R. T. (1963). Trophic relationships of eight sympatric predatory gastropods. Ecology, 44, 63-77. Parrish, D. J., Braun, P. D. & Unnasch, S. R. (2003). Are we conserving what we are? Measuring Ecological Integrity within protected area. Bioscience, 9, 851-860. Pianka, R. E. (1966). Latitudinal gradient in species diversity: A review of concepts. The American Naturalist, 910, 33-47. 44. FYP FSB. Meir, E., Andelman, S., Possingham & H.P., (2004). Does conservation planning matter in a dynamic and uncertain world? Ecology Letter, 7, 615–622..

(55) Poulin, R. (1999). Speciation and diversification of parasites lineages: an analysis of congeneric parasites species in vertebrates. Evolutionary ecology, 13, 455-467. Post, D.M. (2002). The long and short of food-chain length. Trends Ecol Evol 17:269– 277 Rahbek, C. (1995). The elevational gradient of species richness- a uniform pattern. Ecography, 18, 200–205. Rahbek, C. (2005). The role of spatial scale and the perception of large-scale speciesrichness patterns. Ecology Letters, 8, 224–239. Ramli, R. & Hashim, R. (2009) Diversity of small mammals inhabiting disturbed forest: A case study on Kenaboi Forest Reserve, Jelebu, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia. Malaysian journal of sciences, 28(4), 481-490. Ricklefs, R.E. & Miller, G.L. (1999) Ecology, 4th edn. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York. Ricklefs, R. E. (2004) A comprehensive framework for global patterns in biodiversity.Ecology Letters, 7, 1-15. Rode-Margono, E. J., Voskamp, A., Spaan, D., Lehtinen, J. K., Roberts, P. D., Nijman, V. & Nekaris, K. A. I. (2014). Records of small carnivores and of medium-sized nocturnal mammals on Java, Indonesia. Small carnivore conservation, 50, 1-11. Rohde, K. (1992) Latitudinal gradients in species diversity: the search for the primary cause.Oikos, 65, 514-527. Rohde, K. (1998). Latitudinal gradients in species diversity. Area matters, but how much? oikos, 82, 184-190. Rosenzweig, M. L. (1992). Species diversity gradients: we know more and less than we thought. J. Mammal, 73, 715-730. Rosenzweig, M. L. (1995). Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge Univ. Press. Rosenzweig, M. L. & Sandlin, E. A. (1997). Species diversity and latitude: listening to area’s signal. Oikos, 80,172-176. Ross, J., Brodie, J., Cheyne, S., Datta, A., Hearn, A., Loken, B., Lynam, A., McCarthy, J., Phan, C., Rasphone, A., Singh, P. & Wilting, A. (2016). Pardofelis marmorata. Retireved November, 24, 2016, from The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/16218/0 45. FYP FSB. Pimm, S.L. (1982). Food webs. Chapman and Hall, London.

(56) Rustam, Hearn, A. J., Ross, J., Alfred, R. Samejima, H., Heydon, M., Susan M. C., Brodie, J. F, Giordano, A. J., Bernard, H., Boonratana, R., Loken, B., Mohamed, A., Jayasilan, M. A., Augeri, D. M., Eaton, J., Hon, J., Marshall, A. J., Mathai, J., Semiadi, G., Macdonald, D. W., Breitenmoser-Würsten, C., Kramer-Schadt, S. & Wilting, A.(2016). Predicted distribution of the marbled cat Pardofelis marmorata (Mammalia: Carnivora: Felidae) on Borneo. Raffles bulletin of zoology, 33, 157– 164 Sanders NJ. Moss J. & Wagner D. (2003). Patterns of ant species richness along elevational gradients in an arid ecosystem. Global Ecology and Biogeography. 10: 77-100. Si, X.F., Kays, R. & Ding, P. (2014). How long is enough to detect terrestrial animals? Estimating the minimum trapping effort on camera traps. PeerJ, 374, 1-14. Simpson, E.H. (1949). Measurement of diversity. Nature, 163, 688. Shannon, C.E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell system technical journal, 27, 379-423 and 623-656. Srivastava, D.S. & Lawton, J.H. (1998). Why more productive sites have more species: an experimental test of theory using tree-hole communities. American Naturalist 152: 510–529. Steinhoff, S. (2009). Weather conditions on capture success of Sciurids in the upper peninsula of Michigan (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Practicum in Environmental Field Biology Cari Pick. (BIOS 35502) Stevens, G.C. (1989). The latitudinal gradient in geographical range: how so many species coexist in the tropics. The American Naturalist, 133, 240–256. Sullivan, T.P. & Sullivan, D.S. (2001) Influence of variable retention harvests on forest ecosystems. II. Diversity and population dynamics of small mammals. Journal of Applied Ecology, 38, 1234–1252. Tews, J., Brose, U., Grimm, V., Tielbörger, K., Wichmann, M. C., Schwager1, M. & Jeltsch1, F. (2004), Animal species diversity driven by habitat heterogeneity/diversity: the importance of keystone structures. Journal of Biogeography, 31, 79-92.. 46. FYP FSB. Roveroa, F., Zimmermannc, F., Berzid, D. & Meeke, P. (2014). “Which camera trap type and how many do I need?” A review of camera features and study designs for a range of wildlife research applications. Hystrix, the Italian Journal of Mammalogy ISSN, 1825-5272.

(57) Traeholt, C. & bin Mohamed, M. S. (2009). Population Estimates of Malay Tapir, Tapirus indicus, by Camera Trapping in Krau Wildlife Reserve, Malaysia. The Newsletter of the IUCN/SSC Tapir Specialist Group, 25, 12- 20. Traeholt, C., Novarino, W., bin Saaban, S., Shwe, N.M., Lynam, A., Zainuddin, Z., Simpson, B. & B. Mohd, S, Tapirus incidus. Retrieved November, 24, 2016, from The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/21472/0 Trigas, P., Panitsa, M. & Tsiftsis, S. (2013) Elevational Gradient of vascular plant species richness and endemism in crete- The effect of post-isolation mountain uplift on a continental island system. Plos one, 8(3), 1-20. Trolle, M. & Kery, M. (2003). Estimation of ocelot density in the pantanal using capturerecapture analysis of camera-trapping data. Journal of Mammalogy 84(2):607-614. Van Houtan K. S., Pimm S. L., Halley J. M., Bierregaard R. O. Jr, & Lovejoy T. E., Dispersal of Amazonian birds in continuous and fragmented forest. Ecol. Lett. 10, 219–229 (2007). Vitt, L. J. &. Pianka, E. R. (2006). The Scaly Ones. Natural History. 115 (6), 28-35. Watkins, E. J., JR., Cardelus, C., Colwell, K.R. & Moran, C. R. (2006). Species richness and distribution of ferns along and elevational gradient in Costa Rica. American Journal of Botany, 93(1), 73-83 Wieczorek, F. W. & Delmerico, M. A. (2009). Geographic information systems. HHs public access, 1(2), 167-186. Wiener, N. (1961), Cybernetics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Wiens, J. J., Parra-Olea, G., García-Paris, M. & Wake, B. D. (2007). Phylogenetic history underlies elevational biodiversity patterns in tropical salamanders. The royal society, 274, 919-928 Willcox, D.H.A., Chutipong, W., Gray, T.N.E., Cheyne, S., Semiadi, G., Rahman, H., Coudrat, C.N.Z., Jennings, A., Ghimirey, Y., Ross, J., Fredriksson, G. & Tilker, A., Arctictis binturong. Retrieved November, 24, 2016, from The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/41690/0 Williams, C.B. (1964). Patterns in the balance of nature. Academic Press, New York and London. 47. FYP FSB. Timmins, R.J., Duckworth, J.W. & Hedges, S., Muntiacus muntjak. Retrived November, 23, 2016, from The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/42190/0.