Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T07:25:29.080Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Abundance of primates reveals Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary, Cardamom Mountains, Cambodia as a priority area for conservation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 August 2011

C. N. Z. Coudrat*
Affiliation:
Nocturnal Primate Research Group, Anthropology Centre for Conservation, Environment and Development, Department of Anthropology and Geography, Oxford Brookes University, OX3 0BP, Oxford, UK.
L. D. Rogers
Affiliation:
Nocturnal Primate Research Group, Anthropology Centre for Conservation, Environment and Development, Department of Anthropology and Geography, Oxford Brookes University, OX3 0BP, Oxford, UK.
K. A. I. Nekaris
Affiliation:
Nocturnal Primate Research Group, Anthropology Centre for Conservation, Environment and Development, Department of Anthropology and Geography, Oxford Brookes University, OX3 0BP, Oxford, UK.
*
*Nocturnal Primate Research Group, Anthropology Centre for Conservation, Environment and Development, Department of Anthropology and Geography, Oxford Brookes University, OX3 0BP, Oxford, UK. E-mail [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We conducted a primate survey in Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary, western Cambodia, during the wet season in 2009. We visually confirmed the presence of five out of six primate species thought to occur in the area: Bengal slow loris Nycticebus bengalensis, Indochinese silvered langur Trachypithecus germaini, pileated gibbon Hylobates pileatus, pig-tailed macaque Macaca leonina and long-tailed macaque Macaca fascicularis. We did not find any sign of the stump-tailed macaque Macaca arctoides and suggest it is absent in Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary and possibly from the Cardamom Mountains. We provide the abundance measures for each primate species; the three most abundant species were Bengal slow loris, Indochinese silvered langur and pileated gibbon. We propose Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary as a priority for primate conservation in Cambodia.

Type
Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Fauna & Flora International 2011

Introduction

Information on the distribution and status of Cambodia’s wildlife is limited (Long & Swan, Reference Long and Swan2000), although information from surveys undertaken since the end of the 1990s has led to improved conservation plans for many species, including tigers and elephants (Daltry & Momberg, 2000; Long et al., Reference Long, Roth, Holden, Uck, Daltry and Momberg2000b). For primates, however, despite 10 of Cambodia’s 11 taxa being categorized as threatened on the IUCN Red List (IUCN, 2010), few studies have quantified their abundance (Long & Swan, Reference Long and Swan2000; Traeholt et al., Reference Traeholt, Bonthoeun, Rawson, Samuth, Virak and Vuthin2005). In particular, the Cardamom Mountains, west of the Mekong River, were inaccessible for c. 20 years because of the Cambodian civil war, and there have been only a few wildlife surveys in this region (Momberg & Weiler, 1999; Long & Swan, Reference Long and Swan2000).

Primates in South-East Asia are declining at a dramatic rate (Mittermeier et al., Reference Mittermeier, Ratsimbazafy, Rylands, Williamson, Oates and Mbora2007) and up-to-date information on their populations is essential for determining their national and global conservation status. Six primate species are reported to occur in the Cardamom Mountains (Table 1; Long & Swan, Reference Long and Swan2000). In Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary the pileated gibbon Hylobates pileatus, with an estimated 3,100 groups, is the only species that has been studied in detail (Traeholt et al., Reference Traeholt, Bonthoeun, Rawson, Samuth, Virak and Vuthin2005). Simulations predict a dramatic decline of the population in the Sanctuary in the next 40–50 years because of habitat loss from illegal logging (Traeholt et al., Reference Traeholt, Bonthoeun, Rawson, Samuth, Virak and Vuthin2005). In developing countries such as Cambodia infrastructure expansion and logging are major threats to forests and wildlife (Smith, Reference Smith2001). We therefore carried out the first survey of all primate species in the Sanctuary since 2000, reporting novel data on their abundance in the rainy season. Because the distribution of primate species in Cambodia is still poorly known we also provide a review of their distribution, status and threats.

Table 1 Total number of sightings and encounter rate (groups per hour and individuals per hour) of each species sighted during the census (60 hours diurnal; 25 hours nocturnal) in Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary (Fig. 1).

* Calculated using all sightings throughout the study period

Study area

Our study took place in the lowlands of Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary (3,338 km2) in the Cardamom Mountains (10,000 km2) in south-west Cambodia (Fig. 1). The survey area comprises lowland evergreen and dry dipterocarp forests up to an altitude of 350 m. Mean annual rainfall is 3,000–4,000 mm, with a rainy season during May–October (Rollet, Reference Rollet1972; Daltry & Momberg, 2000). The fauna of the Cardamom Mountains includes a variety of threatened and/or endemic species of birds, mammals, amphibians and plants (Momberg & Weiler, 1999; Daltry & Momberg, 2000). Some illegal activities such as timber extraction and hunting persist and local people utilize the forest legally for resin, fruit and plant collection.

Fig. 1 Location of the Cardamom Mountains and Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary within Cambodia.

Methods

We surveyed for primates from 22 April to 31 May 2009 using line transects (Sutherland, Reference Sutherland and Sutherland2000) combined with exploration of the forest not following any transect (tracking) to increase detection and acquire descriptive data on group size. Tracking and line transects are hereafter referred to as the census.

Ten randomly selected 1-km long transects were walked twice over 10 days at 08.00–11.00 and then 2 weeks later at 14.00–17.00, and twice over 10 days at 19.00–24.00 and 24.00–04.00. Transects 1–4 were in lowland evergreen forest and transects 5–10 in dry dipterocarp forest. Eight days were spent tracking diurnal primates starting at 08.00 for 4–6 hours. Two people walked quietly at 1 km h-1, stopping frequently to scan all forest layers. We recorded date, time, transect, coordinates with a global positioning system, weather, habitat and perpendicular distance of the first animal seen from the observer or transect.

For diurnal primates we used the encounter rate biodiversity assessment technique (Sutherland, Reference Sutherland and Sutherland2000), calculating number of animals seen per survey hour. For the Bengal slow loris Nycticebus bengalensis we used the linear encounter rate per km (Nekaris et al., Reference Nekaris, Blackham and Nijman2008) and density (D) of animals per km2, calculated using D = n/2wl, where w is strip width, l is transect length and n is the number of lorises (Sutherland, Reference Sutherland and Sutherland2000).

Results

We spent 60 hours conducting diurnal surveys and 25 hours conducting nocturnal surveys. We confirmed the presence of four diurnal and one nocturnal primate species (Table 1). We sighted diurnal primates 18 times, 13 of which (72.2%) were during censuses and five opportunistically. Twelve observations (92.3%) were made during tracking and only one (7.7%) during transects (Table 1). All sightings of diurnal primates were in lowland evergreen forest. We encountered nine N. bengalensis. For the entire area surveyed the linear encounter rate was 0.45 ± SE 0.64 km-1 and density was 18.75 ± SE 26.81 km-2. More sightings (66.7%) occurred in dry dipterocarp forest, with a linear encounter rate of 0.50 ± SE 0.63 km-1 and density of 20.83 ± SE 26.35 km-2. In lowland evergreen forest (33.3% of sightings), linear encounter rate was 0.38 ± SE 0.75 km-1 with a density of 15.63 ± SE 31.25 km-2.

N. bengalensis was sighted most, followed by the Indochinese silvered langur Trachypithecus germaini, H. pileatus, pig-tailed macaque Macaca leonina and long-tailed macaque Macaca fascicularis (Table 1). We did not detect the stump-tailed macaque Macaca arctoides. We also heard H. pileatus daily between 09.00 and 10.00. Half of all diurnal species were sighted between 05.30 and 11.10 and half between 12.30 and 17.00. We observed lorises more or less equally during early and late night: 19.00–00.00 (56%) and 00.00–04.00 (44%).

Most diurnal observations (n = 17) occurred during sunny days (94.4%); no sighting occurred during rain. The mean distance from observer for diurnal primates was 19.8 m ± SD 10.1, and 5.8 m ± SD 3.6 for N. bengalensis. Mean group sizes are presented in Table 1. Group composition of H. pileatus was one adult male and female with three juveniles; the four sightings were in the same area and were probably of one group. Sightings of T. germaini and M. fascicularis comprised all age classes. Only adult N. bengalensis were seen; on three occasions individuals were observed in proximity with conspecifics.

Discussion

Our survey confirms the presence of four diurnal primates and the nocturnal N. bengalensis in the Cardamom Mountains. Previous surveys of these species had relied on a combination of village interviews and forest and market surveys (Table 2).

Table 2 Summary of the results of this and previous primate surveys (with surveying dates and lengths in parentheses) in the Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary (Fig. 1). [Confirmed] indicates that the presence of the species was not confirmed by sightings.

To clarify the distribution of primate species in Cambodia we compiled records for all species known from the country (Table 3). Recent changes in classification of T. germaini may increase its threat. Genetic data (Osterholz et al., Reference Osterholz, Walter and Roos2008; Roos et al., Reference Roos, Nadler and Water2008) separate T. germaini from Trachypithecus margarita, with the Mekong River a barrier between the two species (Roos et al., Reference Roos, Nadler and Water2008). Previous surveys (Boonratana, Reference Boonratana, Momberg and Weiler1999; Long & Swan, Reference Long and Swan2000; Long et al., Reference Long, Roth, Holden, Uck, Daltry and Momberg2000a) in the Cardamom Mountains identified T. germaini as Trachypithecus cristatus, consequently attributing it a much broader distribution in South-East Asia. If Roos et al.’s (2008) classification is accepted, conservation of this species in the Cardamom Mountains should be regarded as a priority.

Table 3 Confirmed records of primate species in Cambodia, with their Red List status and the areas where they have been observed, with references, west and east of the Mekong river.

1 LC, Least Concern (i.e. not on the Red List); VU, Vulnerable; EN, Endangered (IUCN, 2010)

2 1, Boonratana (Reference Boonratana, Momberg and Weiler1999); 2, Long et al. (2000a); 3, Long & Swan (Reference Long and Swan2000); 4, Traeholt et al. (Reference Traeholt, Bonthoeun, Rawson, Samuth, Virak and Vuthin2005); 5, Daltry & Momberg (2000); 6, Emmet & Olsson (2005); 7, Neath et al. (Reference Neath, Setha, Bunnat and Stuart2001); 8, Rawson & Senior (Reference Rawson and Senior2005); 9, Pollard et al. (Reference Pollard, Clements, Hor and Ko2007); 10, Rawson (Reference Rawson2007); 11, Rawson & Roos (2008); 12, Channa & Gray (Reference Channa and Gray2009); 13, Conservation International (2007); 14, Timmins & Ratanak (2001); 15, Desai & Vuthy (1996); 16, Walston et al. (Reference Walston, Davidson and Soriyun2001); 17, Pfeffer (Reference Pfeffer1969); 18, Starr et al. (Reference Starr, Nekaris, Streicher and Leung2010b); 19, Starr et al. (Reference Starr, Nekaris, Streicher and Leung2011); 20, Campbell et al. (Reference Campbell, Poole, Giesen and Valbo-Jorgensen2006); 21, Kong Kim Sreng & Setha (2002); 22, Royan (Reference Royan2010); 23, Bezuijen et al. (Reference Bezuijen, Timmins and Seng2007); 24, ACCB data (M. Handschuh, pers. comm. 2010); 25, Wildlife Conservation Society data (H. Rainey, pers. comm. 2010); 26, Rainey et al. (2010); 27, Eames (Reference Eames2007); 28, Davidson (2006)

As H. pileatus was more easily heard than seen, using their vocalisation to census the species seems a better method to estimate density (e.g. triangulation: Traeholt et al. Reference Traeholt, Bonthoeun, Rawson, Samuth, Virak and Vuthin2005; occupancy modelling: Neilson, Reference Neilson2010). Traeholt et al. (Reference Traeholt, Bonthoeun, Rawson, Samuth, Virak and Vuthin2005) used triangulation and suggested that the Cambodian population of H. pileatus is the world’s largest and that the Cardamom Mountains are critical for the conservation of this species. Our results, with only one group sighted in an area of c. 470 ha, may be indicative that the density of the species in Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary has decreased since the study by Traeholt et al. (Reference Traeholt, Bonthoeun, Rawson, Samuth, Virak and Vuthin2005). Monitoring of this population by regular surveys is required.

Despite distribution data (Cobert & Hill, Reference Cobert and Hill1992; Rowe, Reference Rowe1996; Walston, Reference Walston and Smith2001; Francis, Reference Francis2008) suggesting the presence of M. arctoides no study has verified its presence in the Cardamom Mountains. Walston (Reference Walston and Smith2001) mistakenly cited Pfeffer (Reference Pfeffer1969) as evidence of M. arctoides west of the Mekong River but Pfeffer’s study was conducted in eastern Cambodia (Table 3). In 2000 three individuals of M. arctoides were sighted in Kirirom National Park, west of the Mekong River (Kong Kim Sreng & Setha, Reference Kong and Setha2002) and reported as having been highly reduced in numbers by hunting. Little is known about this species and its distribution in South-East Asia is not clearly defined (Fooden et al., Reference Fooden, Guoqiang, Zongren and Yingxiang1985; Choudhury, Reference Choudhury2002; Htun et al., Reference Htun, Timmins, Boonratana and Das2008). Although M. arctoides is generally found at high elevations (up to 2,700 m in India and China; Htun et al., Reference Htun, Timmins, Boonratana and Das2008), in Cambodia it was recorded at c. 250 m in Virachay National Park (Conservation International, 2007), the same altitude as our survey site. Previous surveys in the Cardamom Mountains covered a wider range of habitat including hill evergreen forest (up to 1,200 m) but did not record this species. The continued absence of M. arctoides in surveys in the Cardamom Mountains indicates either that it does not occur there or that it does so at an extremely low density (cf. Pollard et al., Reference Pollard, Clements, Hor and Ko2007).

The only previous nocturnal surveys for N. bengalensis were conducted by Daltry & Momberg (2000). Other confirmations come from dead or captive individuals (Table 2). Starr et al. (Reference Starr, Nekaris, Streicher and Leung2010b) conducted surveys for N. bengalensis throughout Cambodia but only sighted the species in Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary and Phnom Kulen National Park. The decline of this species in the wild and in traditional medicine markets, where it once was common, mean that the Sanctuary is also an important site for this species.

Previous diurnal surveys in the Cardamom Mountains were carried out during the dry season (c.f. Daltry & Momberg, 2000) when rivers dry up. Our survey, during the rainy season, was conducted next to a river that attracts some primate species, perhaps explaining why we observed some species not seen by previous researchers. Researchers often recommend to survey diurnal primates in the early morning (Sutherland, Reference Sutherland and Sutherland2000) but we observed primates active throughout the day. All of our encounters occurred during non-rainy days.

Seasonality may also affect the results of nocturnal surveys. N. bengalensis was encountered in dry dipterocarp forest characterized by grassland that this non-leaping primate uses as a substrate to reach trees. During the dry season grassland is burnt by local people for access to resin trees (Starr et al., Reference Starr, Nekaris, Streicher and Leung2011), possibly adversely affecting this species. Slow lorises also reduce their activity during the cooler period of December–February and during these months other researchers have detected relatively few (Evans et al., Reference Evans, Duckworth and Timmins2000; Starr et al., Reference Starr, Nekaris, Streicher and Leung2011). Increased activity during our study period (April–May) could explain why N. bengalensis was the most often encountered primate.

Our study provides the first encounter rates of diurnal primate species for Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary, although only an index of abundance. Given the difficult terrain, which made line transects difficult to establish and time consuming, we recommend for future research the use of occupancy surveys that use sampling of many points spread in different habitats, allowing the coverage of a large area (Royles & Nichols, Reference Royles and Nichols2003). This method also provides a detection probability for comparing different species and habitat types (MacKenzie et al., Reference MacKenzie, Nichols, Ryle, Pollock, Bailey, Hines, MacKenzie, Nichols, Ryle, Pollock, Bailey and Hines2006), something lacking in our study. Presence sampling by sign (e.g. faeces, tracks, vocalization) may be particularly suitable for the Cardamom Mountains, and not only for primates. Occupancy surveys in combination with sign counts could be useful for estimating abundance of the area’s many endemic birds (Shanahan & Possingham, Reference Shanahan and Possingham2009) and reptiles and amphibians (cf. Grismer at al., 2008). Other threatened taxa, including Endangered Asian elephant Elephas maximus, Vulnerable gaur Bos gaurus, and Endangered banteng Bos javanicus, all of which were detected during our study, leave tell-tale signs (Barnes, Reference Barnes and Kangwana1996).

Although rare and threatened species are protected by law from hunting and trade in Cambodia (Walston & Ashwell, 2005), wildlife is continually threatened by illegal activities. The end of the war was characterised by dramatic logging and increasing development of infrastructure such as roads (Momberg et al., Reference Momberg and Weiler1999), factors that still persist. During our study we heard chainsaws twice a few kilometres from our camp; illegal logging is currently increasing in the region (T. Eastoe, pers. comm.). In the Cardamom Mountains hunting and illegal trade for food, pets and medicine also accelerated after the war (Momberg et al., Reference Momberg and Weiler1999) and are still serious threats (N. Thy, pers. comm.); we saw an infant T. germaini for sale as a pet in Pramoy village. Capture of entire groups of primates such as macaques have been reported in Cambodia and could lead to local extinctions in some areas (Nijman, Reference Nijman2005; BUAV, 2008). Starr et al. (2010a) note the importance of N. bengalensis in Khmer traditional medicines. Previous visits to Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary encountered numerous hunted specimens in villages destined for medicinal use (Starr et al., Reference Starr, Nekaris, Streicher and Leung2010a).

Our study indicates the importance of Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary for primate conservation in Cambodia. We hope our findings will encourage further primate studies in the area and that the Sanctuary will become a priority for primate conservation in Cambodia.

Acknowledgements

We thank the staff of Fauna & Flora International (FFI) Cambodia Programme (T. Eastoe, O. Nelson, N. Thy, T. Wood and E. Woodfield), staff from the Ministry of Environment who authorized and facilitated the project, R. Bunthoeun, T. Clements, M. Handschuh, K.E. Hourt, A. Maxwell, B. Rawson, E. Samun, E. Pollard, H. Rainey, T. Gray, J. Eames and C. Starr for providing valuable information, anonymous reviewers for their useful comments, D. Stark for help preparing the map, and Primate Conservation Inc. and the MSc Primate Conservation at Oxford Brookes University for funding.

Biographical sketches

C.N.Z. Coudrat’s interests lie in wildlife conservation, environmental education and primatology, with a special focus on the ecology of colobines, especially douc monkeys. She is particularly interested in the Indochinese region. D. Rogers is currently involved in a biodiversity survey for the Heart of Borneo initiative. Her interests lie in the study of wildlife and its relation to habitat and conservation education both in habitat countries and worldwide. Her specific areas of interest are Hylobates, Nomascus and nocturnal mammals. K.A.I. Nekaris has studied Asian mammals in the wild and in captivity for more than 15 years. She has conducted field studies of all currently recognized taxa of slow and slender lorises and has initiated conservation awareness and capacity building projects in numerous loris range countries.

References

Barnes, R. (1996) Estimating forest elephant abundance by dung counts. In Studying Elephants (ed. Kangwana, K.), pp. 3848. African Wildlife Foundation, Nairobi, Kenya.Google Scholar
Bezuijen, M.R., Timmins, R. & Seng, T. (2007) Biological Surveys of the Mekong River Kratie and Stung Treng Towns, North-east Cambodia, 2006-2007. WWF Greater Mekong–Cambodia Country Programme, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Boonratana, R. (1999) A preliminary wildlife survey in the Cardamom Mountains region of south-western Cambodia. In Conservation Status of the Cardamom Mountains in South-western Cambodia: Preliminary Studies (eds Momberg, F. & Weiler, H.), pp. 1127. Fauna & Flora International, Indochina programme, Hanoi, Vietnam.Google Scholar
BUAV (British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection) (eds) (2008) Cambodia—The Trade in Primates for Research. BUAV, London, UK.Google Scholar
Campbell, I.C., Poole, C., Giesen, W. & Valbo-Jorgensen, J. (2006) Species diversity and ecology of Tonle Sap Great Lake, Cambodia. Aquatic Sciences, 68, 355373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Channa, P. & Gray, T. (2009) Status and Habitat of Yellow-Cheeked Crested Gibbon Nomascus gabriellae. Phnom Pritch Wildlife Sanctuary, WWF–Cambodia Program, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Choudhury, A. (2002) Status and conservation of the stump-tailed macaque Macaca artoides in India. Primate report, 63, 6372. Http://dpz.eu/pr/pr63/choudh.pdf [accessed 19 July 2009].Google Scholar
Cobert, G.B. & Hill, J.E. (1992) The Mammals of the Indomalayan Region: A Systematic Review. Natural History Museum Publications and Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
Conservation International (2007) Preliminary Report Virachey National Park. Rapid Assessment Program, Conservation International, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Daltry, J.C. & Momberg, F. (eds) (2000) Cardamom Mountains Biodiversity Survey 2000. Fauna & Flora International, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Davidson, P.J. (2006) The Biodiversity of the Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve 2005. Status Review. UNDP/GEF-funded Tonle Sap Conservation Project, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Desai, A.A. & Vuthy, L. (1996) Status and Distribution of Large Mammals in Eastern Cambodia. Results of the First Foot Surveys in Mondulkiri and Rattanakiri Provinces. IUCN/Fauna & Flora International/WWF. Large Mammal Conservation Project, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Eames, J. (2007) A Rapid Evaluation of Lomphat Sanctuary. BirdLife International Indochina Programme, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Emmett, D.A. & Olsson, A. (2005) Biological Surveys in the Central Cardamom Mountains. Conservation International Cambodia Program and Forestry Administration, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Evans, T.D., Duckworth, J.W. & Timmins, R.J. (2000) Field observations of larger mammals in Laos, 1994–1995. Mammalia, 64, 55100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fooden, J., Guoqiang, Q., Zongren, W. & Yingxiang, W. (1985) The stump-tailed macaques of China. American Journal of Primatology, 8, 1130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Francis, C.M. (ed.) (2008) A Field Guide to the Mammals of South-East Asia. New Holland Publisher, London, UK.Google Scholar
Grismer, L., Neang, T., Chav, T., Wood, P.L., Oaks, J.R., Holden, J. et al. . (2008) Additional amphibians and reptiles from the Phnom Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary in north-eastern Cardamom Mountains, Cambodia, with comments on their taxonomy and the discovery of three new species. The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology, 56, 161175.Google Scholar
Htun, S., Timmins, R.J., Boonratana, R. & Das, J. (2008) Macaca arctoides. In IUCN Red List of Threatened Species v. 2010.4. Http://www.iucnredlist.org [accessed 27 January 2011].Google Scholar
IUCN (2010) IUCN Red List of Threatened Species v. 2010.4. Http://www.iucnredlist.org/ [accessed 27 January 2011].Google Scholar
Kong, Kim Sreng & Setha, T. (2002) A Wildlife Survey of Kirirom National Park, Cambodia. Wildlife Conservation Society–Cambodia Program, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Long, B., Roth, B., Holden, J. & Uck, S. (2000a) Large mammals. In Cardamom Mountains Biodiversity Survey 2000 (eds Daltry, J.C.. & Momberg, F.), pp. 4968. Fauna & Flora International, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Long, B. & Swan, S.R. (2000) Cambodian Primates: Surveys in the Cardamom Mountains and North-east Mondulkiri Province. Fauna & Flora International, Hanoi, Vietnam.Google Scholar
Long, B., Swan, S. & Masphal, K. (2000b) Biological Surveys in North-east Mondulkiri, Cambodia. Fauna & Flora International, Indochina Programme, and the Wildlife Protection Office, Department of Forestry, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
MacKenzie, D.I., Nichols, J.D., Ryle, J.A., Pollock, K.H., Bailey, L.L. & Hines, J.E. (2006) Occupancy in ecological investigation. In Occupancy Estimation and Modelling—Inferring Patterns and Dynamics of Species Occurrence (eds MacKenzie, D.I., Nichols, J.D., Ryle, J.A., Pollock, K.H., Bailey, L.L. & Hines, J.E.), pp. 2552. Elsevier, Burlington, USA.Google Scholar
Mittermeier, R.A., Ratsimbazafy, J., Rylands, A.B., Williamson, L., Oates, J.F., Mbora, D. et al. . (2007) Primates in peril: the world’s 25 most endangered primates, 2006–2008. Primate Conservation, 22, 140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Momberg, F. & Weiler, H. (eds) (1999) Conservation Status of the Cardamom Mountains in South-western Cambodia: Preliminary Studies. Fauna & Flora International, Indochina programme, Hanoi, Vietnam.Google Scholar
Momberg, F., Weiler, H. & Hardke, M. (1999) Introduction. In Conservation Status of the Cardamom Mountains in South-western Cambodia: Preliminary Studies (eds Momberg, F. & Weiler, H.), pp. 610. Fauna & Flora International, Indochina programme, Hanoi, Vietnam.Google Scholar
Neath, N., Setha, T., Bunnat, P. & Stuart, B. (2001) A Wildlife Survey of Bokor National Park, Cambodia. Wildlife Conservation Society, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Neilson, E. (2010) The use of singing behaviour to model the occupancy of pileated gibbons (Hylobates pileatus) in the Cardamom Mountains, Cambodia. MSc thesis, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
Nekaris, K.A.I., Blackham, G.V. & Nijman, V. (2008) Conservation implications of low encounter rates of five nocturnal primate species (Nycticebus spp.) in Asia. Biodiversity and Conservation, 17, 733747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nijman, V. (2005) In Full Swing: An Assessment of Trade in Orang-utans and Gibbons on Java and Bali, Indonesia. TRAFFIC South-East Asia, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.Google Scholar
Osterholz, M., Walter, L. & Roos, C. (2008) Phylogenetic position of the langur genera Semnopithecus and Trachypithecus among Asian colobines, and genus affiliations of their species groups. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 8, 112.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pfeffer, P. (1969) Considération sur l’écologie des forêts claires du Cambodge oriental. Terre et Vie, 1, 324.Google Scholar
Pollard, E., Clements, T., Hor, N.M. & Ko, S. (2007) Status and Conservation of Globally Threatened Primates in the Seima Biodiversity Conservation Area, Cambodia. Wildlife Conservation Society, Cambodia Program, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Rainey, H., Clements, T., Setha, T., Sokha, T., Vann, R. & Tyson, M. (2009) Large Mammal Surveys in Preah Vihear Protected Forest, Cambodia 2006-2009. Wildlife Conservation Society, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Rawson, B. (2007) Surveys, Trade and Training in Voensei Division, Ratanakiri Province, Cambodia. Conservation International, Hanoi, Vietnam.Google Scholar
Rawson, B. & Roos, C. (2008) A new primate record for Cambodia: Pygathrix nemaeus. Cambodian Journal of Natural History, 1, 711.Google Scholar
Rawson, B. & Senior, B. (2005) Pileated Gibbon (Hylobates pileatus) Status in Preah Monivong ‘Bokor’ National Park, Cambodia. WildAid, Bangkok, Thailand.Google Scholar
Rollet, B. (1972) La végétation du Cambodge. Bois et Forêt des Tropiques, 144, 315; 145, 23–38; 146, 3–20 (3 parts).Google Scholar
Roos, C., Nadler, T. & Water, L. (2008) Mitochondrial phylogeny, taxonomy and biogeography of the silvered langur species group (Trachypithecus). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 47, 629636.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowe, N. (ed.) (1996) The Pictorial Guide to the Living Primates. Pogonias Press, East Hampton, USA.Google Scholar
Royan, A. (2010) Significant mammal records from Botum-Sakor National Park, south-west Cambodia. Cambodian Journal of Natural History, 1, 2226.Google Scholar
Royles, J.A. & Nichols, J.D. (2003) Estimating abundance from repeated presence-absence data or point counts. Ecology, 84, 777790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shanahan, D.F. & Possingham, H.P. (2009) Predicting avian patch occupancy in a fragmented landscape: do we know more than we think? Journal of Applied Ecology, 46, 10261035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. (ed.) (2001) Biodiversity, the Life of Cambodia—Cambodian Biodiversity Status Report 2001. Cambodia Biodiversity Enabling Activity, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Starr, C.R., Nekaris, K.A.I., Streicher, U. & Leung, L.K.-P. (2011) Field surveys of the Vulnerable pygmy slow loris Nycticebus pygmaeus using local knowledge in Mondulkiri Province, Cambodia. Oryx, 45, 135142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starr, C.R., Nekaris, K.A.I., Streicher, U. & Leung, L.K.-P. (2010a) Traditional use of slow lorises Nycticebus bengalensis and N. pygmaeus in Cambodia: an impediment to their conservation. Endangered Species Research, 12, 1723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starr, C.R., Rogers, L.D., Nekaris, K.A.I. & Streicher, U. (2010b) Preliminary field surveys of the northern slow loris (Nycticebus bengalensis) in Cambodia. In Conservation of Primates in Indochina (eds Nadler, T., Rawson, B. & Thinh, Van Ngoc), pp. 4352. Frankfurt Zoological Society–Endangered Primate Rescue Centre–Conservation International Indo-Burma Program, Hanoi, Vietnam.Google Scholar
Sutherland, W.J. (2000) Assessing biodiversity. In The Conservation Handbook: Techniques in Research, Management and Policy (ed. Sutherland, W.J.), pp. 320. Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmins, R.J. & Ratanak, O. (2001) The Importance of Phnom Prich Wildlife Sanctuary and Adjacent Areas for the Conservation of Tigers and Other Key Species. WWF Indochina Programme, Hanoi, Vietnam.Google Scholar
Traeholt, C., Bonthoeun, R., Rawson, B., Samuth, M., Virak, C. & Vuthin, S. (2005) Status Review of the Pileated Gibbon Hylobates pileatus, and Yellow-Cheeked Crested Gibbon, Nomascus gabriellae, in Cambodia. Fauna & Flora International, Cambodia Programme, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Walston, J. (2001) Mammals of Cambodia. In Biodiversity, the Life of Cambodia—Cambodian Biodiversity Status Report 2001 (ed. Smith, J.), pp. 133152. Cambodia Biodiversity Enabling Activity, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Walston, J., Davidson, P. & Soriyun, M. (2001) A Wildlife Survey of Southern Mondulkiri Province, Cambodia. Wildlife Conservation Society, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Google Scholar
Walston, N. & Ashwell, D. (eds) (2008) An Overview of the Use and Trade of Plants and Animals in Traditional Medicine Systems in Cambodia. TRAFFIC South-East Asia, Greater Mekong Programme, Hanoi, Vietnam.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1 Total number of sightings and encounter rate (groups per hour and individuals per hour) of each species sighted during the census (60 hours diurnal; 25 hours nocturnal) in Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary (Fig. 1).

Figure 1

Fig. 1 Location of the Cardamom Mountains and Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary within Cambodia.

Figure 2

Table 2 Summary of the results of this and previous primate surveys (with surveying dates and lengths in parentheses) in the Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary (Fig. 1). [Confirmed] indicates that the presence of the species was not confirmed by sightings.

Figure 3

Table 3 Confirmed records of primate species in Cambodia, with their Red List status and the areas where they have been observed, with references, west and east of the Mekong river.