SPATIAL ECOLOGY OF HATCHLING AND JUVENILE KOMODO DRAGONS

(Varanus komodoensis) IN THE KOMODO NATIONAL PARK, INDONESIA

MUHAMAD JERI IMANSYAH

THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT FOR THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE

FACULTY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA
BANGI

2006
EKOLOGI SPATIAL TETASAN DAN ANAKAN BIAWAK KOMODO
(Varanus komodoensis) DI TAMAN NEGARA KOMODO, INDONESIA

MUHAMAD JERI IMANSYAH

TESIS YANG DIKEMUKAKAN UNTUK MEMENUHI SEBAHAGIAN

DARIPADA SYARAT MEMPEROLEH IJAZAH
SARJANA SAINS

FAKULTI SAINS DAN TEKNOLOGI

UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA
BANGI

2006
 iii

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the work in this thesis is my own except for quotations and
summaries, which have been duly acknowledged

5 December 2006 MUHAMAD JERI IMANSYAH

P28345
 iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

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

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

Special appreciations should be awarded to my fellow Research Officers at

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

I should be indebted Dr Claudio Ciofi (University of Florence, Itali) for his

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

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

It is also should be acknowledged that this study is part of a long-term

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

ABSTRACT

Radio-telemetry and mark-recapture techniques were used to investigate and compare

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

ABSTRAK

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

CONTENTS

Page

DECLARATION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv
ABSTRACT v
ABSTRAK vi
CONTENTS vii
LIST OF FIGURES x
LIST OF TABLES xi

CHAPTER I GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Spatial Ecology Studies in Free Ranging Animals 4

2.2 Systematics and Distribution of the Komodo Dragons 5

2.3 Present Status of the Komodo Dragons 8

2.4 Biology, Ecology, and Reproduction of the Komodo

Dragons 9

2.5 Biology and Ecology of Juveniles 11

2.6 Previous Ecological Studies on the Komodo Dragons 12

CHAPTER III GENERAL METHODOLOGY

3.1 Study Site 14

3.1.1 Biogeographical setting 14

3.1.2 Selected study sites 16

3.2 Field Techniques 20

3.2.1 Juvenile classification 20

3.2.1 Radiotelemetry 21
3.2.3 Mark-recapture techniques 22
3.2.4 Baited box-trapping technique 23
 viii

3.2.5 Baited Pipe-trapping technique 24

3.2.6 Noosing and Hand-capture technique 25
3.2.7 Nest enclosure traps 25

3.3 Data Analysis 26

3.3.1 Spatial movement and activity area 26

3.3.2 Habitat use 27
3.3.3 Long distance movement 27

CHAPTER IV A COMPARISON OF DAILY MOVEMENT

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

4.1 Introduction 28

4.2 Materials and Methods 29

4.2.1 Study site 29

4.2.2 Studied animals 30
4.2.3 Radiotelemetry technique 30
4.2.4 Habitat assessment 31
4.2.5 Data analysis 32

4.3 Results 35

4.3.1 Patterns of movement 35

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

4.4 Discussion 44

CHAPTER V ASSESSING LONG DISTANCE MOVEMENT

OF HATCHLING AND JUVENILE KOMODO
DRAGONS

5.1 Introduction 49

5.2 Materials and Methods 51

5.2.1 Study sites and capture technique 51

5.2.2 Data analysis 53
5.2.3 Statistical analysis 54

5.3 Results 56

5.4 Discussion 57
 ix

CHAPTER VI GENERAL DISCUSSION

6.1 General Discussion 62

6.2 Recommendations 63

CHAPTER VII CONCLUSION

REFERENCES 68
 x

LIST OF FIGURES

No. Figure Page

2.1 Distribution of Varanus komodoensis. Grey areas represent

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

3.1 Study sites across the four islands of Komodo National Park.
Numbers are dedicated to show the locations; 1. Loh Sebita;
2. Loh Liang; 3. Loh Lawi; 4. Loh Wau; 5. Loh Buaya; 6.
Loh Baru; 7. Loh Tongker; 8. Loh Dasami; 9. Nusa Kode;
10. Gili Motang. 19

4.1 Movement patterns of hatchling Komodo dragons. Arrows

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

4.2 Movement patterns of two juvenile Komodo dragons (a:

639E332, b: 63D9C4B). Circles indicate shelter sites. 38

4.3 Activity area overlaps of six juvenile Komodo dragons as

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

4.4 Differences in terrestrial and arboreal habitat use by hatchling

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

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

annual movement for juvenile (b, c). 55
 xi

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

2.1 Local names for Komodo dragon. 6

2.2 Average density of Varanus komodoensis in Komodo

National Park (KNP) and Flores Island. 8

3.1 Size of each island within KNP and it’s vegetation cover (in
km2). 15

3.2 Range of measurements applied in classifying hatchling and

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

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

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

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

juvenile Komodo dragons. 36

4.3 Percentages of overlap on activity areas in juveniles. 36

4.4 Frequency of elevation preferred by hatchling and juvenile

(%). 43

4.5 Major tree preferences used by hatchling and juveniles (%). 43

4.6 Total number of tree species and mean values of tree

parameters used, and animal position on tree. 43

5.1 Total number of tagged animals for each year. 52

5.2 Distance of movement of juvenile Komodo dragons (m) 58

5.3 Topographical barrier’s score of each study area. 58

5.4 Distance between islands in Komodo National Park. 58

 CHAPTER I

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

The Komodo dragon (Varanus komodoensis) is the largest extant lizard in the world
(King & Green 1999; Mattison 1992; Pough et al. 2001). This species lives in a
relatively small range of distribution in the wild. Komodo dragons can be found on the
islands of Komodo, Rinca, Nusa Kode, Gili Motang, and the western coast of Flores
(Ciofi et al. 2002; Ciofi & de Boer 2004), and were previously known on Padar Island.
Currently, four of these populations are located within the boundary of Komodo
National Park (PHKA 2000). Flores is the largest island within the Komodo dragon’s
distribution and contains two nature reserves: Wae Wuul on the west coast and Wolo
Tado on the north coast (Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). It is evident that the dragon
populations in these parks are more secure than those outside of the parks, given that
key threatening processes, including habitat loss, altered fire regimes and competition
for key prey with humans, are largely absent within the park (Jessop et al. 2004). The
range of the Komodo dragon has decreased significantly over the last 3 decades due to
several threatening processes including the suspected decline of large prey, such as
Timor deer (Cervus timorensis) and anthropic habitat fragmentation and disturbances
(Ciofi et al. 2002; Ciofi & de Boer 2004). Degradation of the environment is
considered to be a major threatening process that could influence the viability of the
extant dragon populations (Jessop et al. 2004).

Due to its vulnerability and its restricted distribution in the wild, Varanus
komodoensis is listed as “vulnerable” in the IUCN Red Data Book, and is on
Appendix I of CITES (Ciofi et al. 2002). The Komodo dragon is also protected by
 2

Indonesian law, including the need for a presidential decree to transfer any
individuals of this charismatic species out of Indonesia.

There are a number of key research areas that require further investigation to
facilitate Komodo dragon management and conservation. An important component of
Komodo dragon management is to understand the spatial requirements and habits,
including movement, activity area, behavior, and habitat use (Phillips 1995; Brill et
al. 1995). These spatial aspects of an animal’s ecology are the key to understanding
important processes such as dispersal, habitat partitioning and reproduction and how
they influence population structure. Understanding these spatial aspects of dragon
ecology is also invaluable in the conservation of this threatened species.

Studies in spatial ecology are often undertaken to calculate estimates of

individual movement, home range, habitat utilization (i.e. Fitzgerald et al. 2002;
Piepgras & Lang 2000), diet (Thompson & Thompson 2001; Whitaker & Shine,
2003), and responses to anthropic habitat changes (Pearson et al. 2005). Knowledge
of an animal’s home range is also important for management purposes (Caley 1997).
Boudjemad et al. (1999) related how habitat modification by anthropic causes could
directly affected demography and movement capacity of wildlife. Further, habitat
change can influence dispersal or foraging strategies (i.e. aspects of spatial ecology),
which can have an impact on the fitness of individuals and, ultimately, the population
as a whole (Greenwood & Swingland 1984).

A number of spatial studies have been conducted and have described activity,
area size, movement, and behaviour of Varanid lizards (Ibrahim 2002; Thompson et
al. 1999; Thompson 1992) is relation to patterns of physiology, reproduction and
demography (Christian et al. 1995; Christian & Weavers 1994; James 1996; Phillips
1995). These spatial studies focused on adults, and thus little is known concerning
juveniles and hatchlings. Spatial studies on Komodo dragons by Auffenberg (1981)
and Sastrawan and Ciofi (2002) focused on the home ranges of adult dragons only.
 3

In the present study, spatial ecology was defined as the interaction between
young Komodo dragons with environmental conditions. It is hypothesized that
environmental conditions will influence the spatial ecology of young Komodo
dragons. The objectives of this study are to: 1) determine the patterns of daily
movement and the activity areas; 2) identify patterns of habitat use; and 3) assess
long distance movement ability in hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons. Results of
this research are anticipated to contribute valuable information on the biology of
hatchling and juvenile Komodo Monitors, that can be of benefit to the management
practices of the park, particularly for this species and its habitat.
 CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 SPATIAL ECOLOGY STUDIES IN FREE RANGING ANIMALS

Habitat loss and fragmentation are currently the most serious threats to wildlife
worldwide, so it is important to understand how patterns and processes of landscape
change will cause individual populations and species to respond to these broad-scale
modifications (Blumstein & Fernandez-Juricic 2004; Collinge 2001). Spatial
heterogeneity processes directly affect ecological systems (Gardner et al. 1989). The
spatial arrangement of individuals within a population will reflect aspects of its
behavior and ecology, and is important in determining population persistence and
gene flow within and between sub-populations (Brown & Downhower 1988; Johnson
2000). Thus, the dynamics of an animal population depends not only on birth and
death rates, but also on an animal’s ability to move into or out of a population
(Dasmann 1964). Determining the number of individuals persisting in an area is a
basic question in ecology, but it is more important to understand how an animal
responds to changing landscape conditions, regardless of whether it is at the
individual, population or community level (Lawson et al. 2006).

Krebs (1999) pointed out that spatial ecology as a science aims to understand
the ecological processes that determine the location of individuals, which are rarely
spread evenly over the landscape. Collinge (2001) concluded that spatial ecology is
an ecological study, which centers upon understanding how landscape configurations
influence the community and population dynamics of organisms. Spatial ecology is at
the very core of the science of ecology (Boyce & McDonald 1999). Whitaker and
Shine (2003) stated that studying spatial ecology can contribute at least three potential
 5

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

animal, second, giving information regarding animal-human interactions, and third, as
an aid in assessing the response and role of an animal in regards to their habitat.
Collinge (2001) emphasized that empirical studies in spatial ecology beneficially
links conservation biology research to practical mechanisms for species management
and conservation planning. In studying spatial ecology, authors included studies of
dispersal (e.g. Olsson & Shine 2003), movement and activity area, habitat use,
activity patterns (Fitzgerald et al. 2002; Piepgras & Lang 2000), diets (Thompson &
Thompson 2001; Whitaker & Shine 2003), and anthropic habitat changes (Pearson et
al. 2005; Martin et al. 2001; Fitzgerald et al. 2002).

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

unoccupied and suitable area within which it is able to establish its own home range.
Caughley and Sinclair (1994) emphasised that migration is not the equivalent of
dispersal. Greenwood and Swingland (1984) described dispersal as being caused by
the need for an individual to search for food sources. Lebreton et al. (2003) studied
the importance of dispersal as a mechanism in reproduction.

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

Dispersal is recognized as a key process in ecology, evolution, and conservation and
it is important to understand the consequences to an animal’s behaviour as it responds
to the habitat (van Dyck & Baguette 2005). Dispersal can affect the dynamics and
persistence of populations, distribution and abundance, community structure, gene
flow, local adaptation, speciation, and the evolution of life-history traits (Lebreton et
al. 2003; Roper et al. 2003). Thus, dispersal is one of the most critical events in the
life of most animals and one of the most important processes affecting the ecology
and evolution of populations (Roper et al. 2003).

2.2 SYSTEMATICS AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE KOMODO

DRAGONS

The Komodo dragon, Varanus komodoensis, was described for the first time by
Major Peter A. Ouwen in 1912 (Auffenberg & Auffenberg 2002; Dunn 1927). This
 6

giant lizard species was placed in the genus Varanus, family Varanidae, order
Squamata, Class Reptiles (Mattison 1992). Varanus salvadorii from Southern New
Guinea and V. varius from Southeastern and Eastern Australia are believed to be the
sister groups of V. komodoensis (King et al. 2002; Molnar 2004). The closest
congeneric species occupying the same region is the Monitor lizard, V. salvator
salvator (Auffenberg 1981).

Auffenberg (1981) reported that this species was called the “Ora” by the local
people of Komodo, Rinca, and West Manggarai. There are several local names
described by Auffenberg (1981) from across its distribution in the Lesser Sunda
region (see Table 2.1). The name “Komodo” was taken from the name of the island
where the first specimens were taken, and which means “rats” (Dunn 1928).

Table 2.1 Local names for Komodo dragon

Local name Region

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

Source: Auffenberg 1981

Even though the Komodo dragon is the largest lizard in the world, this species
has the smallest range of any large carnivore (King & Green 1999; Mattison 1992;
Pough et al. 2001). In the early studies of the Komodo dragon, this species was found
in the heart of the Lesser Sunda region on the islands of Komodo, Rinca, Padar, Gili
Motang, Gili Dasami (also known as Nusa Kode), and the Western coast of Flores
Island (Dunn 1928; Fig. 2.1). Five of the islands are within the boundary of Komodo
National Park (PHKA 2000; Fig 2.1). In studies conducted after 1991, this species
could not be found on Padar Island (Ciofi & de Boer 2004; Jessop et al. 2004;
Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002).
 7

Figure 2.1 Distribution of Varanus komodoensis. Grey areas represent the current distribution; black areas
represent areas that were identified as part of the distribution by Auffenberg (1981); hatched areas
indicate where V. komodoensis have been reported by villagers.

Source: Redrawn from Sastrawan and Ciofi 2002.

 8

2.3 PRESENT STATUS OF THE KOMODO DRAGONS

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

approximately 2405 Komodo dragons living within Komodo National Park in 1998
(PHKA 2000, unpublished report). Ciofi and de Boer (2004) estimated that the
population density of dragons on Flores was more than 60% lower than that reported
for Komodo National Park (Table 2.2.). Jessop et al. (2006 in press) estimated that
the dragon population on Gili Motang Island has the lowest density of dragons of all
the inhabited islands within the park (see Table 2.2).

The disappearance of resident Komodo dragons on Padar Island probably

stemmed from the decline of Timor deer (Cervus timorensis) populations due to
illegal hunting (Ciofi 1999; Ciofi & de Boer 2004). Pet and Subijanto (2001) reported
that there were at least 3 cases (37.5 %) of deer hunting in Komodo National Park
that had been sent to court during 2000-2001. Ciofi et al. (2002), Ciofi and de Boer
(2004), and Primack (2004) stated that fragmentation and habitat disturbance as a
result of the high population growth of humans are the main factors affecting
Komodo dragon populations on Flores.

Table 2.2 Average density of Varanus komodoensis in Komodo National

Park (KNP) and Flores Island.

Location Population density Number of sites

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

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

Even though the Komodo dragon is not threatened by the leather trade, like
the congeneric Water Monitor (V. salvator), and is considered ‘dangerous’ to humans
(King et al. 2002; Shine et al. 1996; Ellis 1998), hunting and trade in this species has
 9

been occurring for a long time. Since the 1930’s Komodo dragons and their eggs have
been hunted illegally for zoo collections and for traditional medicine (Primack et al.
1988). Hien (2003) reported that the local people of Riung, Northwest Flores, claimed
that they once illegally caught 50 live specimens of the Komodo dragon for a
foreigner. However, the widespread hunting and trading of other reptiles including
varanids, for their skins and for food (e.g. Shine et al. 1996) should be considered a
potential threat to the Komodo dragon.

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

Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora (CITES) and is classified by the International Union for the
Conservation of Nature Resources (IUCN) as “vulnerable” due to its demographic
decline and limited distribution (Ciofi et al. 2002). The World Conservation
Monitoring Center (WCMC) also listed the Komodo dragon as “Rare” due to it’s
restricted distribution (Ellis 1998). This species is protected in Indonesia under Act
no. 5, on Conservation of Biological Resources and Their Ecosystems,1990,; and
Government regulation no. 7, on Protected Wild Flora and Fauna, 1998. Primack
(2004) included the Komodo dragon in his discussion on “conservation priorities” as
he considered that this species met all the criteria of distinctiveness, endangerment,
and utility.

2.4 BIOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND REPRODUCTION OF THE

KOMODO DRAGONS

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

extremely large body size. Adults can reach up to 304 cm in total body length and
weigh up to 81.5 kg (Jessop et al. 2006 unpublished data). Sastrawan and Ciofi
(2002) recorded the largest Komodo dragon in their field study as being about 300 cm
in length and weighing about 69 kg. Auffenberg (1981) recorded his largest specimen
caught as being 260 cm in length and 54 kg in weight. This is similar in length to the
largest specimens of its sister species, the Papuan monitor V. salvadorii, which
reached about 265 cm in length (Horn 2004). Another large varanid species, occuring
 10

on the islands of Java, Bali and throughout Lesser Sunda region, V. salvator may
reach up to 218 cm in length and weigh up to 25 kg (Gaulke & Horn 2004; Horne &
Gaulke 2004).

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

weight, and are considerably longer at hatching than other large varanid species
(Auffenberg 1981). Ciofi (2004) recorded that hatchling V. komodoensis average 42
cm in total length and 0.10 kg in weight. Hatchling V. salvadorii possibly reach up to
49 cm in total length and 0.55 kg in weight (King & Green 1999).

Komodo dragons can be found from sea level up to about 800 meters in
altitude, mainly in tropical dry and moist deciduous monsoon forests (Ciofi 2004).
Indeed, this species is generally distributed over entire islands within KNP and
western coastal on Flores but is rarely found above 500 meters (Auffenberg 1981).

All varanids are insectivores or carnivores. Unlike other varanids that rely on
smaller prey species, Komodo dragons are able to feed on larger vertebrate species,
such as the Timor Deer (Cervus timorensis), water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis), or
small wild boars (Sus scrofa). Adult Komodo dragons mostly rely on a sit-and-wait
hunting strategy to catch their prey (Auffenberg 1981; Green et al. 1990; King &
Green 1999; Pough et al. 2001). Hatchlings and juveniles, however, feed on a diverse
diet of insects, small lizards, snakes and birds, and use more active hunting strategies
than adults (Auffenberg 1981; Ciofi 1999; Mattison 1992).

Female Komodo dragons are known to breed when they reach a body weight
of around 20 kgs (King & Green 1999). Females begin nesting in August, as
determined by the presence of recent digging activity on the nest, or by repeated
observation of individuals in association with the nest during the nesting period. The
nesting period is from August through November, with egg deposition occurring in
September (Ciofi 1999; Jessop et al. 2004). Up to 38 hatchlings will emerge from the
nest at the beginning of the dry season (Auffenberg 1981; Jessop et al. 2006
 11

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

among Komodo dragons has been observed and was calculated to comprise 8% of
adult dragon scats (Auffenberg 1981). Cannibalism has also been recorded in other
Varanids, such as V. griseus, V. gouldii and V. gigantheus (King & Green 1999).

2.5 BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY OF JUVENILES

Generally, mortality in lizards is highest during the first phase of their life because
they are more vulnerable to predation (Mattison 1992). Poor maternal body condition
and stress can decrease the dispersal tendency of juveniles (Meylan et al. 2002).
Typically, natural populations show substantial variation, in locomotor performance
and body size, which is related to offspring survivorship (Clobert et al. 2000). Thus,
the growth and survivorship of offspring in reptiles is greatly affected by the animal’s
environment (i.e. Brockelman 1975; Gans & Pough 1982).

Incubation temperature is known to contribute greatly to the quality of

emerging hatchlings and affects their survivorship. Cold temperature during
incubation can negatively effect hatchlings and hot temperatures can positively effect
hatchlings (Elphick & Shine 1998; Phillips & Packard 1994; Qualls & Andrews
1998). This pattern is complex, however, as higher incubation temperature will result
in earlier hatching but produce lighter and smaller hatchlings than lower temperature,
which produce larger offspring that tend to survive better (King & Green 1999). Du
and Ji (2003) reported that moderate temperatures produced optimum size, locomotor
ability and success of hatchlings in soft-shelled turtle, while Ji and Du (2000)
reported a similar pattern in colubrid snakes. In a further study on lizards, the only
discernible influence on juvenile phenotypes was their rearing environment (Qualls &
Shine, 2000). Brockelman (1975) found that a wide variety of factors can affect
optimal body size and the ability to process energy effectively, and these were also
affected by the process of competition, which the offspring must face before and
during maturity.
 12

Most juvenile reptiles leave the natal area in which they were born and move
into new habitats that are not already occupied or to avoid cannibalism by adults
(Pough et al. 2001). Greenwood (1984) noted that natal dispersal among juveniles is
also considered as a mechanism to avoid future inbreeding. Heatwole (1976) and
Sarno et al. (2003) described natal dispersal as being driven by the competition for
food resources and territories with adult.

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

movement away from the natal site (Brown & Downhower 1988). Animals will
exploit available resources once they are out of their natal sites (Greenwood &
Swingland 1984). Pelletier et al. (2003) described how immature turtles immediately
swam towards the ocean and steadily traveled long distances once released into the
water. Hatchling of varanids tend to climb trees and spend most of their time in the
upper strata of trees once they emerged from the underground nests (Auffenberg
1981; Bohme et al. 2004; Ciofi 2004; King & Green 1999).

2.6 PREVIOUS ECOLOGICAL STUDIES ON THE KOMODO DRAGONS

The first scientific study on the Komodo dragon was conducted by Major Peter A.
Ouwen, director of the Zoological Museum in Buitenzorg (now Bogor), Java, in 1912
(Auffenberg & Auffenberg 2002). Ouwen described the species for the first time.
Later, Dunn (1927 & 1928) conducted the first significant observations and gave the
initial information on the habitat and distribution of Komodo dragons. Auffenberg
(1981) contributed to the first comprehensive study on the ecology and behavior of
this species. On the basis of 13 months of field observations, Auffenberg (1981)
provided the base line information on aspects of the Komodo dragon’s ecology and
behavior. The most recent field study on the Komodo dragon was conducted by
Jessop et al. (2006 unpublished data). Since 2002, they undertook a broad scale
investigation in the ecologyl and demography of the Komodo dragon, which has
provided important information and instigated a program to monitor population
trends. Although numerous field studies on the ecology of Komodo dragons have
been conducted, yet there are no detailed studies on the ecology on juvenile Komodo
dragons (Auffenberg & Auffenberg 2002). Walsh et al. (2002) studied growth in
 13

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

growth and nutritional treatment in captivity.

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

chromosomes, physiology, genetics, ecology and social behaviour, parasites,
microbiology, conservation and management, have provided valuable information to
science and to ensure effective management of the species (Ciofi et al. 2002). The
long-term management and conservation objectives underpinning survival of this
species will be to maintain a genetically viable, self-sustaining, and free-living
Komodo dragon population. Information on reproduction and broad scale ecology of
this species is needed to support the management authority responsible to protect it,
and, as pointed out by Jessop et al. (2004), information on offspring survivorship are
vital for management planning to ensure the maintenance of this unique species in
the wild.
 CHAPTER III

GENERAL METHODOLOGY

3.1 STUDY SITE

3.1.1 Biogeographical Setting

The study was conducted within the Komodo National Park, East Nusa Tenggara,
Indonesia, approximately 500 km east of Bali. The Park lies in the Lesser Sunda
region between Flores Island and Sumbawa Island (8°35’40” S and 119°25’51”E),
encompassing two main islands; Komodo and Rinca; three smaller islands, Padar, Gili
Motang and Nusa Kode, and numerous smaller adjacent islands. Komodo National
Park established by the government of Indonesia in 1980, enhancing its status from
Wildlife Reserve in 1970. Before declared as national park, this park was declared as a
Man and Biosphere Reserve by UNESCO in 1977. Further, in 1991 UNESCO
designated this park as a World Heritage Site. The park was initially established to
conserve the unique Komodo dragon (Varanus komodoensis) and was identified by
both WWF and Conservation International as a global conservation priority area. This
area is a transitional zone between the Australian and Asian fauna and flora,
containing elements of both (PHKA 2000).

The park encompasses the extant distribution of the endangered species of the
Komodo dragon and is approximately 1817 km2 in size encompassing both marine
(1214 km2) and terrestrial (603 km2) habitat (PHKA 2000). Komodo and Rinca are the
two largest island, followed by Padar, Gili Motang, and Nusa Kode. Most of the
islands are mountainuous (the highest peak is 800 m asl on Komodo Island),
 15

combining a mostly grass-covere rugged topography, with variuous size of flat valleys
on the lower elevation (up to 50 m asl) (Dunn 1928; Monk et al. 1997).

Komodo Island is the largest island with the highest peak reaching 800 m asl
and is mostly covered by grassy savanna habitat (59.38%) (Table 3.1). Rinca the
second largest island is also predominantly covered by savanna habitat (55.02%) and
the highest peak is 712.5 m. Padar, the third largest island, has the highest percentage
cover of savanna habitat (93.48%) amongst other large islands. The other two main
islands, Gili Motang and Nusa Kode are predominantly covered by open deciduous
forest (79.96% and 84.33%, respectively). The other numerous small islands are
predominantly covered by savanna grass.

There are four existing settlement within the park (PHKA 2000), namely
Kampung Komodo (Komodo Island), Rinca, Kerora (Rinca Island), and Papagarang
(Papagarang Island). The settlements were established prior to 1980, before the area
declared as national park. Total population of these settlements was estimated
approximately 2300 people in 1999.

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

Type of vegetation GILI NUSA

KOMODO RINCA PADAR
cover (km2) MOTANG KODE
Island’s area 311.59 204.78 14.09 9.48 7.33
Beach Line 211.22 203.64 36.16 16.11 15.66
Mangrove Forest 3.01 6.50 0.40 0.00 0.04
Savanna 185.02 112.66 13.17 1.37 1.15
Open Deciduous
Forest 79.29 64.88 0.92 7.58 6.18
Closed Deciduous
Forest 38.63 27.24 0.00 0.53 0.00
Quasi Cloud Forest 8.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Source: Jessop et al. 2006 unpublished data.

The climate is dry and is influenced by monsoons and trade winds. Rainfall
varies with the elevation, averaging less than 500 mm a year, with peak values
between December and February (Monk et al. 1997). Jessop et al. (2006 unpublished
 16

data) classified the vegetation cover of each island, with modifications based on
classification by Auffenberg (1980) as shown in Table 3.1:

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

tides, located along the shoreline. This habitat is dominated by
Rhizophora sp. and Lumnitzera.

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

Komodo, Rinca, and Padar and mostly dominated the hilly areas. This
habitat is dominated by the grass species Eulalia leschenaultiana.
Common trees found at the lower altitude are Borassus filiformis,
Zyzypus sp., and Tamarindus indica.

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

dominated by Tanarindus indicus, followed by Sterculia foetida. This
forest mostly exists across the big valleys (i.e. Loh Liang, Loh Sebita).
ODF is characterized by the more open canopy. Komodo dragons are
mostly found within this type of forest.

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

the ODF but with a denser canopy. CDF mostly exists in the deeper
parts of valleys and has higher elevation as compared to ODF.

- Quasi Cloud Forest (QCF) is only found above 500 m asl. This forest
has a moisture and cooler climate and is characterized by moss-covered
rock, bamboo groves, and rattan.

3.1.2 Selected Study Sites

The overall study was conducted across 10 sites on four islands, but the radio
telemetry study was only done in Loh Liang. The study sites are; Loh Sebita, Loh
Liang, Loh Lawi, and Loh Wau on the Komodo Island, Loh Buaya, Loh Baru, Loh
 17

Tongker, and Loh Dasami on Rinca Island, Nusa Kode Island, and Gili Motang
Island. The description of each study site is as follows (Figure 3.1);

1) Loh Sebita (SB) (8º32’ N, 119 º32 E). This site is located on the east coast
of Komodo Island. The valley is characterized by a dense mangrove forest
stretching along the east coast of the valley. Towards the west, the
topography increases gently from sea level to about 735 m asl, the second
highest peak of the island. To the south uplifted rugged mountain stands
delimit the valley with smoother hills to the north. Vegetation in Loh Sebita
is dominated by the open deciduous forest type.

2) Loh Liang (LG) (8º34’ N, 119º29 E). This site is located at the north-east
part of the island, approximately 6 km south of Loh Sebita. Loh Liang is a
wide valley and is characterized by ODF. CDF exists along the northern to
western parts. This valley is delimited by smoother hills to the west and
north, which rise from sea level to the highest altitude of the island (800 m
asl to the west and 740 m asl to the northwest). To the East, this valley is
delimited by the rugged mountain stands. Vegetation in Loh Liang is
dominated by the open deciduous forest type, except in the northern deeper
valley, close dense forest exists.

3) Loh Lawi (LW) (8º36 N, 119º26 E). This site is located at the center of
Komodo Island, approximately 7 km southern of Loh Liang. This valley is
characterized by a long (approximate 6 km from the coast line) and narrow
area, delimited by rugged mountatins to the south, west, and north. To the
east, Loh Lawi is covered by a thick mangrove forest along the south coast.
Across the valley, open deciduous forest is predominantly.

4) Loh Wau (WA) (8º41’ N, 119º26’ E). This site is located on the south of
Komod Island, approximately 17 km from Loh Liang. The valley is
delimited by rugged mountainous topography to the west and smoother hills
to both the south and north. The close dense forest vegetation type is
predominantly in this very small valley.
 18

5) Loh Buaya (BY) (8º39’ N, 119º43’ E). This site is located on the northern
part of Rinca Island. This valley has a smooth topography. Savanna is
predominant in the valley with a small open deciduous forest to the middle
of the valley.

6) Loh Baru (BR) (8º43’ N, 119º41’ E). This site is located to the east of the
island, approximately 9 km south of Loh Buaya. The local people occupied
this valley before the park was established. Later, the settlements moved to
the nearest villages; Kerora and Rinca village. In Loh Baru agricultural
crops predominantly in the valley, while to the deeper part of the valley
open deciduous forest exists. The Loh Baru site also includes Loh Baru
valley and Sok Niu valley, which is located 2 km north of Loh Baru.
Komodo dragons are known to move reoutinely between these two valleys.
To the west and south, Loh Baru is delimited by rugged mountains which
lead to the highest peak altitude of the island (712.5 m asl).

7) Loh Tongker (TK) (8º45’ N, 119º43’ E). This site is located to the
Southeastern of Rinca Island, approximately 12 km southern Loh Buaya.
This small and narrow valley is predominantly covered by open deciduous
forest. Loh Tongker is delimited by rugged and steep hills.

8) Loh Dasami (DS) (8º46’ N, 119º39’ E). This site is located on the southern
part of Rinca Island, approximately 15 km southern Loh Buaya, and is
characterized by a very closed dense forest. This small valley is delimited
by a rugged mountainous terrain to the west, north and east, and the highest
peak has an altitude of 712.5 m asl.

9) Nusa Kode (NK) (8º47’ N, 119º39’ E). This site is located as a small island
is southern Rinca Island, approximately 1.5 km across Loh Dasami valley.
Nusa Kode is a rugged mountainous island and has few small and narrow
valleys. The island is predominantly covered by open deciduous forest from
sea level to the peak (400 m asl). Savanna exists on the eastern side of the
island.
 19

BORNEO

KOMODO
1

4
PADAR
6
RINCA
8
N 7
0 5 10 Kilometers
9 10

Figure 3.1 Study sites across the four islands of Komodo National Park.
Numbers are dedicated to show the locations; 1. Loh Sebita; 2. Loh
Liang; 3. Loh Lawi; 4. Loh Wau; 5. Loh Buaya; 6. Loh Baru; 7. Loh
Tongker; 8. Loh Dasami; 9. Nusa Kode; 10. Gili Motang.
 20

10) Gili Motang (GM) (8º48’ N, 119º47’E). This mountainous island is located
8 km southeast off Rinca Island, and 3 km southwest off Flores. This
isolated island is predominantly covered by open deciduous forest
dominated by Schoutenia ovata. Along the western to the southern part of
the island, savanna exists up to the peak (425 m asl) with small closed dense
forest on the peak. This island has received less attention as compared to the
other places within the park in regards to conservation management (Jessop
et al. 2006 in press).

3.2 FIELD TECHNIQUES

3.2.1 Juvenile Classification

Hatchlings among species in Varanids vary greatly in size (King & Green 1999). They
range from 18 grams in weight and approximately 17 cm in length in V. rosenbergi,
80 to 127 grams in weight and are about 30 cm in length in V. komodoensis.
Auffenberg (1981) found that average total length of Komodo dragon hatchling was
30.4 cm in SVL and weight 80.3 grams, and were considerably longer and larger than
the other large Varanid species.

The juvenile in Komodo dragon were estimated below maturity sexual age,
which is estimated 5 years (King & Green 1999). Lemm et al. (2002) defined those
juvenile Komodo dragons which less than three years had 38 – 40 cm in SVL and 0.75
– 1.30 kg in weight. Large Komodo dragons (>2.3 m in total length and >38 kg in
weight) are likely to be males, but younger and smaller animals are difficult to sex
(Jessop et al. 2006 unpublished data; Auffenberg 1981). Within this study, hatchling
was defeined as recently hatched animal (below one year), while juvenile was above
yearling animal. Animal thus met all of the measurements ranges as shown in table 3.2
below were classified either as hatchling or as juvenile.
 21

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

Varanus komodoensis is categorized as follow;

- Hatchling
Hatchling has a brown pattern with large, distinct orange spots on the
dorsal region. Yellow stripes present on it’s neck to the dorsal region.
Light yellowish spot pattern found on its four legs from the temporal
region to the front. Front legs are brown with white flecks disposed in
round, horizontal circles. The ventral part of the body is light yellow
with large dark spots. Tail has some light yellow strip circling.

- Juvenile
Juvenile pattern is gradually lost with age. They still show a lighter skin
color, but have a darker brown pattern. Small light yellow spot pattern
still exists on its four legs. Tail has lighter color (as compared to
hatchlings) strip circling.

Table 3.2. Range of measurement applied in classifying hatchling and juvenile of

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

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

Hatchlings
min 3.50 16.00 0.040
max 6.00 30.00 0.400

Juveniles
min 6.50 35.00 0.600
max 13.50 80.10 10.000

3.2.2 Radiotelemetry

Radiotelemetry was used to determined habitat utilization by hatchling and the

juveniles. Samuel and Fuller (1996) confirmed that radiotelemetry is a good technique
in acquiring detailed and unique information on animal ecology, physiological
 22

process, and the proximate causes of mortality. White and Garrot (1990) emphasized
the use of radiotelemetry to investigate habitat requirements, and demography. Similar
techniques have been demonstrated in studying spatial ecology of reptiles (i.e.
Fitzgerald et al. 2002; Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002; Webbs & Shine 1997).

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

2004 and 2005 in Loh Liang, Komodo island, where total of twelve Komodo dragon
were radiotracked. This study was conducted after the hatchling period, which is
usually between Februarys to March, when the transition of rainy to dry season, which
is usually between March to June. AVM transmitters (G3-1V), AVM receivers
(LA12-Q), and AF Antronics Yagi antennas were used in the study. The transmitters
were glued to the base of the tail of selected animals and are considered the best site
for placement. Attaching transmitters on juveniles by means a harness (Sastrawan &
Ciofi 2002) was not feasible.

Individual were located either by direct observation or triangulation techniques

(White & Garrot 1990). During tracking, certain parameters for habitat type or tree
visited by animals recorded as follows; habitat type, tree species, breast height
diameter, and tree height. To measure tree height Suunto clinometer was used.
Radiotracked animals captured using capture techniques as described below.

3.2.3 Mark-recapture Techniques

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

dragons, this research employed the Capture Mark Release and Recapture (mark-
recapture) method (Krebs. 1999; Lancia et al. 1996; White & Clark 1996). Similar
methods had been employed by Clobert et al. (2000); Limpus and Walter (1980), and
Magnusson (1979) in their studies.

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

study sites within the Komodo National Park (Figure 3.1). This research is part of the
long-term annual population and ecology study of the Komodo dragon within the
 23

Komodo National Park, which is being conducted by the Center for Conservation and
Research of Endangered Species, Zoological Society of San Diego since 2002 (Jessop
et al. 2006 unpublished data). Hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons were captured
using several techniques; including nest enclosure traps (using metal sheeting fence),
baited (box and enclosed-pipe) traps, noose or by hand. Following capture, for safety
reasons, captured Komodo dragons were restrained either by electric tape or by rope
on its four legs and mouth taped. Capture and measuring processes were no more than
30 minutes. No anesthesia was used in handling the animals. To avoid injury to
animals, physical restraint in handling the animals within this study was followed
Friend et al. (1996).

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

marker and permanently marked with Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tag
(Trovan ID100a) before release at the point of capture within 30 minute of capture.
The PIT tags are encased in glass, encoded with 10 digits of alphanumeric code, 8 X 2
mm in size and were implanted using a plastic syringe and 12-g needle. This
technique is believed to be superior to most tagging methodologies for marking
reptiles (Nietfield et al. 1996). Every captured Komodo dragon was measured before
release. The following data were collected from each hatchling and juvenile and all
the measurements were taken in centimeter (cm) and taken to the nearest 0.5 cm,
while weight was in kilogram (kg).

- Head Length (HL),

- Head Width (HW),
- Snout-Vent Length (SVL),
- Ventral Total Body Length (VTL),
- Tail Length (TL),
- Tail Circumference (TC),
- Weight (W),
 24

3.2.4 Baited Box-trapping Technique

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

juvenile Komodo dragons. Baited box-trapping is effective to catch individual above
yearlings. Several previous researchers (Ciofi 2002; Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002; and
Ciofi & De Boer 2004) captured Komodo dragon for genetic, home range, and
distribution study employed similar trapping method (baited wood-box traps).

Each trap (300 X 60 X 60 cm) was constructed from alloy and aluminum metal
sheets with two open-ends with sliding doors. Only one door (front side) was kept
open to allow animals to enter the trap. The front door was connected by a metal wire
with bait at the other end of the wire. Each trap was baited with goat-meat, where two
or three pieces were placed on the floor to attract the juvenile to enter and approach
the hanging bait. The front door would close whenever the hanging bait was pulled.

Eight traps were placed along a line transect with an interval of 250 - 450
meters between traps depends on the terrain and covered the valleys as much as
possible. Traps were checked twice a day (morning and afternoon session) and moved
for every three days to allow for sufficient production of the volatile oils that were
released as the bait decomposed. Trap locations were marked by GPS (Garmin Etrex
Summit). Recaptured and resighted animal within the same trapping session in each
location were recorded and considered as Within Trip Recapture or Resight.

3.2.5 Baited Pipe-trapping Technique

To capture hatchling, this study was also employing enclosed PVC pipes 1m in length
and 0.1 m in diameter where the bottom side is closed. To attract the hatchling, this
trap was baited using meat. Similar techniques were implemented with other reptiles
species as reported by Mathies et al. (2001) and Schemnitz (1996). Each pipe-trap was
placed on a tree in 100 m line transects at a 5 m distance and approximately 1–2 meter
above ground to attract hatchling and avoid disturbance by bigger Komodo dragon.
Pipe-traps were placed near the active nests to anticipate escaping hatchlings and near
 25

ranger station of station where occasionally hatchlings were found every hatchling
seasons.

3.2.6 Noosing and Hand-capture Technique

The noosing technique has been demonstrated by many authors, such as Olsson and
Madson (2001) and Wapstra and Swain (2001). The noosing technique required two
persons and relies on a systematic search. Searching was conducted opportunistically
by foot and covered almost entire the valley. Noosing technique employed one 2
meters of woody “Y” stick with lasso.

3.2.7 Nest Enclosure Traps

Female Komodo dragons are known to begin nesting in August, (Jessop et al. 2004),
and lay eggs in September (Ciofi 1999). Up to 40 hatchlings will emerge from the nest
at the beginning of dry season (February to March) and weigh between 60–130 grams
and are about 20-60 cm in length (Auffenberg 1981; Ciofi 1999; King & Green 1999).

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

from nest. This technique only possible to employed in Loh Liang, Loh Sebita
(Komodo Island) and Loh Buaya (Rinca Island) where a number of active nests were
monitored from survey in the previous year. Hatchlings were captured by hand within
fenced nests. Metal sheeting with height of approximate 80cm from ground was used
to circling the nest. Size of the area in which covered by the fence varying depending
on the size of the nest. To avoid hatchlings escaping by digging the soil, 10 cm of the
lower part of the metal sheeting was pushed into the ground. Each fence was covered
by fishing nets to avoid predation by birds. Fenced-nests were monitored daily from
early February to the end of March which is considered hatchling season. Hatchlings
were captured by hand immediately on emergence and measured and PIT tagged
before released.
 26

3.3 DATA ANALYSIS

The spatial ecology of juvenile Komodo dragons was assessed based on following
spatial parameters; spatial movement, activity areas, habitat use, daily activity
patterns, and annual movement. These parameters were used by Fitzgerald, et al.
(2002); Ibrahim (2002), Piepgrass and Lang (2000), and Olupot et al. (2001), in
assessing spatial ecology in reptiles. Detailed descriptions of each analysis will be
included in the relevant chapters.

3.3.1 Spatial Movement and Activity Area

Spatial movement of each size class was determined using data obtained from the
radiotelemetry study of hatchlings and juveniles. Spatial movement is defined as a
straight line moved between two consecutive points (Samuel & Fuler 1996). This
measurement will provide a minimum distance that an animal could have traveled to
reach the new location. This technique was also employed by Ibrahim (2002) and
Fitzgerald et al. (2002). Spatial movement data will be calculated by means of a
computer program ESRI ArcView 3.2 (ESRI 1999) with X Tools and Animal
Movement program (Hooge et al. 1999).

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

in it’s normal activities (Ibrahim 2002). Activity area was calculated using data
obtained by means of radiotelemetry (Fitzgerald et al. 2002; and Sastrawan & Ciofi
2002). This study employed methods of Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP) and
Adaptive Kernell as the most familiar methods in analyzing activity areas (Fitzgerald
et al. 2002; Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). This analysis employed computer programs of
ESRI ArcView 3.2 (ESRI 1999) with X Tools and Animal Movement program
(Hooge et al. 1999). Use of GIS methods will provide more accurate relocation
mapping and more proportional calculation of activity areas (Kernohan et al. 1998).
 27

3.3.2 Habitat Use

To investigate habitat utilization, following parameters used by hatchlings and

juveniles were measured; shelter sites and tree preferences. The data were obtained
from radiotelemetry study. Locations noted for each radiotracked animal where they
occurred were classified as to the habitat type and were converted into the percentages
of time each animal spent in a particular habitat type (White & Garrot 1990). To
defined the type of habitat in which animal used, habitat type at the adjacent area
where animal located was determined subjectively (Jessop et al. 2004)

3.3.3 Long Distance Movement

Long distance movement in Komodo dragons was analyzed using data obtained from
the Mark-Recapture study (Husak & Fox 2003; Lancia et al. 1996; & Nietfield et al.
1996). This long distance movement is used to measure the ability of hatchling and
juvenile Komodo dragons to move to adjacent valleys or adjacent island. Long
distance movement ability was measured as a straight distance moved between two or
more consecutive points (Samuel & Fuler 1996) between capture locations from
subsequent days and years and were calculated by means of computer program of
ESRI ArcView 3.2 (ESRI 1999) with X Tools and Animal Movement program
(Hooge et al. 1999).
 CHAPTER IV

COMPARISON OF DAILY MOVEMENT PATTERNS, ACTIVITY AREAS,

AND HABITAT USE BETWEEN HATCHLING AND JUVENILE
KOMODO DRAGONS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

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

spatial requirements and habitat use by animals (Brill et al. 1995; Fitzgerald et al.
2002; Phillips 1995; Piepgras & Lang 2000). The spatial requirement and habitat use
are especially important for Komodo dragons inhabiting the Komodo National Park
(Burghardt et al. 2002; Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). Knowledge of inter and intra-island
movements is, in fact, essential to understand meta-population dynamics. Several
studies have been conducted to describe spatial activities, movement patterns and
associated behavior of varanid lizards (e.g. Ibrahim 2002; Thompson 1992; Thompson
et al. 2002). In addition, such studies have been conducted to assess interactions
between spatial ecology and aspects of their physiology, reproduction and
demography (i.e. Christian et al. 1995; Christian & Weavers 1994; James 1996;
Phillips 1995). Previous study on Komodo dragons has focused on a preliminary
description of movements and activity area size of Komodo dragons using footprint
locations and sighting records (Auffenberg 1981). More recently, Sastrawan and Ciofi
(2002) detailed the activity areas and movements on five adult Komodo dragons that
varies in size between SVL 116 – 154 cm).

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

pertaining to the aspects of spatial ecology of early life-history stages, including
juveniles, and especially the post-natal or hatchling stage. For many animals, the
period immediately following the departure from the natal area can be associated with
 29

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

space and eventually establishment of a home range.

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

Komodo dragon movement patterns (Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). To address this
knowledge gap, a radio-telemetry study to estimate home range size and describe
activity patterns of hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragon was conducted. This study
was aimed at addressing three aspects of spatial ecology:

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

nest.
(2) Determine movement patterns and activity area size of hatchling and
juvenile Komodo dragons,
(3) Determine patterns of habitat use by hatchling and juvenile Komodo
dragons.

These three aspects of spatial ecology represent important facets of the

ecology of Komodo dragons as they could provide insight into ontogenic transitions
in spatial ecology. In particular, the dispersal phase is one of the key events
associated with gene flow within or among populations and responsible for
maintaining many population processes.

4.2 MATERIALS AND METHODS

4.2.1 Study Site

The study was conducted in the Loh Liang valley on Komodo Island, (8°33’40” S and
119°29’51”E) in Komodo National Park (KNP), East Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia.
General descriptions on vegetation cover of KNP are described elsewhere (e.g.
Auffenberg 1981; Jessop et al. 2006 unpublished data; Monk et al. 1999). Komodo
Island is a rugged, mountainous island covered predominantly by savannah.
Deciduous monsoon forest dominated by Tamarind tree (Tamarindus indica).are
found in coastal valleys, while closed evergreen forest persists on hills above 500 m.
 30

4.2.2 Studied Animals

Five hatchling Komodo dragons with a mean snout to vent length (SVL) of 20.16 ±
0.85 cm (SEM) (range 18.25 – 22.6 cm) and body mass of 0.11 ± 0.01 kg (range
0.095 – 0.135 kg) were captured following emergence from their nest. Hatchlings
were captured by hand from fenced nests or using PVC pipe traps (10 cm diameter
and 100 cm in length). Seven juvenile Komodo dragons (mean ± SEM of SVL 55.81
± 2.97 cm and body mass of 3.03 ± 0.56, range 1.4 – 5.7 kg) were captured by hand
or in goat meat baited box traps. Trapping methods are described in Chapter III in this
thesis. Measurements of individual animals are summarized in Table 4.1.

4.2.3 Radiotelemetry Technique

This study was conducted between March 2004 and June 2005. In 2004, two
hatchlings and four juveniles were radio-tracked, and in 2005 three hatchlings and
four juveniles were followed. Telemetry equipment consisted of activity-sensitive
AVM G31V transmitters (AVM Instruments Co. Ltd.), a AVM LA12Q receiver, and
a three-element yagi antenna. Each transmitter was attached to the dragon’s base of
tail using duct tapes. In 2004, 8 transmitters were attached to four hatchlings and four
juveniles and in 2005, 6 transmitters were attached to three offspring and three
juveniles.

After the transmitters were attached, hatchlings and juveniles were

immediately released at the point of captured. Each animal was radio-tracked for 7 –
56 days and comprised a total of 7 – 66 observation events. Each animal was recorded
up to four times a day based on latitude and longitude measurement using a Garmin
GPS. To increase independency of the data for each radio-tracked animal, individual
daily observations were conducted in four sessions; separated by a minimum daily
time interval of 2-3 hours (average). Daily observations were made from 0600 to
1800 hrs across 4 time periods of 06 – 09, 09 – 12, 12 – 15, and 15 - 18 hrs.
Movement and activity area data were analyzed using 11 - 18 (mean ± SEM: 14.9 ±
0.71) temporally independent fixes over this period.
 31

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

Observations
PIT tag ID Year SVL (cm) Weight (kg) Positional
#
Hatchling
64E4218 2004 22.6 0.14 50 12
64CDC09 2004 21.3 0.11 26 6*
63DFB2A 2005 18.25 0.1 66 11
64D4C0E 2005 18.3 0.09 51 18
63C1383 2005 20.35 0.11 67 14
Mean ± SEM 20.16 ± 0.85 0.11 ± 0.01 52.00 ± 16.60 12.2 ± 1.96
Juveniles
64CF2AO 2004 61.85 3.5 18 17
639E332 2004 68.35 5.7 39 17
643761C 2004 58.05 3.5 18 15
64E2E95 2004 55.45 3.4 14 14
63DE6F1 2005 51.15 1.65 57 16
63D9C4B 2005 44.45 1.4 44 15
63DB3B7 2005 51.35 2.05 7 6*
Mean ± SEM 55.81 ± 2.97 3.03 ± 0.56 28.14 ± 7.78 14.29 ± 1.44

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

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

calculate triangulation, bearings were taken using a compass from two or more
receiving points (Samuel & Fuller 1996; Fitzgerald et al. 2002; Sastrawan & Ciofi
2002). The point at which the bearings crossed denoted the animal’s position.
Typically, bearings were obtained within 3 minutes. Receiving points were located
between 30-50 meters from the estimated lizard’s position. Level of triangulation
reliability within this study was 83.2 ± 3.05 %. Fixes were recorded using a Global
Positioning System (GPS; Garmin Etrex), then recorded into an Excel spreadsheet
and visualized on to digital maps using ArcView 3.2 (ESRI).

4.2.4 Habitat Assessment

To quantify and compare the habitat use of juvenile and hatchling lizards, habitat and
shelter site parameters concurrently with positional data of lizards were collected
 32

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

1) Habitat strata
Use of either terrestrial or arboreal strata

2) Habitat type
The presence of lizards in one of three key habitat types: open deciduous forest,
closed dense forest, and savannah grassland. These habitat types were readily
distinguished by canopy closure and floristic composition.

3) Shelter site
Included a description of resting or sleeping location based on the use of
vegetation (identified to species), or substrate type. Further, with relation to
vegetation, particularly trees, the tree diameter at breast-height (Dbh) and tree
height were also recorded. Tree Dbh was obtained by measuring the tree
circumference at breast-height and calculated using the formula circumference =
2πr (where: π = 3.14, 2r = diameter). Tree height and Komodo dragons’ position
above ground was calculated using a Suunto Clinometer PM5 (Suunto, Finland).

4) Elevation
Ground elevation at which a lizard was located was recorded alongside every fix
locations.

4.2.5 Data Analysis

A) Movement and Orientation

Directionality and tortuousity were analyzed to describe the pattern of path movement
(linearity) of Komodo dragons (Nams & Bourgeois 2004). Directionality was
analyzed by measuring the turning angle of movement on each point in a compass
direction (Claussen et al. 1997). The turning angles indicate the movement angles
between two consecutive points (Higham et al. 2001). Tortuosity was measured by
 33

analyzing the fractal dimension (D) (Milne 1991), whose values range between 1-2:
D = 1 the animals’ path of movement is straight; D = 2 (i.e. maximum) the animals
path of movement is so tortuous as to completely cover a plane (Nams & Bourgeois
2004). To describe site fidelity, Site Fidelity Test was ran with 1000 replications to
obtain the r2 value, the lower r2 value, the highest fidelity of the animal (Hooge &
Eichenlaub 1997). Directionality and Site Fidelity were computed using the Animal
Movement Program extension (Hooge et al. 1999) and X Tools of ArcVIew 3.2
(ESRI) while Fractal dimensions were computed using the computer program Fractal
(Nams 2004a).

Komodo dragon movement distances were calculated as the distance moved

between two consecutive points (Samuel & Fuler 1996). This measurement estimates
the minimum distance that an animal would have traveled between two locations.
Mean daily movement distance was obtained by dividing the total distance of
recorded movements by the total number of radio-tracking days. A similar method
has been applied elsewhere in investigating reptile movements. (e.g. Ibrahim 2002;
Fitzgerald et al. 2002; Whitaker & Shine 2003; Phillips 1995). These calculations
were made using the Animal Movement Program (Hooge et al., 1999) and X Tools
extension of ArcView 3.2 (ESRI).

B) Activity area

In this study, the activity area was defined as the area occupied by an animal during
the study period. Core area was defined as the area in which studied animal mostly
visited or occupied during the study period. Activity areas were calculated using three
methods: the 100% Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), 95% and 50% Adaptive
Kernell Analysis (AK). MCP is the most common and simplest method used to
estimate the activity area of animals by calculating the smallest possible convex
polygon around the outermost animal locations (Kenward 1993; Samuel & Fuller
1996). Sastrawan & Ciofi (2002) applied MCP to measure adult Komodo dragon’s
activity area size. However, MCP only uses a proportion of location data; it is
sensitive to outliers and incorporates large areas that may have never been used by the
animal (Melville & Swain 1999; White & Garrot 1990). The 95% AK is also suitable
 34

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

the total fixes (Kernohan et al. 1996) by smoothing the location data (Kernohan et al.
1998). The 95% AK is believed to be a very effective method for estimating activity
area (Katajisto & Moilanen 2005 in press; Pavey et al. 2003). The 50% AK method
was used to determine core areas within the activity area of hatchling and juvenile
Komodo dragons. The 50% AK has been widely used to determine the core area or
habitat use in other reptiles (Whitaker & Shine 2003; Fitzgerald et al. 2002; Kernohan
et al. 1998; Piepgras & Lang 2000; Smith et al. 1999). Overlaps were estimated by
calculating the size of overlapped activity areas between individuals and compared to
the total of activity area (Figure 4.3).

To increase the quality of data, radio-tracking animals with less than 10 fixes
(data for hatchling 64CDC09 and juvenile 6eDB3B7) were excluded. Daily
movements and activity areas were analyzed based on data subset of four hatchlings
and six juveniles with minimum 11 fixes. Activity area estimations were calculated
using the Animal Movement Program (Hooge et al. 1999) and X Tools extension of
ArcVIew 3.2 (ESRI). A similar technique for studying spatial ecology was applied by
King and Gurnell (2004) and Piepgras and Lang (2000).

C) Habitat Use

Patterns in habitat use were analyzed by comparing the frequency of particular habitat
types (arboreal and terrestrial), types of vegetation (closed forest, open forest, and
savanna), elevation of location, shelter sites, tree species, tree DBH and tree height,
and animal position above ground. To determine if Komodo dragons were using their
habitat in a non-random fashion, their observed use of habitat was compared with a
random selection of locations calculated using the program Ecological Methodology
V. 6.1 (Krebs 1999; 2002) to generate 100 random latitude and longitudes positions
within Loh Liang. These random locations were then assigned their habitat type and
elevation drawn from digital topographic maps.
 35

D) Statistical Analysis

Prior to analysis all data was log transformed (Sutherland et al. 2000) to meet the
assumptions of parametric tests (Zar 1999). Log transformed data that did not meet
the assumptions was statistically analyzed using a nonparametric statistical
procedures. All data is presented in tables and graphs of the means and standard error
of the mean (SEM) of back-log transformed data. T-test, Chi square test and Mann-
Whitney U tests were used to determine the in habitat types used (King & Gurnell
2005; Rheaney & Whiting 2003). Linear regression test and ANOVA was used to test
differences in time spent on a tree between hatchlings and juveniles. For all statistical
tests, significance was inferred at P < 0.05.

4.3 RESULTS

4.3.1 Patterns of movement

During the study, hatchlings dispersed in a predominantly linear fashion with little
movement over previously occupied areas (Figure 4.1). In contrast, juvenile dragons
exhibited more tortuous movement paths reflecting increased movement over the
same area (i.e. use of an activity area) (Figure 4.2). Fractal analysis indicated that the
linearity of the movement paths undertaken by hatchlings D = 1.11 ± 0.01 was
significantly more directed (i.e. strait) than that of juvenile dragons (D = 1.39 ± 0.05;
Mann-Whitney U test; Z = -2.558, p = 0.01). The degree of site fidelity in hatchlings
(r2 = 729502.69) was significantly lower than that in juveniles (r2 = 2729220.96; T-
test t1,9=-39.123.01, p < 0.001).

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

active than juvenile dragons and on average moved 32.62 ± 12.67 m/day compared to
129.137 ± 41.71 m/day (T-test t1,9 = -3.014, p = 0.015) (Table 4.2). Consistent with
this the longest daily movements recorded by hatchling (163.99 ± 22.96 m/day) were
significantly less than that of juvenile dragons (509.87 ± 73.32) (T-test t1,9 = -5.241, p
< 0.001). Daily activity of hatchlings was significantly less than juvenile dragons
 36

(Chi square test; x2 = 51.68, p < 0.001) based on an activity index calculated using the
relative proportion of movement fixes compared to the proportion of stationary fixes.

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

Komodo dragons.

Maximum Total Daily Longest 100% 95% 50%

PIT tag
Overnight Move (m) Move (m) move (m) MCP (ha) AK (ha) AK (ha)
Hatchlings
64E4218 4 983.4 70.24 191.19 4.83 20.12 4.74
63DFB2A 15 571.61 15.04 195.08 1.72 13.06 3.61
64D4C0E 4 692.91 23.1 96.63 1.96 13.48 2.51
63C1383 15 949.38 22.08 173.08 3.59 12.143 2.71
799.32 ± 32.61 ± 163.99 ± 14.7 ± 3.39 ±
Mean 9.5 ± 3.17 99.82 12.67 22.96 3.02 ± 0.73 1.83 0.51
Juveniles
64CF2AO 6 2286.24 326.61 397.87 12.53 33.23 10.48
639E332 2 6308.96 143.38 791.59 32.37 16.34 2.33
643761C 2 350.72 43.84 334.35 4.02 5.49 0.56
64E2E95 5 2879.15 89.97 427.54 17.42 32.55 2.45
63DE6F1 2 5556.63 99.23 672.06 61.77 30.52 4.3
63D9C4B 2 3445.54 71.78 435.83 17.76 21.57 2.65
3.17 3471.21 129.14 509.87 24.31 23.28 3.79
Mean ± 0.75 ± 892.46 ± 41.71 ± 73.32 ± 8.38 ± 4.49 ± 1.42
OVERALL
2402.45 90.53 371.52 15.8 19.85 3.63
Mean 5.7 ± 5.1 ± 676.16 ± 92.18 ± 71.08 ± 5.97 ± 3.02 ± 0.84

Table 4.3 Percentages of overlap on activity area in juveniles

OVERLAPPED
VK ID MCP (ha) OVERLAP (ha) OVERLAP (% )
VK ID
64CF2A0 12.53 2.55 20.34 639E332
639E332 32.37 2.55 7.88 64CF2A0
643761C 4.02 3.66 91.01 64E2E95
643761C /
64E2E95 17.42 6.65 38.20
63DE6F1
63DE6F1 61.77 2.99 4.84 63DE6F1
 37

#a
8ｰ33'55"

8ｰ33'05"

8ｰ34'00"

#c
Latitude (South)

#b 8ｰ34'05"
#d
8ｰ33'10"
8ｰ34'10"

8ｰ34'15"

N N
0 50 100 Meters 0 100 200 Meters
8ｰ33'15"
8ｰ34'20"
119ｰ29'45" 119ｰ29'50" 119ｰ29'55" 119ｰ30'00" 119ｰ29'50" 119ｰ29'55" 119ｰ30'00" 119ｰ30'05"

Longitude (East)

Figure 4.1 Movement patterns of hatchling Komodo dragons. Arrows indicate starting point and general direction of movements.
Letter refers to hatchlings ID as follow; a) 64D4C0E, b) 63DFB2A, c) 64E4218, d) 63C1383.
 38

a b

8ｰ33'10" 8ｰ33'50"

8ｰ33'15" 8ｰ33'55"

8ｰ33'20" 8ｰ34'00"
Latitude (South)

8ｰ33'25" 8ｰ34'05"

8ｰ34'10"
8ｰ33'30"

8ｰ34'15"
8ｰ33'35"
N N
0 100 200 Meters 0 100 200 Meters
8ｰ34'20"
8ｰ33'40"
119ｰ30'20" 119ｰ30'25" 119ｰ30'30" 119ｰ30'35" 119ｰ30'40" 119ｰ30'45" 119ｰ29'40" 119ｰ29'45" 119ｰ29'50" 119ｰ29'55" 119ｰ30'00"
Longitude (East)

Figure 4.2 Movement patterns of two juvenile Komodo dragons (a: 639E332, b: 63D9C4B). Circles indicate shelter sites.
 39

a b
8ｰ32'45" 8ｰ32'45" #4
#3 #5 #3
#

8ｰ33'00" #1 8ｰ33'00"
#5 #4 #1

8ｰ33'15" 8ｰ33'15"
#2

#2
8ｰ33'30" 8ｰ33'30"
Latitude (South)

#5

8ｰ33'45" 8ｰ33'45"

#6

8ｰ34'00" 8ｰ34'00"
#6

8ｰ34'15" 8ｰ34'15"
N N
0 500 1000 Meters 0 500 1000 Meters
8ｰ34'30" 8ｰ34'30"
119ｰ29'30" 119ｰ29'45" 119ｰ30'00" 119ｰ30'15" 119ｰ30'30" a
119ｰ30'45" b
119ｰ29'30" 119ｰ29'45" 119ｰ30'00" 119ｰ30'15" 119ｰ30'30" 119ｰ30'45"
Longitude (East)

Figure 4.3 Activity area overlaps of six juvenile Komodo dragons as calculated by MCP (a) and 50% Adaptive Kernell (b). Numbers
refer to juvenile ID as follow: 1) 64CF2A0, 2) 639E332, 3) 64E761C, 4) 64E2E95, 5) 63DE6F1, 6) 63D9C4.
 40

4.3.2 Size of Activity Areas

Activity areas of hatchlings and juveniles ranged between 1.72 – 4.83 ha and 4.02 –
61.77 ha for MCP; 12.14 - 20.12 ha and 5.49 – 33.23 for 95% AK; and 2.51 – 4.74
and 0.56 – 10.48 ha for 50% AK (Table 4.2, Figure 4.3). Hatchlings used significantly
smaller activity areas, of approximately 8 times less than juveniles for the 100% MCP
(T-test; t1,9 = -3.66, p = 0.001). However, there was no significant differences in 95%
AK (T-test t1,9 = -0.02, p = 0.18) and neither for 50% AK (T-test t1,9 = 0.396, p =
0.70). In five of six cases, the activity areas of juvenile dragons overlapped with one
(n = 4) or two (n = 1) conspecifics. The extent of overlap of activity areas ranged from
4.84 – 91.01 % or 2.55-6.65 ha (Table 4.4; Figure 4.3.a).

4.3.3 Patterns in Habitat Use

There was a significant difference between hatchlings and juveniles in several

measured parameters of habitat use. All radio-tracked hatchlings were almost entirely
arboreal (97.7%) compared to juveniles which more terrestrial (71.0%) (Chi square
test; x2 = 239.22, p < 0.001) during the course of observation (Figure 4.4a). Hatchlings
were remained on the same tree ranged from 4 to 15 days (mean 9.5 ± 3.17 days)
before moving to the next tree (Table 4.2). Hatchlings were rarely observed on the
ground, except during long distance movements between trees (> 30 m). There was an
occasional arboreal movement whereby hatchlings were able to move between trees
with overlapping canopy. In contrast, juveniles were significantly more terrestrial than
arboreal (Figure 4.4a). However, they were still often encountered in trees. Juveniles,
on the other hand, spent significantly less time on trees ranged from 2 to 6 days,
(mean 3.17 ± 0.75; T-test t1,8=2.257, p = 0.038) (Table 4.2). However, body size,
rather than age class was a better indicator of habitat use, as there was a highly
significant negative linear relationship between body size and amount of arboreal
activity (% Arboreal activity = -2.070 * SVL + 139.244, r = 0.965; ANOVA,
F1,9 = 108.423, p < 0.001) (Figure 4.4b).
 41

120

255
100
a

Frequency of Use (%)

80
130
Hatchling
Juvenile
60

40
53

20

6
0
Terrestrial Arboreal

Habitat Strata

120
b
Frequency of arboreal activity (%)

100

80

60

40

20

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

SVL cm

80 42 73
c
Hatchling
Juvenile
Frequency of Use (%)

60

40

20 16
6 7
5

0
Closed Forest Open Forest Savanna

Habitat Type

Figure 4.4 Differences in terrestrial and arboreal habitat use by hatchling and
juvenile Komodo dragons (a). Figure b depicts the relationship
between body size (SVL) and arboreal activity in the radio tracked
Komodo dragons.
 42

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

45.86, p < 0.001) and juveniles (Chi square test; x2 = 85.04, p < 0.001) were observed
significantly more frequently in open deciduous forest, compared to either closed
dense forest or savannah (Figure 4.4.c). There was no significant difference in the
frequency of observed habitat preference use between hatchlings and juveniles (Chi
square test; x2 = 1.891, p = 0.389; Figure 4.4c.). For both hatchlings (Chi square test;
x2 = 14.206, p < 0.001) and juveniles (Chi square test; x2 = 16.205, p < 0.001) their
habitat use preference was significantly different to that calculated for habitat types
from randomly generated locations across the study sites.

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

located in the lowest elevation class (54.54 % for < 25 m above sea level; Chi square
test; x2 = 20.98, p < 0.001) (Table 4.4). Juvenile dragons (Chi square test; x2 = 9.26, p
= 0.002) exhibited a significant preference for elevations between 25 – 50 m (36.17
%) above sea level (Table 4.4). These elevation preferences for hatchlings and
juvenile dragons were significantly different (Chi square test; x2 = 25.127, p < 0.001).
Further, both hatchlings (Chi square test; x2 = 53.707, p < 0.001) and Juveniles (Chi
square test; x2 = 29.736, p < 0.001) elevations preferences differed significantly from
random selection of elevations within their environment.

4.3.4 Shelter Sites Selection

Shelter sites were defined as those places used by hatchlings and juveniles for resting
(also as sites between movements - for juveniles only) or as overnight refuges.
Hatchlings used trees exclusively for shelter. They significantly used live (84.71 %)
over dead trees (15.29 %; Chi square test; x2 = 122.859, p < 0.001) (Table 4.4).

Amongst live trees (15 species recorded), there was a significant tendency for
hatchlings to occupy Tamarindus indica tree (45.37 %) (Chi square test; x2 = 122.86,
p < 0.001) (Table 4.5). Juveniles used predominantly crevices under or among rocks
(51.77 %) as shelters. These shelters could be a part of a larger forested area with
significant granitic exfoliation forming rocky fields or a clump of rocks associated
 43

with trees. Trees (9 species recorded) were occasionally used by juveniles as locations
for resting or basking (Table 4.5).

With respect to arboreal habitat use, hatchlings used significantly thinner (tree
DBH; T-test t1,10 = -2.634, p = 0.025) and shorter trees (T-test t1,4 = -2.915, p = 0.043)
than juveniles (Table 4.6). However, there was no significant difference in tree
elevation use between hatchlings and juveniles (T-test t1,4 = 2.23, p = 0.089).

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

Elevation (m) Hatchlings Juveniles

< 25 54.54 24.47
25 – 50 40.00 36.17
50 – 75 5.45 14.89
75 – 100 0.00 21.28
>100 0.00 3.19

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

Tree species Hatchlings Juveniles

Tamarindus indica 44.61 70.93
Corypha utan 14.21 0.00
Saruga sp 4.73 1.67
Schleichera oleiosa 7.20 2.40
Dead/log 13.19 0.00
Other 16.06 25.00

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

Parameters Hatchling Juvenile

# Tree sp. 15 9
Tree DBH (cm) 43.22 ± 7.14 66.58 ± 5.42
Tree height (m) 12.51 ± 0.72 16.14 ± 1.01
VK height (m) 7.89 ± 0.85 5.47 ± 0.67
 44

4.4 DISCUSSION

Hatchlings displayed several key differences with respect to their spatial ecology
compared to juvenile Komodo dragons. In particular, their post-natal movements were
essentially linear compared to those of juveniles that appeared to have already
developed a defined area of established activity. This predominantly linear movement
could possibly underpin a deliberate type of dispersal behavior that enables hatchlings
to move as far as possible away from their nesting sites relative to the actual distance
traveled. Based on the limited number of hatchlings radio-tracked, there was no
indication that hatchlings were heading towards a consistent bearing similar to natal
dispersal in other reptiles including hatchling Green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas) that
display well-oriented post-emergence dispersal (Salmon & Wyneken 1987). Rather,
the movement of hatchling dragons was similar to patterns of natal dispersal
demonstrated by hatchlings of Blanding turtles (Emydoidea blandigii) (McNeil et al.
2000) and the Australian freshwater crocodile (Crocodylus johnstoni) (Tucker et al.
1997).

Pough et al. (2001) described that lizard hatchlings moved out of their natal
areas to find a suitable patches of habitat which are not already occupied by larger
conspecifics or to avoid cannibalism by adults. As reported by Sarno et al. (2003),
dispersal in juvenile Guanacos occurred in order to avoid conflict with adults.
Cannibalism among Komodo dragons has been observed (Auffenberg 1981) as well as
in other Varanids such as V. griseus, V. gouldii and V. gigantheus (King & Green
1999). This early life-stage is dominated by high mortality because hatchlings are
particularly vulnerable to predation (Mattison 1992).

Dispersal in threatened species is important for populations to enlarge their

distribution and to maintain genetic variability as this is a critical component of
population dynamics (Lebreton et al. 2003; Sutherland 2000; Trakhtenbrot et al.
2005). In reptiles, dispersal in hatchlings is correlated with rates of adult presence
(Pough et al. 2001). Sutherland et al. (2000) reported that natal dispersal was
positively correlated with body mass, where larger animals have larger dispersal
distance.
 45

From the data, hatchlings displayed a consistent pattern in habitat use. They
were arboreal during their first stage of life. Following emergence, hatchlings
immediately climbed the nearest tree (Auffenberg 1981). Their arboreal nature is
presumably a strategy for avoiding their terrestrial based larger conspecifics and
possibly aerial predators such as birds of prey (Auffenberg 1981; King & Green
1999). Thompson (1993) reported similar behaviour in V. caudolineatus. Hatchlings
of Blanding’s turtles hide in vegetation soon after emergence (McNeil et al. 2000).
Arboreal habits could provide advantages for hatchlings to test differences in escaping
tactics from predators (Higham et al. 2001). Arboreal habitat also provides resources
such as food and shelter (Reaney & Whiting 2003). Hatchlings were observed to feed
on Gecko gecko (PIT tag ID 64E4218 and 64D4C0E) which are commonly on trees in
Komodo island (Auffenberg 1980). Unfortunately, this study could not determine how
long the hatchlings spent their life as being arboreal. Observations from KNP rangers
suggest that hatchlings could lead an arboreal life for up to five years.

Even thought juveniles were terrestrial, three out of six juveniles (SVL < 60
cm) were found occasionally on trees for overnight shelter. Auffenberg (1981)
reported a similar arboreal characteristic on juveniles less than 70 cm in SVL.
Arboreality in juvenile of other terrestrial Varanid species were also reported in V.
doreamus (Bohme et al. 2004) and V. salvator (Gaulke & Horn 2004).

The rate and distance moved by hatchlings within their natal valley was
relatively slow and small compared to juveniles, suggesting that this early dispersal
phase was not particularly important for the overall pattern of dispersal from natal
sites. Movements in hatchlings were shorter than in juveniles. Mean juvenile daily
movement was four times larger than that of hatchlings, but six times smaller than
adults (Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). As reported by Perry and Garland (2001), terrestrial
lizards have larger movement and activity area size than arboreal individuals. In
contrast, Pough et al (2001) noted that arboreal reptiles have a low movement pattern.
King and Green (1999) noted that arboreal monitors such as V candolineatus and V.
brevicauda showed a similar characteristics to Komodo dragons.
 46

Movement in juvenile reptiles increase with age (McMaster & Herman 2000).
The study indicated that the larger the animal, the larger the daily movement and the
longer the movement. Sastrawan and Ciofi (2002) reported similarity in adult male
and adult female Komodo dragons. Similar patterns in other species reptiles were also
reported, such as in arboreal snakes (Fitzgerald et.al 2002; Pearson et al. 2005).

Many authors defined activity areas as a portion of a particular area used

during a defined period of time and will expand as over an extended period of time
(King & Green 1999; Thompson et al. 2002). There was size variation in activity areas
between hatchlings and juveniles. Juvenile mean activity areas were eight times larger
than those of hatchlings were.

This study also suggested that juveniles were able to explore and expand their
foraging areas better than hatchlings, which had to familiarize with their new
environment after emergence. Activity area size increased as Komodo dragons grew
older. Average adult activity area is 19 times larger than in juveniles (see also
Auffenberg 1981; Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). Smith et al. (1999) reported that the adult
Angonoka turtle Geochelone yniphora has a larger activity area size compared to
juveniles. According to Pough et al. (2001) many authors reported a positive
correlation between activity area size and body size in many species of reptiles.
Christian and Waldschmidt (1984) demonstrated that the lizard’s body size and sex
were significantly correlated to size of activity area. Perry and Garland (2002) also
demonstrated that activity area is correlated with body size in different species of
lizards.

According to this study, both hatchlings and juveniles had small core activity
areas. Komodo dragons used core areas as shelter sites rather than for foraging. Small
core area sizes were also reported for the Massasauga (Johnson 2000). In hatchling
Komodo dragons, the small size of the core area was probably due to less active
behavior in this age class as far as exploration of their new environment concerned.
Yet, juveniles preferred particular spots suitable to their needs. Although juveniles
moved away from their overnight shelter, they returned to their shelter in the
afternoon. Nevertheless, some juveniles remained at the same overnight shelter for a
 47

few days (e.g. 639E332, and 63D9C4B). However, many authors reported that there is
a significant correlation between age or sex class, activity and core area in other
reptile species, such as snakes and turtles (e.g. Melville & Swain 1999; Piepgrass &
Lang 2000; Whitaker & Shine 2003). King and Green (1999) suggested that core
activity areas varied seasonally. In this study, however, it was not possible to
investigate seasonal movements and seasonal activity areas.

The importance of dispersal area for hatchlings is determined by the use of

specific tree species during their early natal dispersal. For juveniles, the importance of
their foraging area is highlighted by the 100% MCP overlap. These overlapping
activity areas indicated that these areas provided sufficient resources that are probably
shared by neighboring juveniles. Even thought there were some overlaps in activity
areas among juveniles, there was no evidence of territoriality. Juveniles were solitary
as none were found on the same tree at one time.

As discussed previously in this chapter, it was shown that hatchlings remained

arboreal during the first stage of their life. Most hatchling activities were carried out
on a tree rather than on the ground. Hatchlings descended to the ground only to move
to another tree even when tree canopy could provide a pathway for travel. Auffenberg
(1981) noted that hatchling Komodo dragons were able to take a leap from branch to
branch. During this study, two hatchlings (64D4C0E and 63DFB2A) were observed to
move between trees using aerial paths, when canopies connected to each other.
Fitzgerald et al. (2002) reported arboreal snakes to move preferentially on the ground.
According to the author, canopy structure (especially physical connectivity between
branches of adjacent trees) was not an important constraint to movement patterns.

Both hatchlings and juveniles used trees as shelter. However, hatchlings

showed a wider selection of tree species for sheltering than did juveniles (15 versus 9
tree species). A similar pattern was described for an arboreal phyton Morelia spilota
in Australia (Pearson et al. 2005). Radio-telemetry suggested that juvenile Komodo
dragons preferred to stay on bigger and higher trees than those chosen by hatchlings.
This probably indicated that juveniles selected particular sites in relation to their body
 48

size. Auffenberg (1981) described that since vegetation could limit the vision of adult
Komodo dragons, it was important for small Komodo dragons to hide from the adults.

Besides using the Tamarind tree, hatchlings were often found hiding on the
Gebang tree (Corypa utan). Live Gebang trees contain dead branches at the base of
their trunks that provide cover for hatchlings to hide, while dead Gebang tree provide
holes at relatively high elevations above that ground. Blazquez and Rodriguez-Estrella
(2001) in their study of Spiny-tailed iguanas, Ctenosaura hemilopha, reported that
selected trees could allow hatchlings and juveniles to take shelter, to feed, basking in
the morning, and minimize the risk of predation.

In their early life stage, Komodo dragon showed their tendency to discover
their new environments in order to find suitable and safest space from predators.
Exploration was demonstrated by the increasing in size of movement and activity
areas along with their age. McMaster and Herman (2000) documented that along with
increasing of age, movement in juvenile reptiles become larger. Greenwood and
Swingland (1984) noted that animals are out of their natal sites to exploit available
resources. Immature Komodo dragons demonstrated their requirements of hidden
places to avoid conflict with their conspecific or other predators, including adults, as
noted by Mattison (1992) that mortality in lizards is highest during the early phase of
their life because they are more vulnerable to predation. Further, long-term and
comprehensive studies are important to investigate detail patterns in spatial use during
early life stage of Komodo dragons.
 CHAPTER V

ASSESSING LONG DISTANCE MOVEMENT

OF HATCHLING AND JUVENILE KOMODO DRAGONS

5.1 INTRODUCTION

Movement of individuals through their habitat is a key process underpinning many

population processes and in particular gene flow. Movements underpinning gene flow
are typically classified as dispersal (Bohonak 1999). Dispersal is one of the most
essential fitness events in the lives of most individual animals and in turn for
important processes affecting the ecology and evolution of populations and of the
most important part of conservation studies of endangered animal (Greenwood 1978;
1980; Koenig et al. 1996).

There are three critical mechanisms for dispersal: (1) leaving the natal site
(natal dispersal), (2) dispersing in terms of accession to breeding site (breeding
dispersal), and (3) settling into a new home range (immigration) (Lebreton et al.
2003). Natal dispersal is the movement of individuals from their place of birth to their
first breeding location (Greenwood 1980). According to Pough et al. (2001) hatchling
reptiles move out of their natal areas to find suitable patches of habitat that are not
already occupied by larger conspecifics. This allows access to specific resources and
avoids cannibalism by adults. Greenwood (1980) also defined breeding dispersal as
the movement of individuals between successive breeding sites, either within a
breeding season or between breeding seasons. Bancroft and Smith (2005)
demonstrated how movement into a new home range was correlated with a specific
dispersal mechanism.
 50

Dispersal is an essential key process that affects extended population structure,

dynamics and gene flow (Blouin-Demers & Weatherhead 2002; Bowman et al. 2002;
Bullock 2002; Hanski 1999). In term of metapopulation dynamics, movement among
sub-populations is a key factor to survival, recruitment, emigration and immigration in
sub-populations (Drake & Alisauskas 2004). Dispersal is also important for the
evolutionary processes of the species (Lenormand 2002).

Dispersal can also play an important role in the behavior and social systems of
animals (Wolff 1999). Caro (1994) and Gompper (1996) suggested that dispersal
could also contribute to increased foraging success and thus decreased competition
among males. Female breeding dispersal is related to mate choice in order to improve
mate quality and locate resources that facilitate offspring fitness (Otter & Ratcliffe
1996).

Moving animals may contribute new genes to populations. Gene flow is

strictly affected by movements of genes within or between populations (Ciofi 2002).
Lenormand (2002) described that movement affects patterns in gene flow and the
divergence of alleles. Movement of adult Black Rat Snakes was suggested as
contribution to the out-breeding mechanism (Blouin-Demers & Weatherhead 2002).
Drake and Alisauskus (2004) reported dispersal could contribute to the gene flow
among sub-populations. Gompper et al. (1998) demonstrated that dispersal could
influence genetic relationships amongst individuals of a social carnivore. Storz (2005)
reported that trait diversification in great tits reflects the effects of dispersal and
spatial selection.

The absence of gene flow, on the other hand, increases inbreeding and genetic
drift and, in small populations, the probability of extinction (Konuma et al. 2000;
Madsen et al. 1996). Low genetic variability is generally correlated with inbreeding.
Rosenfield and Bielefeld (1992) reported a relationship between low natal dispersal
and high inbreeding incidence in Cooper’s hawk. Inbreeding can cause severe low
fitness for small populations (Lande 1998).
 51

Site fidelity is often characterized by events of philopatry (Reed & Oring

1993). Variability in site fidelity is influenced by habitat, resource distribution and
includes mating and parental care systems (Emlen & Oring 1977; Powell 1989). The
interaction of movement patterns and landscape features affects individual space-use,
population dynamics and dispersion, gene flow, and the redistribution of nutrients and
other materials (Johnson et al. 1992).

To date, there has been no detailed study on the dispersal capacity of Komodo
dragon (Auffenberg & Auffenberg 2002; Sastrawan & Ciofi 2002). The objective of
this study is to investigate the dispersal capacity in immature Komodo Dragons (i.e.
hatchlings and juveniles). Sutherland et al. (2000) suggested that movement from the
natal site in the early life stage of an animal is important to the processes of
demography, population dispersion, colonization, and gene flow. As parental care is
rare on reptiles, it is suggested that post-natal or early life-phase dispersal should be
common (Olson & Shine 2003; Shine 1988).

This study aimed at measuring the movement capacity of hatchling and

juvenile Komodo dragons at two different spatial scales that are thought to contribute
to gene flow among;
1) Movement between adjacent valleys within islands
2) Movement between adjacent islands.

5.2 MATERIALS AND METHODS

5.2.1 Study Sites and Capture Technique

The study was conducted over 10 sites across four islands in Komodo National Park.
These four islands encompass the extant distribution of this species within Komodo
National Park and include populations from Komodo (393.4 km2), Rinca (278.0 km2),
Gili Motang (10.3 km2) and Nusa Kode (referred to as Gili Dasami) (9.6 km2). Study
site description and area size of selected study sites and mark-recapture techniques
were described in Chapter III.
 52

Dispersal in animal can be measured using the dispersal rate (number of

dispersers leaving their natal territory) and the expected distance moved by each
disperser (Sutherland et al. 2000). The extent of gene flow between populations can be
measured by means of movement data as a direct method or indirectly method in by
using genetic markers (Blouin-Demers & Weatherhead 2002). Direct assessment of
movements among populations is a valid approach for the interpretation of gene flow
in the ecological context (Bohonak 1999; 2002; Bossart & Prowel 1998).

Mark recapture is the most effective way to measure population parameters

(Seber 1982). This method is also useful to obtain data on movement and population
dynamics in animals (Claussen et al. 1997; Lancia et al. 1996; Lebreton et al. 2003;
White & Clark 1996). Several authors have used mark recapture to measure
movement in animals (e.g. Clobert et al. 2000; Limpus & Walter 1980; Magnusson
1979). A limitation of this method is that movements within and among populations
vary in space and time (Schwartz & Arnason 1996) and detailed information on
animal movement, such as frequency of movement, cannot be assessed. In practical,
mark recapture methods require individual marking (Lancia et al. 1996). Koenig et al
(1992) suggested that tagging using passive integrated transponders (PITs) is the most
efficient method in mark recapture studies to investigate dispersal mechanism.

During the study period a total of 149 hatchlings and 304 juveniles were
captured and tagged (Table 5.1). Within three years of study, 1 hatchling and 76
juveniles were recaptured in the subsequent years. To increase the sample size for
hatchlings, data on 1 recaptured hatchling from March 2006 was added. These
recapture data were then analyzed for distance of movements (see below).

Table 5.1 Total number of tagged animals for each year.

Year Hatchling Juvenile

2003 51 131
2004 6 87
2005 92 86
Total 149 304
 53

5.2.2 Data Analysis

Measures of dispersal capacity of hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons were

obtained by analyzing daily, annual, farthest daily, and farthest annual movements of
animal. Daily movement (distance travelled by animal in a day) was calculated from
Within Trip Recapture / Resight (WTR) data which was taken during the trapping
session in one location. Annual movement (mean annual distance travelled by animal)
was calculated as the mean of distance between the consecutive annual capture
positions during the mark-recapture period (2003-2005). Farthest daily and farthest
annual movement was calculated as the distance between the first locations of
captured with the farthest location of recaptured.

To measure the influence of terrestrial barriers on movement, geographical

barriers were identified and scored depending on their potential effect on animal
movement. Several measurements were taken on map of the Komodo National Park
(BAKOSURTANAL 2000) as follow; elevation of the nearest highest peak elevation
to the edge of the valley (h), distance to the nearest highest peak from edge of the
valley (d), and degree of slope (s). Edge of the valley was depicted virtually by
creating a poly-line along the elevation contour lines of 62.5 m on the map. Random
points were placed along the virtual edge line using the Ecological Methodology
computer program (Krebs 2002; see Krebs 1999). The number of points is a result of
the total length of the virtual edge line (km) divided by 1 km (for example, total length
of virtual edge line for Loh Sebita was 20.1 km, giving a total of 20 random points).
Three random bearings between 0-180° were picked from each random point to
measure each parameter of the barrier mentioned above. Along the bearing line, the
nearest highest peak (h) and the distance (d) to the virtual edge line was taken.
Degree of slope (s) was ranked between 1 – 10, which was calculated by dividing the
highest peak elevation by the distance to the highest peak and multiplied by α , where
α value is 10 (Equation 5.1). Vegetation type was scored as 1 (closed forest), 2 (open
forest), and 3 (savannah). Area size was calculated as the size of the valley by creating
polygon along the elevation contour lines of 2.5 m and coastal line (0 m) on the map.
 54

h
s= ×α (Equation 5.1)
d

To measure influence of marine barriers distance between islands was

measured. Similar technique as employed to measure terrestrial barrier was employed
also to measure marine barriers. A number of random points were placed along coastal
line (0 m) on topographical map of the Komodo National Park (BAKOSURTANAL
2000). To obtain the number of random points, the total length of coastal line (island
boundary) divided by 10 km. From each random point distance to the nearest adjacent
island was measured. All distance of movements and barriers scaling were calculated
using Animal Movement program (Hooge et al. 1999) and X Tools extension of Arc
View 3.2. (ESRI).

5.2.3 Statistical Analysis

Prior to analysis all data were log transformed (Sutherland et al. 2000) to meet the
assumption of parametric tests (Zar 1999). Log transformed data that did not meet the
assumptions was statistically analyzed using nonparametric statistical procedures. All
data is presented in tables and graphs of the means and standard error of the mean
(SEM) of back-log transformed data. The Chi square test was used to determine
differences among slope degree between valleys (King & Gurnell 2005; Rheaney &
Whiting 2003). Paired T-tests was used to determine differences in distance of
movement between WTR data and annual mark recapture data. Pearson correlation
test was used to determine relationship between distances of movement with the size
of the valley. For all statistical tests, significance was inferred at P < 0.05.
 Figure 5.1
Frequency (%) Frequency (%) Frequency (%)

0
5
10
15
20
25

0
5
10
15
20
25
0
10
20
30
40
50
60

< < <

c
1 0 1 00 10 10 0

b
10 10 0
a

0- 0- 0-
2 0 2 00 20 200 20 200
0- 0- 0-
3 0 3 00 30 300 30 300
0- 0- 0-
4 0 4 00 40 400 40 400
0- 0- 0-
5 0 5 00 50 500 50 500
0- 0- 0-
6 0 6 00 60 600 60 600
0- 0- 0-

movement for juvenile (b, c).

7 0 7 00 70 700 70 700
0- 0- 0-
8 0 8 00 80 800 80 800
0 0-
90 90 0
90 -9 0 90 -90
0- 0 0 0 0- 0
1 0 10 10 -10 10 10
0 0 00 00 00 00 00
Distance (m)

Distance (m)
11 -11

Distance (m)
1 1 - 11 1 1 -1 1
0 0 00 00 00 00 0 0
1 2 - 12 12 -12 1 2 -1 2
0 0 00 00 00 00 0 0
1 3 - 13 13 -13 1 3 -1 3
0 0 00 00 00 00 0 0
1 4 - 14 14 -14 1 4 -1 4
0 0 00 00 00 00 0 0
-1 -1 -1
50 50 50
>1 0 >1 0 >1 0
50 50 50
0 0 0

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

55
 56

5.3 RESULTS

The study showed a low number of recapture events for hatchlings. From the total of
149 tagged hatchlings only two hatchlings were recaptured. One hatchling of 2004
was recaptured in 2005 at the same location of its first capture in Loh Baru, Rinca.
Another hatchling was recaptured a year (March 2006) after its emergence in 2005
approximately 1500 m from its initial capture location in Loh Buaya, Rinca (Figure
5.1a). On the contrary, juveniles showed a higher degree of recapture than hatchlings.
From a total of 304 juveniles tagged, 74 of them were annually recaptured during the
study period. Most juveniles displayed a very short distance of movement (< 100 m;
Figure 5.1b, 5.1c). Twenty-two (28.95 %) individual juveniles were recaptured within
the same locations of their first captured.

Both hatchlings and juveniles showed no significant difference between daily

and annual movement from WTR data and annual recapture data, respectively, (Paired
T test; t 1,75 = -0.19, p = 0.85) (Table 5.2). However, there was a significant difference
between farthest daily movement and farthest annual movement (Paired T test; t 1,75 =
2.05, p = 0.04) (Table 5.2). Annual distance and farthest annual movement in
juveniles showed a significant differences among valleys (Chi square test; x2 = 593.33,
p ≤ 0.01 and x2 = 1029.01, p ≤ 0.01) and between islands (Chi square test; x2 =
36006.11, p ≤ 0.01 and x2 = 53528.18, p ≤ 0.01) (Table 5.2). There was no record of
movements between adjacent valleys within island and neither for between adjacent
islands.

Slope degree was negatively correlated with the size of the valley and the
nearest peak elevation (Pearson correlation test; r = -0.75, p ≤ 0.01 and 0.66, p ≤ 0.01)
(Table 5.3). On the other hand, slope degree was not significantly different among
valleys (Chi square test; x2 = 6.18, p ≤ 0.52) (Table 5.3). Distance of daily movement
and farthest daily movement from WTR data during trapping session showed a
significant correlation with area (valley) size (Pearson correlation test; r = 0.32, p ≤
0.01 and r = 0.41, p ≤ 0.01) in juveniles. There was also a significant correlation
between distance annual movement and area size (Pearson correlation test; r = -0.12, p
 57

≤ 0.01) and between farthest annual movement and area size (Pearson correlation test;
r = 0.34, p = 0.02). Distance in annual movement and farthest annual movement
showed a significant negative correlation with slope degree (Pearson correlation test; r
= -0.399, p ≤ 0.01, and r = -0.399, p ≤ 0.01, respectively). In contrast, both annual
movement and farthest annual movement distance were not significantly correlated
with vegetation types (Pearson correlation test; r = 0.07, p ≤ 0.63, and r = 0.16, p =
0.30).

Distance to the nearest island was significantly different among islands (Chi
square test; x2 = 14036.88, p ≤ 0.001) and significantly correlated with size of the
island (Pearson correlation test; r = 0.90, p ≤ 0.01) (Table 5.5). Daily and farthest
daily movement was significantly correlated with size of the island (Pearson
correlation test; r = 0.88, p ≤ 0.01 and r = -1.00, p ≤ 0.01). There was also a significant
correlation between daily and distance between island (Pearson correlation test; r =
0.61, p ≤ 0.01) and between farthest daily and the distance (Pearson correlation test; r
= 0.95, p ≤ 0.01). Annual and farthest annual movement were showed a negative
significant correlations with both size of island and distance between island (Pearson
correlation test; r = -0.99, p ≤ 0.01, r = -0.79, p ≤ 0.01, r = -1.00, p ≤ 0.01, and r = -
0.88, p ≤ 0.01, respectively).

5.4 DISCUSSION

Many authors define dispersal as movement away from one location to another
location, being it to move away from natal sites, to look for suitable breeding
opportunities, to find an unoccupied habitat, or to either avoid a conflict or
competition with other conspecifics (van Dyck & Baguette 2005; Grant 1978;
Greenwood 1980). In this study, dispersal was defined as movement of young
Komodo dragons to the adjacent valleys or adjacent islands in term of accession of
gene flow exchange between local populations. The aim of this study was to measure
movement patterns and site fidelity in the early life stages of Komodo dragons. Based
on three years of mark recapture data, this study has documented the first information
on dispersal ability of Komodo dragons during early life stages. In general, movement
 58

in juveniles was influenced by spatial characteristics, i.e. topographical setting and

size of the valley.

Table 5.2 Distance of movement of juvenile Komodo dragons (m).

ISLAND / Farthest Farthest

Daily Annual
Location Daily annual
KOMODO 368.26 714.33 579.78 476.63
Loh Sebita 916.25 658.75 873.86 1185.77
Loh Liang 967.92 862.33 577.74 753.88
Loh Lawi 1129.45 761.73 507.67 594.36
Loh Wau 461.00 343.80 419.69 344.25
RINCA 389.81 629.20 650.93 540.95
Loh Buaya 882.14 617.95 838.41 1008.86
Loh Baru 1013.29 756.33 746.33 778.76
Loh Tongker 594.00 432.14 1120.69 1330.54
Loh Dasami 594.00 432.14 469.44 475.45
Gili Motang 225.62 555.75 563.29 702.62

Table 5.3 Topographical barrier’s scores of each study area.

Distance to
Area Size Nearest Slope Vegetation
Location the nearest
(km2) Peak (m) degree type
peak (m)
Loh Sebita 5.81 181.24 889.93 4.33 2.82
Loh Liang 8.94 181.24 889.93 4.33 2.82
Loh Lawi 10.03 231.82 954.73 3.46 2.61
Loh Wau 0.83 301.67 909.27 9.11 2.60
Loh Buaya 5.50 126.81 913.46 3.61 2.78
Loh Baru 5.48 253.11 597.82 7.84 2.12
Loh Tongker 2.64 272.10 533.67 6.74 2.14
Loh Dasami 3.54 326.76 830.43 5.22 1.00
TOTAL/MEAN 5.35 234.34 814.90 5.58 2.36

Table 5.4 Distance between islands in Komodo National Park

Area size Mean distance to

Island
(km2) nearest island (m)
Komodo 311.59 12981.43
Padar 14.09 5012.00
Rinca 204.78 4670.50
Nusa Kode 7.33 1206.66
Gili Dasami 9.48 3576.67
 59

Both hatchlings and juveniles displayed low degrees of long distance

movement enabling them to cross into other valleys or among islands. Indeed, due to
low number of recaptures, it was difficult to measure movement capacity of hatchlings
in terms of their natal dispersal. The mark recapture method used in this study may
have limitations and underestimate records on dispersal events. Previous studies on
dispersal applying mark-recapture methods have reported similar results (Roper et al.
2003).

During the study, there was no record of within trip recapture or resight on
hatchlings, thus daily movement of hatchlings could not estimated. No captured
hatchling were recaptured nor even resighted after captured, either from nest or from
traps, during the mark-recapture study session. This study showed a low degree of
recapture opportunities for hatchlings. This might be due to arboreal tendency of
hatchlings and their tendency to stay in the same tree for a long period of time
(approximately 9 days; see chapter IV).

After a year, one hatchling was recorded did not move at all from its first
capture location. This hatchling was recaptured at the same location one year after its
first capture. In contrast, another hatchling displayed long distance movement during
the first year of its life. Radiotracked hatchlings (see chapter IV) displayed a relatively
slow and short distance movement during their first month after emergence. However,
it is difficult to conclude that hatchling Komodo dragons exhibit either site fidelity or
long distance natal dispersal during their early stage of life.

During their early life stage, Komodo dragons exhibit poor long distance
movement ability. Juveniles did not move more than 2000 m, either for daily
movement or for annual movement, and there was no record of any movement to
adjacent valleys, or to adjacent islands. In contrast, most juveniles displayed short
distance movement (<500 m). This result is similar to short distance dispersal pattern
in juveniles of the Tasmanian Snow skink (Niveoscincus microlepidotus) (Olsson &
Shine 2003). Sutherland et al. (2000) documented that dispersal in juvenile birds and
mammals often involve short distance movement, while long distance was
uncommon.
 60

This study suggests that movement in hatchlings and juveniles to adjacent

valleys was limited by topographical settings of the valleys (table 5.4); i.e. high degree
of slope. Radiotelemetry data suggested that juveniles did not cross hills between
valleys during the study (Chapter IV). It was evident that landscape features, such as
mountain slope may strongly influence movements in early life stage of the species.
Olsson and Shine (2003) suggested that site preferences might influence neonates to
be less dispersed. Dahl and Willebrand (2005) reported that the philopatry pattern was
related to the low natal dispersal and high degree of adult site fidelity.

During the three years of the study, there was no evidence of juvenile Komodo
dragon dispersing to adjacent islands. Even though Komodo dragons are able to swim,
the ocean may be a main geographical barrier preventing dispersal between adjacent
islands (Ciofi 2002). Manel et al. (2003) suggested that landscape features, i.e.
mountains, stream, and ocean, might influence the pattern of gene flow and population
structure.

Dispersal is influenced by propensity of dispersers (Kawecki & Holt 2002) and

distances in dispersal are influenced by cost of dispersal, i.e. increase of mortality
(Roze & Rousett 2005). Lenormand (2002) suggested that dispersal might affect the
offspring’s survival in nature, for instance because of maladaptive mechanism of the
individual to the new environment. Sarno et al. (2003) suggested that dispersal in
juvenile could increase the mortality rate via adult predation. Yet, Waser (1996)
suggested that variation in cost and benefit or dispersal were influenced by a variety
factors, i.e. social behaviour, fitness effect of dispersal, and intra-sexual conflicts.

Extensive movement in Black rate snakes was suggested to have a correlation

with out-breeding opportunity (Blouin-Demers & Weatherhead 2002). Long distance
movement is critical for exchanging genetic information (Trakhtenbrot et al. 2005).
However, based on this study, juvenile Komodo dragons displayed a tendency to site
fidelity and suggested reduced out-breeding opportunities when they reach for adult.
Hadany et al. (2004) noted that high fitness animal show their tendency to settle to
their natal site and might be increased the potential for inbreeding when they reached
reproductive maturity.
 61

In addition, this study suggested that movement and fidelity in hatchling and
juvenile Komodo dragons may have an implication to the gene flow. Ciofi (2002)
described genetic variability among island populations for Komodo dragon. High
degrees of similarity were found between Rinca and nearby islands (Nusa Kode and
west coast of Flores) whereas, populations from Komodo and Gili Motang showed
significant differentiation from other island populations.

Decreases in genetic variability may relate to population isolation due to

increase in spatial distance (Lensen et al. 2005). Kawecki and Holt (2002) noted that
low immigration would decrease population sustainability. Genetic similarity in small
populations could happen if dispersal is rare (Gomppers 1998). Several reproductive
and physiological deficiencies in small populations may result from an increase in the
level of inbreeding and low genetic variability and in turn affect population viability
(Ciofi et al. 2002). Genetic variability can be maintained with at least one disperser
per generation (Mills & Allendrof 1996). However, the current population size of the
Komodo dragons might not be adequate to maintain genetic variation (Ciofi &
Bruford 1999).

This species is characterized by a long history of isolation by geographical

barriers with a high degree of genetic distinctiveness and a significantly low level of
gene exchange with other subpopulations and may retain the potential to develop
adaptation to distinct environmental condition (Ciofi 2002). However, further studies
are required to investigate if hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons adopt natal
philopatry and do not disperse.
 CHAPTER VI

GENERAL DISCUSSION

6.1 GENERAL DISCUSSION

Successful biological conservation requires are to understand patterns and processes in

spatial ecology of the species (Collinge 2001). Patterns in dispersion and use of space
by species are critically linked to how managers decide management tactics (Daltrop
et al. 2000). Studies on spatial and habitat use could provide useful information for the
conservation strategies of endangered species (McDaniel et al. 2000).

An important finding from this study was that, during the early stage of their
life, Komodo dragons have small activity areas with a high degree of overlap, and do
not move long distances. Hatchlings displayed a linear fashion of movement from
their nest that appeared to underpin a deliberate type of dispersal behavior to move as
far as possible from their nesting sites. Juveniles, in turn, displayed their ability to
explore their environment and occupied larger areas than hatchlings. Movement in
hatchlings and juveniles are important in term of finding suitable habitat to avoid
competition with larger conspecifics, expanding their distribution and maintain
genetic variability of the population (Lebreton et al. 2003; Pough et al. 2001; Sarno et
al. 2003; Sutherland 2000; Trakhtenbrot et al. 2005).

Forest coverage plays an important role for both hatchling and juvenile
Komodo dragons as shown by the extensive use of arboreal habitats. Both hatchling
and juvenile Komodo dragons displayed their preference for a particular tree (i.e.
Tamarindus indica) and particular terrestrial setting (i.e. rock crevices) for shelter.
This tendency showed the importance of trees during their early life-stage particularly
 63

in avoiding cannibalism by larger Komodo dragons. Webb and Shine (1997)

documented that understanding spatial and habitat requirements in reptiles could assist
managers in determining their vulnerability to disturbances.

Based on mark-recapture data, this study showed evidence of low degree of

long distance movement by young Komodo dragons. There was no record of either
hatchling or juvenile performing long distance movements to the adjacent valleys, or
to adjacent islands. Movement in Komodo dragons, particularly young, was
constrained by landscape features. This, in turn, limited exchanges between local
populations would decrease survival probability of small and isolated population.

Brooker et al. (1999) suggested that survival probability in small populations

and isolated subpopulations is dependent on their ability to disperse. Dispersal is
critically important for species conservation in relation to the impact of natural and
human disturbances (Trakhtenbrot et al. 2005). Ciofi and de Boer (2004) documented
declines in distribution and population density of Komodo dragons during the last
three decades (Auffenberg 1981).

Given their limited dispersal abilities, this age class of Komodo dragons are in
a precarious situation, and vulnerable to both natural and anthropic threats. Ciofi
(2002) mentioned that potential natural threats included active volcanoes adjacent to
the habitat. Ciofi and de Boer (2004) noted that decline in the extant population of
Komodo dragons was influenced by habitat fragmentation and poaching activities. It
has been documented that natural and anthropogenic factors are the major causes of
species extinction within last decades (Kull et al. 2006).

6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

Dispersal in animals plays an important role in their population dynamics and genetic
variability (Trakhtenbrot et al. 2005; Grant 1978). Dispersal was suggested as a
mechanism to maintain small populations and stabilized the overall population
through recolonization and as a source of genetic variability (Reed et al. 1998).
Blouin-Demers and Weatherhead (2002) described how movements had a significant
 64

impact to the gene flow mechanism in black rat snakes (Elaphe obsoleta) which was
represented by the mating system between male and females from different
subpopulations.

The absence of dispersal may put small populations at risk of local extinction
due to inbreeding depression and genetic drift (Madsen et al. 1996; Konuma et al.
2000). Limited inter-island dispersal over long periods of time may result in insular
alteration (Sinclair 1998). Losos (2004) documented that the adaptation of the Greater
Antillean anoles was correlated to isolation by insular and within island mechanisms.
Ciofi (2002) has documented the genotypic differences among insular populations,
particularly for the most isolated island, Gili Motang. This sub-population is the most
severely at risk (Jessop et al. 2006 in press). Limitation in genetic variation due to
insular adaptation has the potential to harm the extant populations of Komodo dragons
which are declining due to natural or anthropic causes.

Dispersal information can be used to develop biological population models and

direct conservation management decisions, i.e in forecasting rate of animal spread,
reintroduction strategies, or maintaining adequate genetic and population viability
(Trakhtenbrot et al. 2005). The declining status of Komodo dragons makes it
appropriate to undertake intervention measures by the park management. Since the
dispersal ability of this species during their early life stage is limited, a feasible option
to manage the population should be considered before the population becomes too
small for conservation options. Protecting remain suitable habitats is the most
important aspect for the conservation of this species (Buij et al. 2002; Galanti et al.
2005 in press; Primack 2004).

Augmentation of this endangered species could be considered by managers as

one of conservation strategies in order to maintain genetic variability and population
viability. However, augmentation might be considered as a good option only when
limiting factors can be addressed. Tweed et al. (2003) suggested that species
augmentation should consider following factors; 1) location of the historical range of
the species; 2) habitat quality and food resource availability; 3) long term security and
access for further monitoring and research.
 65

Finally, further long-term studies are needed to address the lack of detailed
knowledge on the spatial ecology of this vulnerable species. Detailed ecological
studies may provide a critical basis for management and conservation planning (Webb
& Shine 1977). In addition, dispersal models can be used to predict which group or
populations is likely to be the most vulnerable to disturbance and allow managers to
test the merits of alternative habitat conservation strategies (Sutherland et al. 2000).
 CHAPTER VII

CONCLUSION

This study has documented that, during their early life stage, Komodo dragons have
small activity areas with a high degree of overlap, and do not move long distances.
There was no record of either hatchlings or juveniles performing a long distance
movement to the adjacent valleys, neither to adjacent islands. Movement in Komodo
dragons, particularly young, was constrained by landscape features.

Hatchlings displayed a linear mode of movement that appeared to underpin a

deliberate type of dispersal mechanism to move as far as possible from their nesting
sites. Juveniles, in turn, displayed an ability to explore their environment and occupied
larger areas as compared to hatchlings. Movement is an important mechanism in
hatchlings and juveniles in terms of finding suitable habitat, so as to avoid competition
with larger conspecifics, expanding their distribution and maintain genetic variability
of the population.

This study also showed that forest coverage plays an important role for both
hatchling and juvenile Komodo dragons. Both hatchling and juvenile Komodo
dragons displayed a preference for open forest with a particular tree (i.e. Tamarindus
indica) and particular terrestrial setting (i.e. rock crevices) as shelter. This showed the
importance of trees during their early life-stage particularly in avoiding cannibalism
by adult Komodo dragons.

Since the dispersal of this species during their early life stage is limited, it may
put the extant population of Komodo dragon at risk of local extinction due to
 67

inbreeding depression and genetic drift. Several feasible options to manage the
population should be considered before the population becomes too small for
conservation options. Protecting remain suitable habitats is the most important aspect
for the conservation of this species. Augmentation of this endangered species could be
considered by managers as one of conservation strategies in order to maintain genetic
variability and population viability. Finally, further long-term studies, especially on
the hatchling and juvenile stages, are needed to address the lack of detailed knowledge
on the spatial ecology of this vulnerable species.
 68

REFERENCES

Auffenberg, K. & Auffenberg, W. 2002. Introduction: The past and now. In Murphy,
J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C. & Walsh, T. (eds.). Komodo dragons:
biology and conservation (zoo and aquarium biology and conservation
series), pp. 1-22. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Auffenberg, W. 1980. The herpetofauna of Komodo, with notes on adjacent areas.

Bulletin of Florida State Museum, Biological Science 25(2): 39-156.

Auffenberg, W. 1981. The Behavioral ecology of the Komodo dragon. Gainesville:

University Florida Press.

BAKOSURTANAL. 2000. Digital topographical map of Komodo National Park,

Indonesia, scale of 1:25.000. Cibinong: Badan Koordinasi Survey Pertanahan
dan Lahan.

Bancroft, J.S. & Smith, M.T. 2005. Dispersal and influences on movement for
Anoplophora glabripennis calculated from individual mark-recapture.
Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 116: 83–92.

Bennet, D. 2002. Diets of Varanus niloticus (Sauria: Varanidae) on the Black Volta
River in Ghana. Journal of Herpetology 36: 116–117.

Bertolucci, C., Leorati, M., Innocenti, A. & Foa, A. 1999. Circannual variations of
lizard circadian activity rhythms in constant darkness. Behavioral Ecology
and Sociobiology 46: 200-209.

Blazquez, M.C. & Rodriguez-Estrella, R. 2001. Winter refuge characteristics of

Spiny-tailed iguanas, Ctenosaura hemilopha, in Baja California Sur, Mexico.
Journal of Arid Environments 49: 593-599.

Blouin-Demers, G. & Weatherhead, P.J. 2002. Implications of movement patterns for

gene flow in black rat snakes (Elaphe obsolete). Canadian Journal of Zoology
80: 1162-1172.

Blumstein, D.T. & Fernandez-Juricic, E. 2004. Editorial: The emergence of

conservation behavior. Conservation Biology 18(5): 1175-1177.

Bohme, W., Philip, K.M. & Ziegler, T. 2004. Varanus doreanus. In Pianka, E.R.,
King, D.R. & King, R.A. (eds.). Varanoid lizards of the world, pp. 168-171.
Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Bohonak, A.J. 1999. Dispersal, gene flow, and population structure. The Quarterly of
Review Biology 74(1): 21-45.
 69

Bohonak, A.J. 2002. IBD (Isolation by Distance): A program for analyses of isolation
by distance. The Journal of Heredity 93(2): 153-154.

Bossart, J.L. & Prowell, D.P. 1998. Genetic estimates of population structure and
gene flow: limitations, lessons, and new directions. Trends in Ecology and
Evolution 13(5): 202.206.

Boudjemadi, K., Lecomte, J. & Clobert, J. 1999. Influence of connectivity on

demography and dispersal in two contrasting habitats: an experimental
approach. Journal of Animal Ecology 68: 1207-1224.

Bowman, J., Jaeger, J.A.G. & Fahrig, L. 2002. Dispersal distance in mammals is
proportional to home range size. Ecology 83(7): 2049-2055.

Boyce, M.S. & McDonald, L. 1999. Relating population to habitat using resource
selection function. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 14: 268-272.

Brill, R.W., Balazs, G.H., Holland, K.N., Chang, R.K.C., Sullivan, S. & George, J.C.
1995. Daily movements, habitat use, and submergence intervals of normal and
tumor bearing juvenile green turtles (Chelonia mydas L.) within foraging area
in the Hawaiian islands. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology
185: 203-218.

Brockelman, W.Y. 1975. Competition, the fitness of offspring, and optimal clutch
size. The American Naturalist 109(970): 677-699.

Brooker, L., Brooker, M. & Cale, P. 1999. Animal dispersal in fragmented habitat:
measuring habitat connectivity, corridor use, and dispersal mortality.
Conservation ecology 3(1): 4.
http://www.consecol.org/vol3/iss1/art4/ [March 3, 2006].

Brown, L. & Downhower, J.F. 1988. Analyses in behavioral ecology: a manual for
lab and field. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, Inc.

Burghardt, G.M., Chiszar, D., Murphy, J.B., Romano Jr., J., Walsh, T. & Manrod, J.
2002. Behavioral complexity, behavioral development, and play. In Murphy,
J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C. & Walsh, T. (eds.). Komodo dragons:
biology and conservation (zoo and aquarium biology and conservation
series), pp. 78–117. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Buij, R., Wich, S.A., Lubis, A.H. & Sterck, E.H.M. 2002. Seasonal movements in the
Sumatran orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus abelii) and consequences for
conservation. Biological Conservation 107: 83-87.

Caley, P. 1997. Movement, activity patterns, and habitat use of feral pigs (Sus scrofa)
in tropical habitat. Wildlife Research 24: 77-87.

Caro, T.M., 1994. Cheetahs of the Serengeti Plains. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
 70

Caughley, G. & Sinclair, A.R.E. 1994. Wildlife ecology and management. London:
Blackwell Science.

Christian, K.A., Corbett, L.K., Green, B. & Weavers, B.W. 1995. Seasonal activity
and energentics of two species of varanid lizards in tropical Australia.
Oecologia 103: 349-357.

Christian, K.A. & Waldschmidt, S. 1984. The relationship between lizard activity
area and body size: reanalysis of the data. Herpetologica 40(1): 68-75.

Christian, K. & Weavers, B. 1994. Analysis of the activity and energetics of the lizard
Varanus rosenbergi. Copeia 2: 289-295.

Ciofi, C. 1999. The Komodo dragon: On a few island of Indonesian Archipelago, the
world’s largest lizard reign supreme. Scientific America.
http://www.sciam.com/1999/0399issue/0399ciofi.html [December 20, 2003].

Ciofi, C. 2002. Conservation Genetics. In Murphy, J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C.

& Walsh, T. (eds.). Komodo dragons: biology and conservation (zoo and
aquarium biology and conservation series), pp. 129-164. Washington:
Smithsonian Institution Press.

Ciofi, C. 2004. Varanus komodoensis.. In Pianka, E.R., King, D.R. & King, R.A.
(eds.). Varanoid Lizards of the world, pp. 197-204. Indianapolis: Indiana
University Press.

Ciofi, C. & Bruford, M.W. 1999. Genetic structure and gene flow among Komodo
dragon poulations inferred by microsatellite loci analysis. Molecular Ecology
8(1): S17-S30.

Ciofi, C., Smith, B.R. & Hutchins, M. 2002. Conservation in situ and ex situ
contributions. In Murphy, J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C. & Walsh, T.
(eds.). Komodo dragons: biology and conservation (zoo and aquarium
biology and conservation series), pp. 129-164. Washington: Smithsonian
Institution Press.

Ciofi, C. & de Boer, M.E. 2004. Distribution and conservation of the Komodo
Monitor (Varanus komodoensis). Herpetological Journal 14: 99-107.

Claussen, D.L., Finkler, M.S., Smith, M.M. 1997. Thread trailing of turtles: methods
for evaluating spatial movements and pathway structure. Canadian Journal of
Zoology 75: 2120-2128.

Clobert, J., Opliger, A., Sorci, G., Ernande, B., Swallow, J.G. & Garland Jr., T. 2000.
Trades off in phenotypic traits: Endurance of birth, growth, survival,
predation, and susceptibility to paratism in a Lizard, Lacerta vivipara.
Functional Ecology 14: 675-684.
 71

Collinge, S.K. 2001. Introduction spatial ecology and biological conservation.

Biological Conservation 100: 1-2.

Dahl, F. & Willebrand, T. 2005: Natal dispersal, adult home ranges and site fidelity
of mountain hares Lepus timidus in the boreal forest of Sweden. Wildlife
Biology 11: 309-317.

Daltrop, D.N.J. & Villani, M.G. 2000. Foundations of spatial ecology: the reinfication
of patches through quantitative description of patterns and pattern repetition.
Entomologica Experimentatlist et Allpicata 96: 119-127.

Saric, J., Jensen, L.J., Ouzounova, R., Rojas, I. & Bork, P. 2005.
Extraction of regulatory gene/protein networks. Bioinformatics 22(6): 645-50.

Dasmann, R.F. 1964. Wildlife biology. New York: John Willey & Sons. Inc.

Drake, K.L. & Alisauskas, R.T. 2004. Breeding dispersal by Ross’e Geese in the
Queen Maud Gulf metapopulation. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation
27(1): 331-341.

Dunn, E.R. 1927. Results of the Douglas Burden expedition to the island of Komodo.
I. Notes on Varanus komodoensis. American Museum Novitiates 286: 1-10.

Dunn, E.R. 1928. Results of the Douglas Burden expedition to the island of Komodo.
V. Observation on habitats and distribution of Varanus komodoensis Ouwen.
American Museum Novitiates 316: 1-10.

van Dyck, H. & Baguette, M. 2005. Dispersal behavior in fragmented habitat: routine
or special movement. Basic and Applied Ecology 6: 534-545.

Emlen, S.T. & Oring, L.W. 1977. Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of
mating systems. Science 197: 214–223.

Ellis, C, 1998. The land of Komodo dragon. Singapore: Times Edition Pte. Ltd.

Elphick, M.J. & Shine, R. 1998. Longterm effects of incubation temperatures on the
morphology and locomotor performance of hatchling lizards (Bassiana
duperreyi, Scincidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 63(3): 429-
447.

ESRI. 1999. ArcView GIS 3.2. Relands: Environmental System Research Institute.

Fitzgerald, M., Shine, R. & Lemckert, F. 2002. Spatial ecology of arboreal snakes
(Hopochepalus stephensii Elapidae) in an eastern Australian forest. Australian
Journal of Ecology 27: 537-545.
 72

Friend, M., Toweill, D.E., Brownell Jr., R. L., Nettless, V.F., Davis, D.S. & Foreyt,
W.J. 1996. Guidelines for proper care and use of wildlife in field research. In
Bookhout, T.A. (ed.). Research and management techniques for wildlife and
habitats. Fifth edition, pp. 96-105. Bethesda: The Wildlife Society.

Funk, D.H. & Sweenwy, B.W. 1990. Electrophoretic analysis of species boundaries
and phylogenetic relationships in some taeniopterygid stoneflies (Plecoptera).
Transactions of the American Entomological Society 116: 727-752.

Funk, W.C., Blouin, M.S., Corn, P.S., Maxell, B.A., Pilliod, D.S., Amish, S. &
Allendorf, F.W. 2005. Population structure of Columbia spotted frogs (Rana
luteiventris) is strongly affected by the landscape. Molecular Ecology 14:
483–496. Doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02426.

Galanti, V., Preatoni, D., Martinoli, A., Wauters, L.A. & Tosi, G. 2005. Space and
habitat use of the African elephant in the Tarangire-Manyara ecosystem,
Tanzania: implications for conservation. Mammalian Biology.
Doi: 10.1016/j.mambio.2005.10.001.

Gans, C. & Pough, F.H. 1982. Biology of the reptilia, volume 13, physiology part D,
physiological ecology. London: Academic Press.

Gardner, R.H., O’Neill, R.V., Turner, M.G. & Dale, V.H. 1989. Quantifying scale-
dependent effects of animal movement with simple percolation model.
Landscape Ecology 3(3/4): 217-227.

Galois, P., Leveille, M., Bouthiller, L., Daigle, C. & Parren, S. 2002. Movement
patterns, activity, and home range of the Eastern Spiny Softshell turtle
(Apalone spinifera) in Northern Lake Champlain, Quebec, Vermont. Journal
of Herpetology 36(3): 402-411.

Gaulke, M. & Horn, Hans-Georg. 2004. Varanus salvator (nominate form). In

Pianka, E.R., King, D.R. & King, R.A. (eds.). Varanoid lizards of the world,
pp. 245-258. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Gibbons, J.W. & Semlitsch, R.D. 1987. Activity patterns. In Seigel, R.A., Collins,
J.T. & Novak, S.S. (eds.). Snakes: ecology and evolutionary biology, pp. 396-
421. New York: Macmillan Publishing.

Gompper, M.E., Gittleman, J.L. & Wayne, R.K. 1998. Dispersal, philopatry, and
genetic relatedness in a social carnivore: comparing males and females.
Molecular Ecology 7: 157-163.

Grant, P.R. 1978. Dispersal in relation to carrying capacity. Proceeding of Natural

Academy of Science, USA 75: 2854-2858.
Green, B., King, D., Braysher, M. & Saim, A. 1990. Thermoregulation, water
turnover and energetics of free-living komodo dragons, Varanus komodoensis.
Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Physiology 99 (1-2): 97-
101.
 73

Greenwood, P.J. 1980. Mating systems, philopatry and dispersal in birds and
mammals. Animal Behavior 28: 1140-1162.

Greenwood, P.J. 1984. Mating systems and the evolutionary consequences of

dispersal. In Swingland, I.R. & Greenwood, P.J. (eds.). The ecology of animal
movement, pp. 116–131. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Greenwood, P.J. & Swingland, I.R. 1984. Animal movement: approaches,

adaptations, and constraints. In Swingland, I.R. & Greenwood, P.J. (eds.). The
ecology of animal movement, pp. 1-6. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Greenwood, P.J. & Harvey, P.H. 1982. The natal and breeding dispersal in birds.
Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 13: 1-21.

Greenwood, P.J., Harvey, P.H. & Perrins, C.M. 1978. Inbreeding and dispersal in the
great tit. Nature 271: 52-54.

Gregory, P.T., Macartney, J.M. & Larsen, K.W. 1987. Spatial patterns and
movements. In Seigel, R.A., Collins, J.T. & Novak, S.S. (eds.). Snakes:
ecology and evolutionary biology, pp. 366-395. New York: Macmillan
publishing.

Goetz, B.G.R. & Thomas, B.W. 1994. Use of annual growth and activity patterns to
assess management procedures for captive tuatara (Sphenodon punctatus).
New Zealand Journal of Zoology 21: 473-485.

Guarino, F. 2001. Diets of a carnivorous lizard, Varanus varius. Wildlife Research

28: 627–630.

Hadany, L., Eshel, I. & Motro, U. 2004. No place like home: competition, dispersal,
and complex adaptation. Journal of Evolution Biology 17: 1328-1336.

Haigen, Xu & Fengxiang, Yang. 1993. Age Classification and growth model of
Phrynocephalus Przewalskii. Ecological Modelling 70(1-2): 127-135.

Heatwole, H. 1976. Reptile ecology. Queensland: University of Queensland Press.

Henderson, P.A. 2003. Practical methods in ecology. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.

Hien, P. 2003. Erster photographischer nachwies von ungewohnlich gefarbten

Varanus komodoensis (Ouwens, 1912) Bei Riung, Flores, Indonesia. Sauria
25(3-9): March 2003.

Higgins, K.F., Oldenmeyer, J.L., Jenkins, K.J., Clambey, G.K. & Harlow, R.F. 1996.
Vegetation sampling & measurement. In Bookhout, T.A. (ed.). Research and
management techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth edition, pp. 567-591.
Bethesda: The Wildlife Society.
 74

Higham, T.E., Davenport, M.S. & Jayne, B.C. 2001. Maneuvering in an arboreal
habitat: the effects of turning angle on the locomotion of three sympatric
ecomorphs of Anolis lizards. The Journal of Experimental Biology 204: 4141–
4155.

Hooge, P.N. & Eichenlaub, W. 1997. Animal movement extension to Arcview,

Version 1.1. Anchorage: Alaska Biological Science Center, U. S. Geological
Survey.

Hooge, P.N., Eichenlaub, W. & Solomon, E. 1999. The Animal Movement Program.
Anchorage: Alaska Biological Science Center, U. S. Geological Survey.

Horn, Hans-Georg. 2004. Varanus salvadorii. In Pianka, E.R., King, D.R. & King,
R.A. (eds.). Varanoid Lizards of the world, pp. 235-243. Indianapolis: Indiana
University Press.

Horn, Hans-Georg & Gaulke, M. 2004. Varanus salvator (subspecies). In Pianka,

E.R., King, D.R. & King, R.A. (eds.). Varanoid lizards of the world, pp. 259-
271. Indianapolis: Indiana Univ. Press.

Husak, J.F. & Fox, S.F. 2003. Spatial organization and the deer enemy phenomenon
in adult female collared lizards, Crotaphytus collaris. Journal of Herpetology
37(1): 211-215.

Ibrahim, A.A. 2002. Activity area, movement patterns, and habitat use of the desert
monitor Varanus griseus, in the Zaranik protected area, North Sinai, Egypt.
African Journal of Herpetology 51(1): 35-45.

James, C.D. 1996. Ecology of the pygmy Goana (Varanus brevicauda) in Spinifex
Grasslands of Central Australia. Australian Journal of Zoology 44: 177-192.

Jenssen, T.A. 2002. Spatial awareness by lizard Anolis crysttellus : why should non
ranging species demonstrated homing behavior ? Herpetologica 58(3): 364-
371.

Jessop, T.J., Sumner, J., Rudiharto, H. Purwandana, D., Imansyah, M.J. & Philips,
J.A. 2004. Study on nest distribution, utilization, and selection by Komodo
dragon, Varanus komodoensis: implication for conservation and management.
Biological Conservation 117: 463-470.

Jessop, T.J., Madsen, T., Ciofi, C., Imansyah, M.J., Purwandana, D., Rudiharto, H.,
Ariefiandy, A., Phillips, J.A. 2006. Island differences in population size
structure and catch per unit effort and their conservation implications for
Komodo dragons. Biological Conservation (Article in press).

Johnson, G. 2000. Spatial ecology of the eastern Massasauga (Sistrurus c. catanatus)

in a New York peatland. Journal of Herpetology 34: 186-192.
 75

Johnson, A.R., Wiens, J.A., Milne, B.T. & Christ, T.O. 1992. Animal movements and
population dynamics in heterogeneous landscapes. Landscape Ecology 7(1):
63-75.

Katajisto, J. & Moilanen, A. 2005. Kernel-based home range method for data with
irregular sampling intervals. Biological Conservation (Article in press).

Kawecki, T.J. & Holt, R.D. 2002. Evolutionary consequences of asymmetric

dispersal Rates. The American Naturalist 160(3): 333-347.

Kenward, R. 1993. Wildlife radio tagging; equipment, field techniques, and data
analysis, third edition. London: Academic Press.

Kernohan, B.J., Millspaugh, J. J., Jenks, J.A. & Naugle, D.E.. 1996. Estimating 24-hr
use patterns in White-tailed Deer from diurnal use. Journal of Environmental
Management 48: 299-303.

Kernohan, B.J., Millspaugh, J.J., Jenks, J.A. & Naugle, D.E. 1998. Use of an adaptive
kernel home-range estimator in a GIS environment to calculate habitat use.
Journal of Environmental Management 53: 83-89.

King, D.R. & Green, B. 1999. Goannas: the biology of Varanid lizards. Sydney:
New South Wales Press Ltd.

King, D.R., Pianka, E.R. & Green, B. 2002. Biology, ecology, and evolution. In
Murphy, J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C. & Walsh, T. (eds.). Komodo
dragons: biology and conservation (zoo and aquarium biology and
conservation series), pp. 23–41. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

King, S.R.B. & Gurnell, J. 2005. Habitat use and spatial dynamics of Takhi
introduced to Hustai National Park, Mongolia. Biological Conservation 124:
277–290.

Koenig, W.D., van Vuren, D. & Hooge, P.N. 1996. Detectability, phylopatry, and the
distribution of dispersal distance in vertebrate. Trends in Ecology and
Evolution 11(12): 524-517.

Konuma, A., Tsumura, Y., Lee, C.T., Lee, S.L. & Okuda, T. 2000. Estimation of
gene flow in the tropical-rainforest tree Neobalanocarpus heimii
(Dipterocarpaceae), inferred from paternity analysis. Molecular Ecology 9:
1843–1852.

Krebs, C.J. 1999. Ecological methodology. Second edition. California: Addison-

Wesley Educational Publisher.

Krebbs, C.J. 2002. Ecological Methodology version 6.1: program for ecological
methodology. Second edition (1999). Vancouver: University of British
Columbia.
 76

Kull, T., Kindlmann, P., Hutchings, M.J. & Primack, R.B. 2006. Editorial:
Conservation biology of orchids: Introduction to the special issue. Biological
Conservation 129: 1-3.

Lancia, R.A., Nichols, J.D. & Pollock, K.H. 1996. Estimating the number of animal
in wildlife populations. In Bookhout, T.A. (ed.). Research and management
techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth edition, pp. 215-253. Bethesda: The
Wildlife Society.

Lande, R. 1988. Demographic models of the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis
caurina). Oecologia 75:601-607.

Lande, R. 1988. Genetics and demography in biological conservation. Science 241:

1455-1460.

Langbein, J., Scheibe, K.M., Eichhorn, K., Lindner, U. & Streich, W.J. 1996. An
activity-data-logger for monitoring free-ranging animals. Applied Animal
Behaviour Science 48: 115-124.

Lawson, D., Jensen, H.J. 2006. The species-area relationship and evolution.
http://uk.arxiv.org/abs/q-bio.PE/0412024 [July 20th, 2006].

Lebreton, J.D., Hines, J.E., Pradel, R., Nichols, J.D. & Spendelow, J.A. 2003.
Estimation by capture-recapture of recruitment and dispersal over several
sites. OIKOS 101: 253–264.

Lemm, J.M., Edwards, M.S., Grant, T.D. & Alberts, A.C. 2004. Comparison of
growth and nutritional status of juvenile Komodo monitors (Varanus
komodoensis) maintained on rodent or poultry-based diets. Zoo Biology 23:
239-252.

Lenormand, T. 2002. Gene flow and the limits to natural limits. Trends in Ecology
and Evolution 17: 183-189.

Limpus, C.J. & Walter, D.G. 1980. The growth of immature Green Turtles (Chelonia
mydas) under natural conditions. Herpetologica 36(12): 162-165.

Llewelyn, J., Shine, R. & Webb, J.K. 2005. Thermal regimes and diel activity
patterns of four species of small elapid snakes from south-eastern Australia.
Australian Journal of Zoology 53: 1-8.

Losos, J.B. 2004. Adaptation and Speciation in Greater Antillean Anoles. In

Dieckmann,U., Doebeli, M., Metz, J.A.J. & Tautz, D. (eds.). Adaptive
Speciation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Madsen, T., Stille, B. & Shine, R. 1996. Inbreeding depression in an insolated

population of adders Vipera berus. Biological Conservation 75: 113-118.
 77

Magnusson, W.E. 1979. Dispersal of hatchling crocodiles (Crocodylus porosus)

(Reptilia: Crocodilidae). Journal of Herpetology 13(3): 227-231.

Manel, S., Schwartz, M.K., Luikart, G. & Taberlet, P. 2003. Landscape genetics:
combining landscape ecology and population genetics. Trends in Ecology and
Evolution 18(4): 189-197.

Mathies, T., Felix, A. & Lance, V.A. 2001. Effects of trapping and subsequent short-
term confinement stress on plasma corticosterone in the Brown Treesnake
(Boiga irregularis) on Guam. General and Comparative Endocinology 124:
106–114.

Mattison, C. 1992. Lizards of the World. London: Blandford.

McDaniel, C.J., Crowder, L.B. & Priddy, J.A. 2000. Spatial dynamics of sea turtle
abundance and shrimping intensity in the U. S. Gulf of Mexico. Conservation
Ecology 4(1): 15. http://www.consecol.org/vol4/iss1/art15/ [March 2, 2006].

McMaster, N.L. & Herman, T.B. 2000. Occurrence, habitat selection, and movement
patterns of juvenile Blanding’s Turtle (Emydoidea blandinggii) in Kejimkujik
National Park, Nova Scotia. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 3 (4): 602 –
610.

McNab, B.K. & Auffenberg, W. 1976. The effect of large body size on temperature
regulation of the Komodo dragon, Varanus komodoensis. Comparative
Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Physiology 55(4): 345-350.

McNeil, J.A., Thomas, B.H. & Standing, K.L. 2000. Movement of hatchling
Blanding’s turtles (Emydoidea blandingii) in Nova Scotia in response to
proximinity to open water: a manipulative experiment. Chelonian
Conservation and Biology 3(4): 611-617.

Melville J. & Swain, J. 1999. Home range characteristics of an alpine lizard,

Niveoscincus microlepidotus (Scincidae), on Mt. Wellington, Southern
Tasmania. Wildlife Research 26: 263-270.

Meylan, S., Belliure, J., Clobert, J. & de Fraipont, M. 2002. Stress and body condition
as prenatal and postnatal determinants of dispersal in the common Lizard
(Lacerta vivipara). Hormones and Behavior, 42: 319-326.

Mills, L.S., &. Allendrof, F.W. 1996. The one-migrant-per-generation rule in

conservation and management. Conservation Biology. 10: 1509-1518.

Milne, B.T. 1991. Lessons from applying fractal models to landcape patterns. In
Turner, M.G. & Gardner, R.H (eds.). Quantitative methods in landscape
ecology, pp. 199-235. New York: Springler-Verlag.
 78

Molnar, R.E. 2004. The long and honorable history of monitors and their kin. In
Pianka, E.R., King, D.R. & King, R.A. (eds.). Varanoids of the world, pp. 10-
65. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Monk, K.A., de Fretes, Y. & Reksodiharjo–Lilley, G. 1997. The ecology of Nusa

Tenggara and Maluku. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nams, V.O. 2004a. Fractal version 4.08. Canada: Department of Environmental.

Sciences, NSAC.

Nams, V.O. 2004b. Detecting oriented movement of animals. Animal behaviour

(Article in press).

Nams, V.O. & Bourgeois, M. 2004. Fractal analysis measures habitat use at different
spatial scales: an example with American marten. Canadian Journal of
Zoology 82: 1738-1747.

Nitfield, M.T., Barret, M.W. & Silvy, N. 1996. Wildlife marking techniques. In
Bookhout, T.A. (ed.) Research and management techniques for wildlife and
habitats. Fifth edition, pp. 140-168. Bethesda: The Wildlife Society.

Olupot, W. & Waser, P.M. 2001. Activity patterns, habitat use and mortality risks of
mangabey males living outside social groups. Animal Behavior 61: 1227–
1235.

Olsson, M. & Madsen, T. 2001. Between variations in determination hatchling

survival in the sand lizard, Lacerta agilis. Functional Ecology 15: 443-450.

Olsson, M. & Shine, R. 2003. Female-biased natal and breeding dispersal in an alpine
lizard, Niveoscincus microlepidotus. Journal of Linnean Society 79: 277-283.

Otter, K. & Ratcliffe, L. 1996. Female initiated divorce in a monogamous songbird:

abandoning mates for males of higher quality. Proceedings of the Royal
Society of London B 263: 351-354.

Pallant, J. 2005. SPSS survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using
SPSS for Windows (Version 12). Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

Pavey, C.R., Goodship, N. & Geiser, F. 2003. Home range and spatial organization of
rock-dwelling carnivorous marsupial Pseudantechinus macdonnellensis.
Wildlife Research 30: 135-142.

Pearson, D., Shine, R. & Williams, A. 2005. Spatial ecology of a threatened phyton
(Morelia spilota imbricata) and the effects of anthropogenic habitat change.
Australian Journal of Ecology 30: 261-274.

Pelletier, D., Roos, D. & Cicione, S. 2003. Oceanic survival and movements of wild
and captive-reared immature green turtles (Chelonia mydas) in the Indian
ocean. Aquatic Living Resosurce 16: 35-41.
 79

Pepin, D., Renaud P.C. & Decuq, F. 2006. Identifying activity patterns from activity
counters in ETHOSYS1 collars on red deer. Applied Animal Behaviour
Science 96: 103–114.

Perry, G. & Garland, T. 2002. Lizard home ranges revisitied: effects of sex, body
size, diet, habitat and phylogeny. Ecology 83(7): 1870-1885.

Pet, J.S. & Subijanto, J. 2001. Enforcement and protection of Komodo National Park.
The Nature Conservancy Coastal and Marine Programme Indonesia.

Phillips, J.A. 1995. Movement patterns and density of Varanus albigularis. Journal
of Herpetology 29 (3): 407-416.

Phillips, J.A. & Packard, G.C. 1994. Influence of temperature and moisture on eggs
and embryos of the White-Throated savanna monitor Varanus albigularis:
implication for conservation. Biological Conservation 69(2): 31-136.

PHKA. 2000. 25 years master plan for management Komodo National Park, Book 2:
data and analysis. Jakarta: PHKA, The Nature Conservancy, Manggarai
District Authority.

Piepgras, S.A. & Lang, J.W. 2000. Spatial ecology of Blanding’s turtle in Central
Minnesota. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 3: 589-601.

Pianka, E.R. 1986. Ecology of natural history of desert lizards, analyses of the
ecological niche and community structure. New Jersey: Princeton University
Press.

Pianka, E.R. 1993. The many dimensions of a lizard's ecological niche, Chapter 9. In
Valakos, E.D., Bohme, W., Perez-Mellado, V. & Maragou, P. (eds.).
Lacertids of the Mediterranean Basin, pp. 121-154. Greece: Hellenic
Zoological Society of University of Athens.

Pough, F.H., Andrews, R.M., Cadle,. J.E., Crump, M.L., Savitzky, A.H. & Wells,
K.D. 2001. Herpetology. Second edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Powell, R.A. 1989. Effects of resource productivity, patchiness, and predictability on

mating and dispersal strategies. In Standen, V. & Foley, R.A. (eds.)
Comparative socioecology: the behavioral ecology of humans and other
animals, pp. 101-123. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publishing.

Prahasta, E. 2002. Sistem Informasi Geografis: Tutorial ArcView. Bandung: Penerbit

Informatika.

Primack, R.B. 2004. A primer of conservation biology, third edition. Sunderland:

Sinauer Associates, Inc.
 80

Primack, R.B., Supriatna, J., Indrawan, M. & Kramadibrata, P. 1998. Biologi

Konservasi. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Indonesia.

Qualls, C.P. & Andrews, R.M. 1998. Cold climates and the evolution of viviparity in
reptiles: cold incubation temperatures produce poor-quality offspring in the
lizard Sceloporus virgatus. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 67(3):
353-376.

Qualls, F.J. & Shine, R. 2000. Post-hatchling environment contributes greatly to

phenotypic variation between two populations of the Australian Garden
Skink, Lampropholis guichenoti. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society
71(2): 315-341.

Reed, J.M. & Oring, L.W. 1993. Philopatry, site fidelity, dispersalm and survival of
spotted sandpipers. The Auk 110(3): 541-551.

Reed, J.M., Silbernagle, M.D., Evans, K., Engilis Jr., A. & Oring, L.W. 1998.
Subadult movement patterns of the endangered Hawaiian stilt (Himantopus
mexicanus knudseni). The Auk 115(3): 791-797.

Rheaney, L.T, & Whiting, M.J. 2003. Picking a tree: habitat use by the tree agama,
Acanthocercus atricollis atricollis, in South Africa. African Zoology 38(2):
273–278.

Rohr, D.H. & Malone, B.S. 2001. Activity times and body temperatures in an
Australian CoPperheads (Serpentes: Elapidae). Australian Journal of Zoology
49: 223-233.

Roper, T.J., Ostler, J.R. & Conradt, L. 2003. The process of dispersal in badgers
Meles meles. Mammal Review 33: 314–318.

Rosenfield, R.N. & Bielefeldt, J. 1992. Natal dispersal and inbreeding in the Cooper’s
Hawk. The Wilson Bulletin 104(l): 184-185.

Roze, D. & Rousset, F. 2005. Inbreeding depression and the evolution of dispersal
rates: a multilocus model. The American Naturalist 166(6): 708-721 + 17
pages of appendices.

Salmon, M. & Wyneken, J. 1987. Orientation and swimming bahevior of hatchling

loggerhead turtles Caretta caretta L. during their offshore migration. Journal
of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 109: 137-153.

Samuel, M.D. & Fuller, M.R. 1996. Wildlife radio-telemetry. In Bookhout, T.A.
(ed.). Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth
edition, pp. 370-418. Bethesda: The Wildlife Society.
 81

Sarno, R.J., Bank, M.S., Stern, H.S. & Franklin, W.L. 2003. Forced dispersal of
juvenile guanacos (Lama guanicoe): causes, variation, and fates of individuals
dispersing at different times. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. Doi:
10.1007/s00265-003-0604-5.

Sastrawan, P. & Claudio, C. 2002. Population distribution and home range. In

Murphy, J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C. & Walsh, T. (eds.). Komodo
dragons: biology and conservation (zoo and aquarium biology and
conservation series), pp. 42–77. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Schemnitz, S.D. 1996. Capturing and handling wild animals. In Bookhout, T.A. (ed.).
Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth edition,
pp. 106-124. Bethesda, Maryland: The Wildlife Society.

Schwartz, C. & Arnason, N. 1996. A general methodology for the analysis of capture-
recapture experiments in open populations. Biometrics 52: 860–873.

Seber, G.A.F. 1982. The estimation of animal abundance and relate parameters. New
York: MacMillian.

Shine, R. 1988. Parental care in reptiles. In Gans, C. & Huey, R. B (eds.). Biology of
the reptilia. Vol. 16, pp. 275-330. New York: Alan R. Liss.

Shine, R., Harlow, P.S. Keogh, J.S. 1996. Commercial harvesting of giant lizards: the
biology of Water Monitors Varanus salvator in Southern Sumatra. Biological
Conservation 77: 125- 134.

Sinclair, E.A. 1998. Morphological variation among populations of the quokka,

Setonix brachyurus (Macropodidae: Marsupialia), in Western Australia.
Australian Journal of Zoology 8(46): 439.449.

Smith, L.L., Robert, B., Joby, M. & Clement, S. 1999. Home range and microhabitat
use in the Angonoka (geochelone yniphora) in Madagaskar. Chelonian
Conservation and Biology 3(3): 393-400.

Storz, J.F. 2005. Nonrandom dispersal and local adaptation. Heredity 95: 3–4.
Doi:10.1038/sj.hdy.6800683. [25 May 2005].

Sun, Li-Xin, Shine, R., Debi, Z., Zhengren, T. 2001. Biotic and abiotic influences on
activity patterns of insular pit vipers (Gloydius shedaoensis, Viperidae) from
north-eastern China. Biological Conservation 97: 387-398.

Sutherland, G.D., Harestad, A.S., Price, K. & Lertzman, K.P. 2000. Scalling of natal
dispersal distance in terrestrial birds and mammals. Conservation Ecology
4(1): 16. http://www.consecol.org/vol4/iss1/art [April 21 2005].

Te Wong, S., Servheen, C.W., Ambu, L. 2004. Home range, movement & activity
patterns, & bedding sites of Malayan sun bears Helarctos malayanus in the
rainforest of Borneo. Biological Conservation 119: 169–181.
 82

Thompson, G. 1992. Daily distance traveled and foraging areas of Varanus gouldii
(Reptilia: Varanidae) in an urban environment. Wildlife Research 19: 743-
753.

Thompson, G. 1993. Daily movement patterns and habitat preferences of Varanus

caudolineatus (Reptilia: Varanidae). Wildlife Research 20: 227-231.

Thompson, G. 1994. Activity area during the breeding season of Varanus gouldii
(Reptilia : Varanidae) in an urban environment. Wildlife Research 21: 633-
641.

Thompson, G.G., De Boer, M., & Pianka, E.R. 1999. Activity areas and daily
movements of an arboreal monitor lizard, Varanus tristis (Squamata:
Varanidae) during the breeding season. Australian Journal of Ecology 24:
117-122.

Thompson, G.G. & Thompson, S.A. 2001. Behaviour and spatial ecology of Gilbert’s
dragon Lophognanthus gilberti (Agamidae: Reptilia). Journal of the Royal
Society of Western Australia 84: 153-158.

Trakhtenbrot, A., Natan, R., Perry, G. & Richardson, D.M. 2005. The importance of
long distance dispersal in biodiversity conservation. Diversity and
Distribution 11: 173-181.

Tucker, A.D., Limpus, C.J., McCallum, H.I. & McDonald, K.R. 1997. movements
and home ranges of Crocodylus johnstoni in the Lynd River, Queensland.
Wildlife Research 24: 379–396

Tweed, E.J., Foster, J.T., Woodworth, B.L., Oesterle, P., Kuehler, C., Lieberman,
A.A., Powers, A.T., Whitaker, K., Monahan, W.B., Kellerman, J. & Telfer, T.
2003. Survival, dispersal, home range establishment of reintroduced captive-
bred puaiohi, Myadestes palmeri. Biological Conservation 111: 1-9.

Walsh, T.D.C., Birchardd, G.F. & Tirtodiningrat, K.M.T.A.. 2002. Captive

management and growth. In Murphy, J.B., Ciofi, C., de La Panouse, C. &
Walsh, T. (eds.). Komodo dragons: biology and conservation (zoo and
aquarium biology and conservation series), pp. 178–195. Washington:
Smithsonian Institution Press.

Wapstra, E. & Swain, R. 2001. Geographic and annual variation in life history traits
in a temperate zone Australian skink. Journal of Herpetology 35(2): 194-203.

Waser, P.M. 1996. Patterns and consequences of dispersal in gregarious carnivores.

In Gittleman, J.L. 1996. Carnivore behavior, ecology, and evolution. Vol. 2,
pp. 267-295. New York: Cornell University Press.
 83

Webbs, J.K. & Shine, R. 1997. A field study of spatial ecology and movement of
threaten snake species Holocephalus bungaroides. Biological Conservation
82: 203-217.

Wei-Gu, Du & Xiang, Ji. 2003. The effects of incubation thermal environments on
size, locomotor performance and early growth of hatchling soft-shelled turtles,
Pelodiscus sinensis. Journal of Thermal Biology 28: 279–286.

White, G.C. & Clark, W.R. 1996. Microcomputer Applications in Wildlife

Management & research. In Bookhout, T.A. (ed.). Research and management
techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth edition, pp. 75-95. Bethesda: The
Wildlife Society.

White, G.C, & Garrot., R.A. 1990. Analysis of wildlife radiotracking data. San
Diego: Academic Press.

Whitaker, P.B. & Shine, R. 2004. A Radiotelemetric study of movements and shelter-
site selesction by free-ranging Brownsnakes (Pseudonaja textile, Elapidae).
Herpetological Monographs 17: 130-144.

Wolff, J.O. 1999. Behavioral model systems. In Barret, G.W. & Peles, J.D. (eds.).
Landscape ecology of small mammals. New York: Springer-verlag.

Wong, D.W.S. & Lee, J. 2005. Statistical analysis of Geographic Information with
ArcView GIS and ArcGIS. New Jersey: John Willey & Sons, Inc.

Xiang, Ji & Wei-Gu, Do. 2000. The effects of thermal and hydric environments on
hatchling success, embryonic use of energy and hatchling traits in a colubrid
snake, Elaphe carinata. Journal Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology
Part A 129: 461-471.

Zar, J.H. 1999. Biostatistical analysis 4th edition. Prentice Hall Inc. USA.