Movement and Ranging patterns of Rhesus Macaques in New Forest, Dehradun Term paper Submitted by:- PUSHKAL BAGCHIE Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of M.SC. (FORESTRY) 2007-09 Under the Supervision of Dr. S.Sathyakumar Scientist & Head, Dept. of Endangered Species Management Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education Dehradun ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I acknowledge with profound gratitude my indebtedness to my supervisor Dr. S.Sathyakumar, Scientist-E & Head, Dept. of Endangered Species Managemet, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, Uttarakhand for suggesting the problem and guiding me during the entire course of study. I am also thankful to Dr. Sushma Vasudevan who guided me during the study. I am thankful to Dr. Sivakumar, for helping me with the analysis part. I am extremely grateful to Director of University, Forest Research Institute, Dehradun (Uttarakhand) for providing me facilities and general encouragement. I am also thankful to Dr. Manoj K. Agarwal, Merwyn Fernandes, Suthirto, and Mr.Veerappan, of Wildlife Institute of India for their help in various ways. I am grateful to Deep, Maluk, Atu, Manjari and Shikha for the encouragement they gave and help they rendered. Pushkal Bagchie MSc Forestry, 2nd Semester, FRI University, Dehradun. General Introduction: From the evolutionary point of view, primates constitute the highest order of mammals. Members of this order are best identified by a combination of characters rather than by one or more than one unique or exclusive ones. (Roonwall,and Mohnot,1977).The zoological strength of primates lies in the unspecialized nature of their morphology and in the highly specialized plasticity of their behavior. Man’s hand-to take one primate and one organ as an example-can be made to behave in a highly sophisticated manner but is structurally a device that differs little from the primitive hand of the lemur like fossil, the 45 million –year –old Notharctus, having the same number of digits, the same number of bones, and the same arrangement of activating muscles. Such a combination of generalized skeleton and specialized behavior provides the wherewithal for primates to seize and exploit extensive variety of ecological niches that come their way. More specialized animals are limited by their physical commitments from exploiting the potentials of a changing environment. However, specialization is not without its advantages; in a stable environment it is advantageous to be well equipped and firmly established; the tarsier is a case in point. The tarsier became a specialized leaping, nocturnal insect-eater some 50 million years ago and it has changed little since then, but the tarsier will never become a true monkey or a man, however long it survives. Its specializations are swept beyond the point of no return. The arboreal monkeys are the most generalized of all the primates, both structurally and behaviorally. They are successful in terms of wide geographic range and high population numbers; this is particularly true of the macaques though most of the species of macaques are ground living they have the physical characteristics of arboreal monkeys. However they are wily animals, and more guileful than the arboreal African monkeys -the guenons- whom they generally resemble. The ground with its wide horizons and numerous predators is a hard school and newcomers learn fast. There have been minimal pressures to alter the general anatomy of the macaques with the result that their food preferences remain catholic and their locomotion retains the simple quadrupedal pattern of their fully arboreal cousins. With this combination the macaque becomes “the primate of primates”. The most successful primates, then, are those that have departed least from the ancestral pattern of structure and furthest from the ancestral pattern of behavior. ADAPTATION: Adaptation of the brain provides the raw material for behavior. Certain physical diversions from the basic primate plan such as the projecting lower teeth (“dental comb”) of the lemurs are specializations. They are developmental cul-de-sacs that tend to inhibit further adaptation. Like many vertebrate mammals the prosomians have backed themselves into an ecological corner, owing to their adaptations, from where there is no escape. Extinction is the only possibility. Tarsius and the aye-aye are the oldest survivors among the primates. The most recent mass extinctions are the ground living, slow moving lemurs of Madagascar which rapidly vanished with the coming of man to the island around 3000 years ago. In order to understand the process of adaptation we have to study the behavior of primates in their natural environment. There are a number of anatomical puzzles among living primates such as the leaping of langurs, the slow climbing of lorises and pottos, the vertical clinging of the tarsier, the knuckle walking of chimpanzees and gorilla, and the marked difference in the size of the external genitalia among the 2 great apes. The degree to which a primate is tree living is variable. There are some which never leave trees, moving through the forest in search of food at tree top level. This type of primate is often lightly built, long limbed and very acrobatic. Ground livers on the other hand are robustly built and travel long distances each day. Gorillas were once arboreal animals, but are now dedicated ground dwellers. Females and young gorillas retain a slight penchant for climbing. Chimpanzees are both tree and ground dwelling in equal proportions. Gibbons are wholly arboreal; orangutans are mainly so. Among the monkeys a variable amount of time is spent on the ground, according to species. Deforestation and modern agricultural techniques serve only to hasten the process of converting a tree living species into a ground dwelling one. ECOLOGY: Primates are found in three major types of vegetation communities: tropical forest, tropical grassland and the transitional area between the two known as woodland savannah. Tropical forest includes primary and secondary forest, swamp or mangrove forest, gallery forest, montane forests and monsoon forests. Primary forests are untouched, virgin forests, undisturbed by man; secondary forests have been exploited by man more or less to a reasonable extent either by slash and burn agriculture or by selective logging. Swamp forests are an ideal habitat for primates: with their arboreal skills, their movement above the water unimpeded, and they are safe from predators such as the leopard. Gallery forests grow along water course and are also known as riparian forests. They serve as an ideal primate haunt with all the advantages of a forest and also access to grassland tracts. It is the preferred habitat of the savannah monkey (Cercopithecus aethiops). Montane or cloud forests are also an important habitat for the primates including the mountain gorilla. Found between 2000-3000 metres. CLASSIFICATION: Authorities have divided primates into two sub orders, the more primitive prosimii and the more advanced Simiae (or Anthropoidea). The Prosimii includes tree shrews, lemurs, lorises and tarsiers, are confined today to Africa, Madagascar, and South and Southeast Asia. Most are nocturnal and arboreal. The Simiae, which includes monkeys, apes and man, are higher primates. They are more widespread than Prosimii and are distributed in South and Central America, Africa and Asia. They are chiefly diurnal and arboreal. SOCIOBIOLOGY AND BEHAVIOR: The areas to which primate groups are usually attached are broadly of three kinds: a home range, a core area and a territory. A mammal’s home range has been defined as “that area about its established home which is traversed by the animal in its normal activities for food gathering, mating and caring for the young” (Burt 1940). It remains constant, though often overlapping the home range of another group, at least for a time, and does not include the areas traversed during occasional exploration. It often extends vertically as well as horizontally, especially in the arboreal species. Its horizontal extent varies from a few hectares to 20 or more km2. Relations between groups occupying neighboring home ranges are generally peaceful, though there are spacing mechanisms such as specific vocalizations. Occasionally there are mutual attacks and severe fights, which sometimes result in social changes such as the defeated group’s splitting up.( Roonwall, and Mohnot, 1977). In some species that have large home ranges (baboons and some langurs), one or more smaller areas, core areas, are reserved for more intensive occupation. Here the groups or sub groups mostly live and feed and rest and the remaining part of the range is used for occasional foraging or for transit. While home ranges may overlap, core areas do not. Only when a home range or part of it is actively defended can we speak of a territory, a concept originally developed from the study of birds. The existence of territoriality in a strict sense has not been clearly established for primates, though in some cases we may perhaps speak of an incipient territory. The word “territory”, however, continues to be used rather loosely in primate literature (Roonwall and Mohnot, 1977). Use of space by primates: The use of space, be it defended territory or undefended home range, is dependent upon the resources it contains; and to a primate these are first of all food, and second secure sleeping sites. For all their intelligence primates have never learnt to store food, as squirrels and hamsters do, and therefore completely dependent upon finding enough to eat everyday at all seasons of the year. In tropical rainforest it is guaranteed, provided that the area is large enough. In the absence of marked seasonal changes, rain forest vegetation has evolved flowering and fruiting sequences quite unlike the regular annual cycles of temperate zones. On the equator some trees are perpetually in fruit but once every 2 or 3 years, and others as seldom as once every 7 years. One year there may be abundance, the next scarcity. So the gibbons’ defence of its territory is a reflection of the need to include within it sufficient resources to survive during the leaner years. On the other hand there is a limit to the perimeter, and thus to the area, that can be defended by a pair of gibbons. The size of a gibbon’s territory is in fact a compromise between these two factors. Overlap between two gibbon territories is small and a continual source of conflict between the two groups involved. The effect of territorial defence is to space out groups evenly in the forest, thus utilizing resources to the best possible advantage. Gibbon groups tend to be clustered, so that maturing progeny can find mates when they are ejected from the natal group. The home range of a primate group is its total range over the year, and is based on the same essential resources of food and security as are territories. Equally important in dry areas is a third resource, water. The home ranges of three baboons may encompass a single waterhole which they all share. Here, during the dry season, all three may foregather without aggression, but with a certain wariness, particularly on the part of the adult males. The main difference between territory and home range are that a home range is not defended, and that home ranges of adjacent groups overlap considerably. Within the home ranges are core areas, places that are frequently used in the daily life of the group. Among the most important of these are sleeping trees which are known from long experience to provide safety from predators and food trees which provide the staple diet. Core areas overlap very little, they are sometimes defended against interlopers, but usually the need for defence is rendered unnecessary by the group’s regular presence there, and by the tendency of the neighboring groups to avoid one another. In a field experiment (Waser,1976) mangabeys were played a recorded vocalization of their loud spacing call, the so called “whoop-gobble” , a low pitched whoop followed a few seconds later by a staccato turkey like gobble. Recordings played close to the mangabeys caused them to retreat from the sound, indicating tendency to avoid contact with other groups, whereas distant playbacks were ignored. This is very different from the gibbon’s territorial pattern of behavior where the vocalizations of neighboring groups act like a magnet, drawing the animals together to confront one another on the common boundary. Home ranges are laid in dry desert areas and small in rain forest. This reflects the rich resources of tropical vegetation as well as its third dimension, height. Rain forest trees often reach a height of 80m (250ft), so a forest living species exploits a range which can be thought of in three dimensions, like fish in an aquarium, rather than in two dimensions, like cows in a field. This means that the daily range of a forest primate can be quite small; as little as 30 meters has been cited in the slender loris in the forests of Sri Lanka. Baboons, roaming the dry grasslands of Africa may cover as much as 19.2km (12 miles). Primates are not, generally speaking nomadic. Their home ranges are fixed through familiarity which has given them precise knowledge of fruiting patterns of particular trees and of aerial pathways through the forest canopy; on the ground, the knowledge of suitable water resources, and of look-out points whence a watch can be kept for approaching danger, are part of the group’s attachment to the home range. Some seasonal variation is seen in the use of home ranges :Altmann and Altmann, 1970 observed that the baboons at Amboseli in Kenya ranged much more widely in the wet season than in the dry; with water everywhere in abundance, baboon groups were no longer compelled to remain near water holes. Chimpanzees living to the east of Lake Tanganyika show a regular migratory pattern. In the wet season they frequent river valleys, feeding on the abundant fruit trees there, but in the dry season they migrate as much as 20km (12.4 miles) to hills where , in the open grasslands, they find ripening seeds and nuts equivalent to the soyabean in nutrition value. Some information about the teeth and food of primates: Apes, monkeys and lemurs eat leaves, flowers and fruit. This is their chief food. As vegetarians, most of them have teeth suited to a vegetarian diet. Their molars or cheek teeth have those broad crowns surmounted with cusps and ridges, which are meant for grinding tough vegetable matter. As to their ways of eating, most lemurs eat like other animals, thrusting out for food with their long pointed snouts. Apes and monkeys carry food to the mouth with their hands. They eat much and eat fast. Eating, as wild animals do, under constant threat of danger, many monkeys have special means of getting away with large quantities of food in the shortest possible time. Some cram food which they cannot eat at once into a large pouch in their cheeks. Even when full, the pouch does not interfere with continued eating, and this extra food hurriedly stowed away can be munched later in some place of security. Macaques and baboons have these pouches. Langurs have none. But for the langur the same purpose is achieved in a different way. Its stomach does the work of a cheek pouch. It is not the simple rounded sac usual in monkeys, but consists of 3 separate pouches or compartment, somewhat like the stomach of a ruminating animal, of a cow, sheep, or goat. The ruminant’s “pouched” stomach has a special chamber for receiving partly chewed food. So has the langur’s. With such a stomach food can be hurriedly taken. Like ruminants, langurs are purely herbivorous; their pouched stomachs are suitable to their special food. Baboons and macaques on the other hand are omnivorous. They vary their vegetable diet with insects, grubs and spiders. Some even eat lizards and frogs, while one of the tribe has taken to eating crabs. They have the type of stomach common to omnivorous animals. Lemurs hunt for their food under cover of darkness. Apes and monkeys feed only by day. Some monkeys, baboons and macaques for instance, forage for food on the ground, some amongst rocks and cliffs, but the great majority of apes and monkeys find their food in trees.( Prater, S.H ) Ranging behavior: Animals range in search for food. Ranging is basically movement of an individual or a group or individuals to areas where there is availability of preferred food items which will satiate the individuals hunger. This type of movement comes under object orientation which eventually comes under the broad heading of orientation mechanisms. Object orientation: the ability to find and approach the resources and avoid stress sources is object orientation. Typically the object orientation is two phased; search and approach. Initially the searching begins in a larger area and is called ranging which is largely a straight movement with occasional turns. If some source is detected then the search is in smaller area and is called local search which now involves mainly turns with little straight movement. If it leads to a resource then it is approached and if to stress source then it is avoided. About the home ranges and movement pattern of macaques: Macaca arctoides (stump tailed macaque): There has been few behavioral observations on this species. The only early work is the brief account of Mc Cann (1933c) on stump tailed macaque in Assam. Recently Bertrand (1969) carried out studies both in captivity and in the field. The following discussion is based on her findings: The macaques leave their sleeping trees at dawn (often when they are hardly visible) and spend most of the morning feeding-until 10:00 or 10:30 A.M. Then they rest or groom until about 1:30 or 2:30 P.M., with occasional resumption of feeding. From mid afternoon to early evening, until 5:30 or 6:00, they again feed actively. Ten to 45 minutes before darkness sets in they are near or in the trees where they sleep; darkness in these forests comes abruptly, usually between 6:15 and 6:40. (Bertrand 1969). Nothing is mentioned about home range of this species. Macaca fascicularis ( Long tailed macaque): in the Kutai Reserve , Eastern Borneo, Kurland(1973) estimated the size of the home range of about 0.8 km2 (1600m by500m) and a density of about two to four groups per sq km2 of riverine forests. Macaca radiata (Bonnet macaque): according to Simonds (1965) the home range of a group is fairly well delimited, being about 5 km2 on the edge of a low sandalwood forest. The group covered one-third to one-half of the home range each day. No seasonal change in home range was observed by Simonds. According to Rahman and Parthasarathy (1969b), the “nomadic area” varied with the season (diurnal temperature) and the availability of food, the latter being the more important element. In seasons of abundant food the average range of movement is short, but in seasons of insufficient food movement may extend beyond the limits of the home range. The linear extent of these movements is about 1-3 km and the general area is about1 km2. Within the home range the group moves as a unit. Sugiyama (1971) reported that home ranges were narrow, extensive and irregular strips as long as 2 km, sometimes overlapping with range of hanuman langur. Daily movements vary from 0 to 2000m; the variation depended on distribution and volume of food available. Home range area was reported to be 40 ha. ABOUT THE STUDY ANIMAL: Rhesus macaque ,(Macaca mulatta)(Zimmermann) 1) Systematic note: Four sub species are recognized, all found in South Asia (Ellerman and Morrison-Scott 1951, Napier and Napier 1967). Macaca mulatta mcmahoni Pocock, 1932. Northeastern Afghanistan; Pakistan (Lower Chitral and Kafiristan); about 1,100 m altitude. Macaca mulatta mulatta (Zimmermann, 1780). Nepal; Bhutan; India (Assam and northern and peninsular India); Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam;Southern China. Macaca mulatta vestita Milne-Edwards, 1892. Tibet (Tengri Nor) Macaca mulatta villosa True, 1894. Northern India (Southern Kashmir, Upper Punjab, and Kumaun Hills). Fooden (1964) stated that M .fascicularis is a sub species of M. mulatta. Hill (1972a) has shown that M. fascicularis is an independent species. 2) Local names: Hindi-Bandar Bengali-Markat Kashmiri-punj Burmese- meeauk 3) Size: Seated, a male rhesus is about 2 feet (60 cm.) high and scales about 15-23 lb. (7-10 kg). Females are smaller and slighter in build. Head and body, 1.5 feet (45 cm.); weight is 10-14 lb. (5 to 6 kgs). The largest and heaviest animals are found in the westerly ranges of the Himalayas (Prater,S.H ). Head and body length (cm): males 48.5-63.5; females 47.0-53.1. Tail length (cm): males 20.3-30.5; females 19.0-28.5 (Shortridge 1914; Schultz 1933, 1969; Napier and Napier 1967; Fooden 1971a.) ** Forest-living animals are generally smaller, and in some forests miniature animals are sometimes found (four examples were seen in the Jaldapara Sanctuary in Northern Bengal). Krishnan (1972) Data on infants born in the laboratory have been presented by Scultz (1933), Van Wagenen (1954,1972), and Gavan and Van Wagenen (1955). Van Wagenen (1972) gives the head and the body length (cm) of the newborn: males 16.4-22.6 (average-19.5); females 15.3-22.0 (19.3). 4) Distinctive characters: The Rhesus has the usual squat, thickset build of a macaque. The hairs on its crown radiate backwards from the forehead without the neat centre- parting, so distinctive in its loins and rump distinguishes it from any other Indian monkey. 5) Distribution: the Himalayas, Assam, and northern and central India as far south as the river Tapti in the West and the Godavari in the East, extending thence into Burma and adjoining countries. Three races are found in India (Prater,S,H ????? ). South and Southeast Asia: northeastern Afghanistan (north to about 35˚ north latitude), south to the Godavari river in India; Burma (but not in the extreme south, Tenasserim; Fry 1928); Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam; Tibet (small pockets); and China (north to about 40˚ north latitude). For details about its distribution in the Thar Desert see Prakash (1956, 1958, 1959, and 1960) and Prakash and Krishna (1960). 6) Habits: Captive or wild, this is the common monkey of Northern India. Large troops live near or in Villages and towns and in groves round tanks and temples. In the jungle, they usually keep to the outskirts rarely penetrating into the depths, except where driven to seek denser cover. They have a decided preference for open country. Almost everywhere the rhesus enjoys freedom from molestation. It is a common sight to see these monkeys mingling with the human element on the crowded platform of a railway station, accepting food from passengers, or stealing it when they can. To raid fields and gardens of a morning or evening is their common and established practice, to which popular and religious sentiment permits little check. Capture and export on a large scale has now depopulated many areas. Like most macaques, the rhesus feeds mainly on the ground. Some live habitually among rocks and cliffs. Ground plants, insects, and spiders are their annual fare. In their feeding a troop of Rhesus will sometimes consort with a troop of langurs, each party going its own way at nightfall. Protection against cold is supplied by a heavier winter coat, always more luxuriant in Himalayan animals, some of which winter in the pine forests quite 8000ft (2440m) above sea level. They swim well both on the surface and underwater, using an overhand breast stroke. The social organization of the Rhesus macaque resembles that of other macaques being based on male dominance. The Rhesus shows a definite breeding season, correlated with climatic conditions. Mating was noted in all months of the year except March but the greatest frequency was from October to December. A major birth season (March to June) preceded the monsoon and a secondary brief post monsoon birth season in September-October. No new born young were seen from November to March.( Prater, S.H ???? ) 7) Mating: There is no particular season for mating in Rhesus macaques. Gestation period is between 135 to 194 days. The age of maturity in case of female Rhesus macaques is three years and four years in case of males. 8) Habitat: Throughout its range the rhesus macaque lives in a wide variety of habitats, including cities, villages and farms, forests and mountains; it is also found in semi desert environment in Rajasthan and in mangrove swamps in the Sundarbans. In several towns of Uttar Pradesh, such as Ayodhya, it is a permanent resident of railway stations, often snatching food from wary passengers. On the whole Rhesus macaques prefer vicinity of cultivated fields, especially near small pools of water, and trees near streams; it is less common in dense forests. In the sub-Himalayas Macaca mulatta is found at a variety of altitudes from 500m to 1500m. the forests in this belt range from sheesham (Dalbergia sissoo) to pine belt with chir pine and oak scrub.( Neville,1968b) In North eastern Afganistan it lives in forests of oak and cedar (Puget, 1971). It is also found in mangrove swamps of sundarbans (Mukherjee and Gupta, 1965) OBJECTIVES OF THE PROPOSED STUDY: 1) To assess the ranging pattern of Rhesus Macaques in New Forest, Dehradun. 2) To identify the food plant species preferred by the species in New Forest, Dehradun Rationale of this study: The movement pattern of any animal is influenced by food availability; even the home range of an animal is influenced by the same. Workers like Chance (1956), Mukherjee (1969) and Rahman and Parthasarathy (1978) while studying home range have observed the factors of availability of food in determining the home range. An animal moves for fulfilling its basic urges such as hunger, finding mates etc. According to Chance (1956), Altmann (1962), Mukherjee (1969) and Pirta et. Al. (1977) factors such as seasonal fluctuations, availability of food, orientation of alpha male, emigration and, last but not the least, human interferences ,can possibly singly or in different combinations may induce alterations and fluctuations in home range of free ranging Rhesus macaques. Hence this study was undertaken so that the daily movement pattern of the animals can be known and consequently it will help in finding out the home range of the troop. In the process we can also get to know the habitats which are most preferred by the troop. The food plants present in those habitats can then be surveyed. Literature review: A review of Feeding habits of rhesus macaques in FRI campus: A survey of the dietary preferences of Rhesus macaques was done in the FRI campus by D.G.Lindburg. it was found that the monkeys at the Forest Research Institute , like any other monkey groups living in close proximity to human habitation, the FRI groups were frequently fed by man, and commonly raided nearby fruit orchard, gardens, and fields. Although the vegetation at FRI contains a number of naturally occurring species, it also contains many introduced species. The principal value of the FRI data on diet is in demonstrating the range of items which may be used as food, and in further illustrating the capacity of the species to adjust its breeding habits to locally available resources, an attribute which has enabled it to survive and flourish as its original habitat disappeared. One of the more interesting observations at FRI was the feeding on stamens of the tea plant, Camellia theifera Griff. In late October a yellow substance on the faces of the monkeys was noticed, and later determined to be pollen from the flowers of the tea plant. This pattern of feeding continued throughout November and over the first half of December. List of food plants utilized by Rhesus monkeys at the Forest Research Institute, Dehra Dun :( Lindburg, 1975) Species Grass Saccharum spontaneum Linn. Part consumed Stem, shoot Herb Launaea aspleniifolia DC. Polygonum serrulatum Lagasc. Pucraria phascoloides Rubia cordifolia Leaf, flower Flower Stem Pith of stem, leaf, fruit. Climber Paederia foetida Linn. Passiflora suberosa Fruit fruit Shrub Camellia theifera Caryota mitis Lour. Clerodendron infortunatum Gaertn. Desmodium gangeticum DC. Diospyros cordifolia Roxb. Flemingia congesta Roxb. Trees Alseodaphne keenanii Nees Anthocephalus cadamba Hemsl. Bauhinia purpurea Linn. Bischofia javanica Bl. Ficus benjamina Linn. Stamen Pith of stem Flower, fruit, new leaf. Leaf Fruit Seed Fruit Leaf, flower, shoot Flower Fruit Fruit Feeding habits of Macaca mulatta: M. mulatta is largely vegetarian. Its diet includes leaves, flowers, fruits and berries and seeds of many species of plants, grass and grains and algae from ponds. It also eats insects and spiders. It is not known to eat small birds, lizards, or similar small animals, but in the Sundarbans it eats crab. It frequently eats earth (sometimes taken from termite mounds) in small quantities. (Blanford 1888-91, Roonwall 1956, Mandal 1964, Mukherjee and Gupta 1965, Lindburg 1971, Krishnan 1972) Feeding habits in the doon valley: In the forests near Dehra Dun, (Uttaranchal), it was noted that the macaque eats fruits, berries, leaves, flowers, seeds, and bark from over 70 species of plants. Insects (termites, grasshoppers, ants and beetles) and occasionally honeycombs of wild bees are eaten when available. Sometimes grasshoppers are eaten also. Earth from ground is eaten during September-may and earth from termite mounds eaten during end of dry season. During mid-monsoon mushrooms are favourite foods. The rhesus macaque also eats tender leaves of the mango (Mangifera indica), the pakar (Ficus wrightiana), and even neem tree (Azadirachta indica) Lindburg (1971). Activity pattern of the Rhesus macaque in the sub-Himalayan forests: In the sub-Himalayan forests (altitude about 610m), Lindburg (1971) observed that the daily rhythm of activity varies with the season as follows: 1) Warm, wet season (July-October): The first activity at dawn is feeding, which begins in the roosting tree themselves. A little grooming also occurs. Food is abundant; consequently foraging slackens within a few hours. Females with infants sit in trees with their cheek pouches full of berries and nursing and grooming their infants, while other animals continue to forage. By midmorning feeding declines and other activities are taken up in unpredictable order. There is a second period of foraging, usually in the late afternoon. Frequently there is a marked rest period of about an hour sometime between 11a.m and 3p.m. Rainfall affects activity. During light showers playing and foraging may continue. But during heavy rainfall all such activity ceases and the macaques huddle together in the central sections of trees. After the rain the wet macaques usually remain in the trees, grooming and shaking themselves dry. 2) Cool season (November-February): The morning temperatures reach the freezing point and frost and heavy dew are common. Foraging begins late. The monkeys remain in the treetops sunning and grooming until about 9:00 or 9:30. Foraging then begins, persisting throughout the day. A midday rest is uncommon. During the first of this season the daily routine of some individuals is appreciably altered by mating activities. 3) Hot, dry season (March-June): in March the day length has increased and morning temperatures are also higher so that foraging begins in early morning and continues intermittently throughout the day interspersed with long periods of inactivity or periods of grooming, playing, and dozing. The tempo of foraging increases during the later part of the day. Food is abundant and many trees are in flower, including the dominant species, Sal (Shorea robusta). Home range pattern: Lindburg (1971) studied the patterns of home range use in the sub-Himalayan forests near Dehra Dun. A home range there may be as large as 6.5x 2.4 km (about 16 km2 ). Forest groups normally spent the night in the foraging trees where they found themselves at the end of the day; at dawn feeding also began there. Most groups traveled from one part of the range to another during foraging. Distances between successive night roosting sites varied from 100 to 2850m, the mean distance being slightly shorter in winter. In the sub mountain forests in northern Uttar Pradesh, Neville (1968) found that home ranges varied from 1 to 3 km2 at higher, less favorable altitudes the home range is larger than in more favorable areas. The distance traveled by each group during a day (“day range”) was 0.2-0.4 km. and, like the home range, tended to be more extensive in less favorable areas. Population density was about 5-15 per km2 in the more elevated chir pine forests, about 57 per km2 in the moist deciduous areas at lower elevations, and 753 per km2 in the town. In the mangrove swamps of the Sundarbans, Mukherjee and Gupta (1965) noted that the home range of a group (20-30 individuals) occupies an entire small island. On larger islands more groups are found. Studies on the trends of change in the composition of populations of M. mulatta in villages, towns and temples in Northern India show that populations in Uttar Pradesh and central Madhya Pradesh have shown a tendency towards urbanization ( a decrease in numbers in rural areas and increase in towns and larger human communities) Southwick, Beg, and Siddiqui(1961a,b,1965), Southwick and Siddiqui (1966,1968) and Southwick and Siddiqui (1970). This trend increases the possibilities of disease transmission since this macaque shares a wide variety of pathogenic bacteria, viruses, protozoa and helminthes with man. (Shah and Southwick 1965) In Western Bengal populations were formerly abundant: the major rhesus populations have now been reduced to the last refuge, the forested areas in the Northern Terai. (Southwick, Ghosh, and Louch 1964). A hypothetical estimate tells that the rhesus populations in Uttar Pradesh (294,364 km2 ) as between 800,000 and 1,000,000 in 1960. (Southwick, Beg, and Siddiqui, 1965). Six troops of free-ranging rhesus macaques residing in Saraswati forests (3 troops) and Veer Sonti (3 troops) were studied and their home ranges were calculated. It was found out that: Troop no. Home range 1 (Saraswati forest) .476 km2 2( do ) .251 km2 3( do ) .502 km2 4 (Veer Sonti forest) 1.575 km2 5( do ) 1.085 km2 6( do ) 1.295 km2 So the conclusion derived from the study was that the home range of free ranging rhesus monkeys is limited to a minimum of 0.251 km2 and a maximum of 1.575 km2. The mean home range of all the six troops came out to be 0.864 km2. The home range domain is given bigger contours primarily due to the urge of the animals to choose a far off place as the centre of diel activity. The monkeys chose tall trees as perching objects in the wake of potential danger in the day time (Gupta, and Kumar, 1990) Aggressiveness in rhesus macaques: M. mulatta is one of the most aggressive of the macaques. It has a marked tendency to bite people both in the laboratory and in the field (Singh 1966; Valerio et al. 1969; Ojha 1972). Ojha analyzed that the biting cases in an Indian village were more common in certain months (June to August and in November and December). During the study period, I was chased thrice by adult males of the group, when I ventured too close to the group. Thus it shows that this macaque is aggressive when humans try to come too close to the group. But I noticed that during the post birth season the macaques become submissive and their levels of aggression decrease markedly. On the contrary, on my approach near the group, the individuals seem to run away from me. Differences between forest dwelling and urban monkeys: The two differ in such aspects such as diet, foraging and roosting habits, behavior at feeding places, degree of aggression, curiosity and eagerness to explore. The differences are probably due, at least in part, to the more restrictive and competitive environment in cities and to the fact that the urban populations have been subjected for generations to novel and complex situations. There is, however no difference in intelligence, as measured by laboratory tests. Differences between forest and urban populations of Macaca mulatta in North India Forest monkeys Urban monkeys Diet: Live principally on leaves and fruits of trees like banyan, fig, mango, tamarind. Experiments tests show distinct preference for fruits and vegetables over cooked and roasted items. Diet: eat fruits and vegetables as well as cooked human foods like chapattis, roasted grains, groundnuts and spiced items. Experimental tests show distinct preference for cooked food. Foraging habits: obtain food naturally and Foraging habits: obtain food mostly by fearlessly from forests where food is abundant. pilfering. Daily habits: generally roost for the night in some convenient tree in the area where they spent the day hunting for food and water. Rarely choose the same tree from one night to the next. Dominance (in food test): when offered food, dominant male takes full charge. In breeding season he allows only one adult female and her infant to share food with him. Have comparatively settled housing and sleeping habits. Invariably return to a particular lodging night after night and move only when chased. Dominance (in food test): when offered food, dominant male allows a number of adult females, infants and juveniles to share food with him, regardless of season. Aggression: at feeding place, show much more Aggression: at feeding place show much less aggression among group members. aggression among group members. Shyness: in cages, shy, retiring, and afraid of Shyness: in cages, are bold and not afraid of man. man. Curiosity and exploration: show less curiosity Curiosity and exploration: show more curiosity and desire to explore and less ability to and desire to explore and more ability to respond to novel and complex situations. respond to novel and complex situations. Table based on data of S.D.Singh (1969).     Status of macaques of F.R.I.: The rhesus macaques of F.R.I. campus reside inside the reserve forest.which is surrounded by urban settlements on every side such as F.R.I. buildings, Ballupur chowk and the Chakrata road. So we can very well assume that the troop in question barely lives inside a forest which is surrounded by town on every side. This reserve forest is like an island with no possible connections to any other forest. Hence the animals have to derive their dietary requirements from the reserve forest and other artificially planted trees outside the reserve forest. As for the question of whether the macaques of F.R.I. are forest monkeys or urban monkeys, we can regard them as semi-urban monkeys, due to the following facts: They depend on both natural food as well as cooked food to certain extents (pilferaging is of common occurrence) They mostly roost inside the forest in particular forest patches. Aggression at feeding place is very high among group members. Materials and methods: I used Scan Sampling (Altmann, 1962) for studying activity patterns. By this method, several individuals are observed one after another in quick succession in predetermined time interval. Their behavioral acts are noted on a well designed check sheet. One important use of this method is to estimate the percentage of time the individuals of a group spend in various predecided activities. For example, we want to know what the members in a deer group do the whole day or how do they budget their time in a day/month or year? Like other methods the following criteria have to be decided: 1) Activities we are interested in 2) Time duration for scan, depending upon the group size, 3) Duration of interval. The scan records activities of all individuals of that group between a predetermined sample time, this task is preferably carried from dawn to dusk. If the notes are taken for a day then at the end you would know how many activities can be calculated. Similarly if the data is collected for fifteen days, six months or one full year, activity pattern of that particular herd of deer can be known. (Mathur, 1998) The study area: The study was carried out in the reserve forest of New Forest Campus, Forest Research Institute(FRI), Dehradun. Location The New Forest area is situated between 30˚19’55” and 30˚21’16”N and 77˚58'40” and 78˚1’E and is about 5 km away from the heart of the city of Dehradun. The area comes under the western subdivision of Dehradun district. Topography The general elevation of the ground is about 640.08m or 2200ft.from the mean sea level. The ground is almost plain with a gentle slope towards south-west direction. Geology and soil The area comprises of thick deposits of Doon gravel and river alluvium. The loose litho logy of Doon gravel has bestowed a porous nature to the strata as a result of which the ground water is very deep. The network of canal system in FRI estate replenishes the deficiency of water. The main rocks can be termed as conglomerate, middle Shivalik sand rock and granite. The soils are derived from the river and stream alluvium containing sediments derived from both tertiary and pre-tertiary rocks of the Himalayan and Shivalik origin. Rock fragments of various sizes are numerous but the surfaces are devoid of coarse material such as stones, pebbles, etc. making the soil stone free. The soil is freely drained internally and externally leached in nature. The soil is loamy in texture at surface and clayey loam in the sub-surface layers and is mild acidic to neutral in reaction containing sufficient amount of nutrients. Climate The climate of FRI Campus is marked by hot summer, well distributed rainfall during the South Monsoon and cold winter with small amount of winter rains. The cold season is from November to February followed by pleasant weather till April. May and June are the hottest months with rains coming by the last week of June. The rainy season remains till September followed by pleasant weather till October. Temperature The extreme cold starts from the mid of December and remains up to the end of February. The temperature starts rising from February and hot conditions persist during May and June with maximum heat observed till June. Rainfall The New Forest Area receives a lot of rain. Monsoon breaks in this region from mid June till the end of September. The weather remains dry after that with occasional showers. The annual rainfall is received during the month of August with lowest in the month of November. Relative Humidity The climate of the FRI estate remains quite humid for the entire year. The highest recorded humidity was 95% during the month of December at 0719 hrs from 1988 to 1997 and the lowest recorded was 66% during the month of May. The relative humidity at 1419 hours (77%) was recorded maximum during the month of August and the lowest during the month of May (35%). Pollution and Biotic pressure The area is closed to the public and is open only to the students and the researchers. Other than some wastes that were previously dumped in the area there is no pollution. As the road in between is used as a thoroughfare air pollution and noise pollution is however present to some extent. The area is a reserve forest hence there is minimum biotic pressure even though illegal collection of firewood occurs, but it is comparatively insignificant. The Fauna The reserve forest of FRI Campus hosts a good number of species of fauna. Among them predators such as Common Leopard (Panthera pardus, floating population), Jackal (Canis aureus) and small mammals such as yellow throated marten, Jungle cat (Felis chaus), Common mongoose (Herpestes edwardsii), Indian Flying Fox (Pteropus giganteus) etc are present. Among the arboreal mammals Rhesus macaque (Macaca mulata), Hanuman langur (Semnopithecus entellus) are resident in the area. Reptiles such as King cobra (Ophiophagus hannah), Common cobra (Naja naja), Monitor lizard (Varanus salvatora) are among the prominent ones found. The avifauna consists of various species of woodpeckers, dove, red wattled lapwing, hawk cuckoo, black kites, parakeets, coucal, babblers, warblers, Asian koel, drongos among many others. Flora The flora consists of avenue trees, Pine plantation, bamboo plantation, teak plantation, Sal plantation, mixed forest of Terminalia and monoculture of other exotic species. The understorey is dominated by canes, lantana, mallotus, parthenium etc. Litchi and mango plantations and a few other horticultural species are also present. ( A working plan of New Forest, Forest Research Institute) The Study Period The study was conducted from 1 st March to 31st May 2008. As the study period coincided with the class hours of the university, observations were taken mostly during early mornings and late afternoon on working days and extensively during the weekends. Due to the limitations of time the recorded data for the studied animal is not exhaustive. Suitability of Rhesus Macaque for studying Primate Behavior: The Rhesus macaque is well known to science owing to its relatively easy upkeep in captivity, and has been used extensively in medical and biological research. The genome of rhesus macaque monkeys has been completed by a consortium of 23 laboratories. Comparing this genome with those already established for chimpanzees and modern humans will provide an even better tool for understanding the similarities and differences between the major groups of primates. Preliminary analysis indicates that macaques are similar to humans in 93% of their DNA sequences, while chimpanzees share about 98% of the DNA with us. This is to be expected since the last common ancestor of macaques and humans was about 19 million years ago, while the chimpanzees and human evolutionary lines diverged only around 6-7 million years ago. Rhesus macaques are abundantly available in the country. They are found both in forests and the urban areas. In the urban areas due to constant exposure to humans they are pretty well adapted and can be studied without much hassle. Constraints during the study The study was carried out during the period of March to May, 2008. This period was overburdened with theory as well as practical classes along with field trips. So it was difficult to record data over a long interval. Hence there is sampling inadequacy in this study. Results and discussion The macaque troop was studied for a period of three months (March to May). The troop consists of 25 individuals. Group scan sampling was conducted at every half hour intervals. The troop was scanned for five minutes where activities such as feeding, foraging, sitting, moving, resting and social behavior were recorded. Based on this data, the mean, the standard deviation and the standard error were calculated for each behavioral state. The table below shows the above mentioned data for one hour time intervals ACTIVITY 0600-0659 0700-0800 0800-0900 0900-1000 1000-1100 FEEDING 1.2 (0.73) 1.88(0.44) 1.45(0.34) 1.45(0.34) 5(1.48) 1100-1200 1200-1300 1500-1600 1600-1700 3.4(1.23) 0.34(0.34) 1.33(0.49) 0.6(0.50) RESTING 1(0.55) 1.63(0.50) 1.23(0.32) 1.89(0.35) 1.13(0.23) 1.1(0.41) 3.67(0.99) 2.5(0.43) 3.5(0.65) SOCIAL 5.6(1.17) 3.75(0.45) 3.11(0.75) 2.67(0.34) 2.5(0.63) 3.8(0.55) 4.5(1.20) 4.17(0.75) 4.1(0.67) MOVING 4(0.32) 4.88(0.77) 6.22(0.61) 4.89(0.87) 3.75(0.70) 4.7(0.90) 4.33(0.67) 2.67(0.49) 3.5(0.56) FORAGING 3.20.58) 2.62(0.68) 2.44(0.38) 3.78(0.78) 2.63(0.63) 2.2(0.42) 2.33(0.80) 1(0.52) 1.4(0.50) SITTING 6.2(0.37) 6.38(0.96) 6.56(0.50) 6(0.76) 5.75(0.59) 6.3(0.72) 7.17(1.08) 7.17(0.79) 7.8(0.55) TOTAL 21(0.63) 21.13(0.35) 21(0.33) 20.67(0.73) 20.75(0.81) 21.5(0.64) 22.33(0.49) 18.83(0.95) 20.8(0.73) 1700-1800 0(0) 6.33(0.89) 4(2) 2(0.58) 0(0) 9.33(1.86) 21.67(1.33) The survey time is divided into one hour intervals, the value in brackets denote the standard error while the value beside it shows the mean value for the particular behavioral state. 12.00 mean no. of individuals 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 06000659 07000800 08000900 09001000 10001100 11001200 12001300 15001600 16001700 17001800 time period FEEDING RESTING SOCIAL MOVING FORAGING SITTING The above graph shows the mean values and standard errors for each behavioral state such as feeding, foraging.. Etc. X axis holds the time period which is divided into one hour intervals; the Y axis holds the mean number of individuals. RANGING BEHAVIOR: The daily movements of the troop were recorded. The GPS locations were recorded. These locations were then plotted on GOOGLE EARTH which is GIS software. Thus the path of movement or the ranging pattern of the troop was known. Ranging pattern of a consecutive three days (22 March to 24 March) is shown below: CALCULATION OF HOME RANGE AND TOTAL DISTANCE TRAVELLED Using the software Arc-GIS, the home range of the troop was calculated out to be 0.1259 km2. The Minimum Convex Polygon was determined with 95% confidence interval which gives us an idea about the troop’s home range. The most preferred sites are found to be the Anthocephalus chinensis patch and the road connecting the Botanical garden and the Shisham Boy’s Hostel dustbin. The total distance traveled during 22 March, 23 March and 24 March as calculated by GOOGLE EARTH software is given below: Date Distance covered (in metres) 22 March 847 23 March 556 24 March 672 FOOD PREFERENCE: The troop generally prefers the following tree species as recorded during the study period: Anthocephalus chinensis, Mangifera indica, Bamboo species, Ficus benjamina, Bauhinia purpurea, Clerodendron infortunatum, Diospyros sp., Litchi chinensis and a variety of grass species. However the troop resorts to feeding from the Shisham Hostel dustbin as well as the Ballupur Dustbin near the Ballupur Chowk. It has also been observed that the troop does occasional raids into the rooms of the hostel for food. The mess workers were also seen to feed the macaques with bread and chapattis prepared in the hostel mess. The macaques also pilfer from the wastebaskets inside the hostel leading chaos among the hostel residents. On one occasion the macaques were found to feed on wheat crumbs (atta crumbs) which some careless pedestrian had dropped on the way near the botanical garden, it was finished within no time after which the macaques rarely opted for natural food on that day. Thus we see that the monkeys have adapted to an urban feeding habit which comprises of cooked food meant for humans. This is the result of a constant attachment with humans which has resulted in such a type of commensal living among the macaques ROOSTING: The troop was found to roost the most in the Anthocephalus chinensis patch and the Litchi chinensis patch. CONCLUSION: From the results we can conclude that: The home range of the troop has been outlined. We can predict the behavior of the troop, say, preference of food plants, most preferred roosting sites or interactions with humans based on the home range. The area of the home range has also been calculated. 4) The preferred food plants have been identified. We can now conclude the plant species which the animals depend during the summer (March-May). 5) We have also seen that the troop depends vastly on cooked food such as dustbin waste food or chapattis and rotis from the hostel mess. From this we can infer that the macaques have adapted themselves into staying side by side with humans and livestock. This type of commensal association is indeed the result of human tolerance towards the macaques. The macaques regularly visit the Boy’s Hostel with the sole aim of pilfering. But till today no such aggressive behavior towards humans has been recorded. In fact it is we, the humans who constantly feed these animals with cooked food. THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS ARE MADE: 1) Planting more food plants in the New Forest area, within the troop’s home range, say (Artocarpus chaplasha, or Mangifera indica) so that the macaques do not venture too much into the hostel or any other human residences, for that matter, which may in future lead to harmful interaction with humans. 2) The Shisham Hostel Dustbin should be shifted to some other place, so that the macaques do not come near humans. Moreover the dustbin is a breeding ground for disease causing micro-organisms and it has got a terrible stench attached to it. So it will be in the interest of Shisham residents if the authorities do something about it. Monkey proof dustbins with heavy lids that only humans can lift the cover may help. 3) The macaques are a threat to the commercial Litchi plantations. So proper cultural operations for protecting the trees need to be taken. 4) The macaques use the bambusetum, near the Ballupur gate, to a great extent for roosting or foraging. But recently the F.R.I. authorities had thinned a large number of bamboo clumps, which had in turn adversely affected the macaque troop, as there was no proper crown cover. After this the troop used to roost near the kadam tree patch, and sometimes near the wicket gate which is so close to human territory. So I suggest that since the animals are after all wild, it is better if we can provide them with secure roosting sites, because it is one of the most important factors determining home range. TIME ACTIVITY FEEDING RESTING SOCIAL MOVING FORAGING SITTING TOT TIME GPS REFERENCES Roonwall,M.L and Mohnot,S.M –Primates of South Asia ( Ecology, Sociobiology and Behavior,1977) Prater, S.H – The Book Of Indian Animals, Bombay Natural History Society,2005 ) Mc Cann (1933c) - Notes on some Indian Macaques. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 36: 796-810 (5 pls.). Bertrand (1969) - The Behavioral Repertoire of the Stumptail Macaque: a descriptive and comparative study. Bibliotheca Primatologica, 11. Basel: Karger. Kurland,J.A.(1973)- A natural history of Kra macaques (Macaca fascicularis Raffles, 1821) at the Kutai Reserve, Kalimantan Timur, Indonesia. Primates (Inuyama) 14:245-262. Simonds, P.E. (1965) - The Bonnet Macaque in South India. In Primate behavior: field studies of monkeys and apes, ed. I. De Vore,pp. 175-196. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Rahaman, H., and Parthasarathy, M. D (1969b) - The home range, roosting places, and the day ranges of the Bonnet Macaque (Macaca radiata). Journal of Zoology 157: 267-276. Sugiyama (1971) - Characteristics of the social life of Bonnet Macaques (Macaca radiate). Primates (Inuyama) 12:247-266. Ellerman, J.R., and Morrison-Scott, T.C.S. 1951- Checklist of palearctic and Indian Mammals, 1758 to 1946. London: British Museum. Napier, J.R., and Napier, P.H. 1967- A handbook of living primates: morphology, ecology and behavior of non human primates. New York: Academic Press. Zimmermann, E.A.W.von..1780- Geographische Geschichte des Menschen, und der allgemein verbreiteten vierfussigen Thiere, nebst einer hieher gehorigen zoologischen Weltcharte. II, Quadrupeden. Leipzig: Weygands-chen Buchhandlung. Milne-Edwards, A. 1870. Note sur quelques Mammiferes du Thibet orientale. Comptes Rendues de l’ Academie de Science (Paris) 70: 341-342. Fooden, J. 1964- Rhesus and crab eating macaques: intergradation in Thailand. Science 143:363-365. W.C.Osman. 1972aTaxonomic status of the macaques Macaca mulatta Zimm. And Macaca irus Cuiver (=M.fascicularis Raffles). Journal of Human Evolution 1:49-51. Shortridge, G.C.1914.-Notes on the weights of animals. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 22:793-794. Schultz ,A.H.1933-Growth and Developmant. In the anatomy of the rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta), ed.C.G. Hartman and W.L.Straus, Jr.,pp.10-27. New York: Hafner Schultz, A.H. 1969- The life of Primates. London: Weidenfield and Nicolson. Fooden, J. 1971a.- Report on Primates collected in Western Thailand, January- April, 1967. Fieldiana (Zoology) 59:1-62. Krishnan, M.1972.- An ecological survey of the larger mammals of penin sular India. Part 1. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 68:503-555 (8 pls.). Van Wagenen, G.1954- Body weight and length of the newborn laboratory rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta). Federation Proceedings 13:157 Van Wagenen,G.1972- Vital statistics from a breeding colony: reproduction and pregnancy outcome in Macaca mulatta. Journal of Medical Primatology (Basel) 1:3-28. Gavan, J.A., and Van Wagenen,G. 1955- Studies on newborn laboratory rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). American Journal of Physical Anthropology 13:399. Fry, T.B. 1928- Bombay Natural History Society’s Mammal Survey of India, Burma and Ceylon. Report no.46. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society 32:545-547. Prakash,I.1956- A list of Mammals of Rajasthan Desert. Journal of the Bengal Natural History Society 28:1-7. Prakash, I. 1958- The breeding season of the rhesus monkey Macaca mulatta (Zimmermann) in Rajasthan. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 55:154. Prakash, I.1959- Checklist of the mammals of Rajasthan desert. University of Rajasthan Studies (Biological Science) (Jaipur) 4:30-56. Prakash, I.1960- Breeding of Mammals in Rajasthan desert, India. Journal of Mammalogy 41:386-389. Prakash , I and Krishna, D. 1960- A note on the mammals of the desert of Rajasthan, India [in hindi] Vijnana Parishad Anusandhan Patrika (Allahabad) 3:203-204. Neville, M.K.1968b- Ecology and the activity of the Himalayan foot hill rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). Ecology 49:110123. Puget, A. 1971- Observations sur le macaque rhesus, Macaca mulatta (Zimmermann, 1780), en Afganisthan. Mammalia ( Paris) 35:199-203 (1 pl.) Mukherjee , A.K and Gupta, S. 1965- Habits of the Rhesus Macaque, Macaca mulatta (Zimmermann), in the Sundarbans, 24Parganas, West Bengal. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 62:145-146. Chance, M.R.A. 1956- Social structure of a colony of Macaca mulatta. British Journal Of Animal Behavior 4:1-13. Mukherjee, R.P. 1969- A field study of the behavior of two roadside groups of Rhesus macaque, Macaca mulatta(Zimmermann), in Northern Uttar Pradesh. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society66:47-56. Rahman ,H and Parthasarathy,M.D 1978- Behavioral variants of Bonnet macaque ( Macaca radiate) inhabiting cultivated gardens, lbid., 1978,75.406-425. Altmann ,S.A.1962a- A field study of Socio biology of Rhesus monkeys, Macaca mulatta. Annals of the New York Academy of Science 102:338-435. Pirta, R.S et. Al. (1977)- A population study of two species of non human primates:M. mulatta and M.radiata J. Bomb. Nat. Hist.Soc.77, 429-434(1977) Lindburg,D.G. 1971-The Rhesus Monkey in North India: an ecological and behavioral study. In Primate Behavior: developments in field and laboratory research.II,ed.L.A.Rosenblum,pp-1-106. New York. Academic press. Blanford ,W.T.1888-91- The fauna of British India including Burma and Ceylon: Mammalia. London: Taylor and Francis. Roonwall,M.L.1956- Macaque monkey eating mushrooms. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society54:171. Mandal,A.K. 1964- The behavior of the rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta Zimmermann) in the Sundarbans. Journal of the Bengal Natural History Society 33:153-165. Southwick,C.H.; Beg,M.A. and Siddiqui, M.R.1961a- A population survey of rhesus monkeys in villages, towns and temples of Northern India. Ecology 42:538-547. Southwick,C.H.; Beg,M.A. and Siddiqui, M.R.1961b- A population Survey of Rhesus monkeys in Northern India. Transportation routes and forest areas. Ecology 42:698-710. Southwick,C.H.;, Beg,M.A. and Siddiqui, M.R. 1965- Rhesus Monkeys in North India. In Primate Behavior: field studies of monkeys and apes,ed.I.De Vore,pp.111-159. New York:Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Southwick,C.H. and Siddiqui,M.R 1966- Population changes of Rhesus monkeys(Macaca mulatta ) in India, 1959-1965. Primates (Inuyama) 7:303-314. Southwick,C.H. and Siddiqui,M.R 1968- Population trends of rhesus monkeys in villages and towns of Northern India,19591965. Journal of Animal Ecology 37:199-204. Southwick,C.H. and Siddiqui,M.R and Siddiqi,F.1970- Primate populations and Biomedical research. Science 170:10511054. Shah,K.V.and Southwick,C.H,1965- Prevalence of antibodies to certain viruses in sera of free living rhesus and of captive monkeys. Indian Journal of Medical Research (Calcutta) 53:488-500. Southwick,C.H;, Ghosh,A and Louch,C.D. 1964- A roadside survey of Rhesus monkeys in Bengal. Journal of Mammalogy 45:443-448. Gupta,R.C and Kumar Suresh, 1990 – On the Home range of free ranging Rhesus Monkeys (Macaca mulatta zimmermann) in Saraswati and Veer Sonti forests in Haryana. Journal of Nature Conservation,1990. Singh, S.D. 1966- The effects of human environment upon the reactions to the novel situations in the rhesus. Behavior (Leiden) 26:243-250. Valerio et al. 1969- Macaca mulatta: Management of a laboratory breeding colony. New York: Academic Press. S.D.Singh (1969) - Urban Monkeys. Scientific American 221:108-115 Mathur, Reena-Animal Behavior, 1998) Working plan of New Forest, Forest Research Institute,Dehradun. Waser, P.M.1976- Experimental playbacks show vocal mediation of intergroup avoidance in a forest monkey. Nature , Lond. 255:56-58 Altmann, S.A.(ed.).1967. Social communication among primates. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.