, 2012). However, this bias may not hold true for leopards (Martins et al., 2011; Pitman et al., 2012). Why this technique was able to detect a sizable portion of small kills made by leopards and not by other predators is unclear, but we provide a few hypotheses: (1) our GPS cluster ‘decision rules’ may be particularly effective at detecting leopard predation events – including small prey species; (2) leopard feeding behaviour, plucking

hair or the tendency to cache prey, might make carcass detection easier for field researchers; (3) our study employed a relatively intensive investigation schedule resulting in a short time delay between identifying clusters and searching them Opaganib manufacturer in the field (mean = 10 days, sd = 9 days). It is important to mention that even though our technique detected small kills, we likely missed predation events on smaller prey like reptiles, rodents and small birds, and thus our representation of small prey consumed may be an underestimate. To verify the accuracy of this GPS cluster method, we recommend comparing this technique with continuous tracking as this should provide superior data where they can be conducted (Mills, learn more 1992). Although we found no statistically significant benefit from supplementing our GPS

cluster dataset with faecal samples, we do advocate the use of this technique 上海皓元医药股份有限公司 in future studies on other large carnivores (e.g. lions; Tambling et al., 2012) and on leopards inhabiting different, untested systems. Increasing the detection of kills made by elusive predators will facilitate dietary studies by allowing for the

collection of more data. For example, studies attempting to quantify carrying capacity metrics, like kill rates and accurate biomass estimates (Jooste et al., 2013), may find combining faecal and GPS-located kill datasets beneficial. This approach requires more resources (e.g. time, effort, funds), but faecal samples are often present at GPS cluster sites (Swanepoel, 2009; Pitman et al., 2012). For example, 52.7% of leopard faecal samples collected in the Waterberg, South Africa, were found at GPS-located kill sites (Swanepoel, 2009). GPS-located faecal samples and kill-site carcasses – as they are partly nested datasets – can be expected to correlate highly, as they did in this study (68%), but what is important is the addition of undetected prey (32%), which can assist in improving predation datasets especially in systems where locating faecal samples is extremely difficult. Our findings are similar to those of Martins et al. (2011) and Tambling et al. (2012), but we suggest caution in interpreting our results on account of our faecal sample size (n = 62 of which 24 were independent of GPS cluster investigations; e.g. Tambling et al., 2012 located 208 faecal samples).