|
Sukhbat, K., & Munkhtsog, B. (1997). Density and Distribution of Ibex and Argali Sheep in Mongolia. In R.Jackson, & A.Ahmad (Eds.), (pp. 121–123). Lahore, Pakistan: Islt.
|
|
Sumiya, G., Buyantsog, B., & WWF Mongolia Country Office. (2002). Conservation of Snow Leopard in the Turgen and Tsagaan Shuvuut Mountains Through Local Involvement.. Islt: Islt.
|
|
Taber, R. D. (1988). Toward a Free-Living Snow Leopard Recovery Plan. In H.Freeman (Ed.), (261). Usa: ISLT and Wildlife Institute of India.
|
Sharma, K., Fiechter, M., George, T., Young, J., Alexander, J.
S., Bijoor, Suryawanshi, K., Mishra, C. (2020). Conservation and people: Towards an ethical code of conduct for
the use of camera traps in wildlife research. Ecological Solutions and Evidence, , 1–6.
Abstract: 1. Camera trapping is a widely employed tool in wildlife
research, used to estimate animal abundances, understand animal
movement, assess species richness and under- stand animal behaviour. In
addition to images of wild animals, research cameras often record human
images, inadvertently capturing behaviours ranging from innocuous
actions to potentially serious crimes.
2. With the increasing use of camera traps, there is an urgent need to
reflect on how researchers should deal with human images caught on
cameras. On the one hand, it is important to respect the privacy of
individuals caught on cameras, while, on the other hand, there is a
larger public duty to report illegal activity. This creates ethical
dilemmas for researchers.
3. Here, based on our camera-trap research on snow leopards Panthera
uncia, we outline a general code of conduct to help improve the practice
of camera trap based research and help researchers better navigate the
ethical-legal tightrope of this important research tool.
|
Kachel, S., Bayrakcismith, R., Kubanychbekov, Z., Kulenbekov, R., McCarthy, T., Weckworth, B., Wirsing, A. (2022). Ungulate spatiotemporal responses to contrasting predation risk from wolves and snow leopards. Journal of Animal Ecology, , 1–16.
Abstract: 1. Spatial responses to risk from multiple predators can precipitate emergent consequences for prey (i.e. multiple-predator effects, MPEs) and mediate indirect interactions between predators. How prey navigate risk from multiple predators may therefore have important ramifications for understanding the propagation of predation-risk effects (PREs) through ecosystems.
2. The interaction of predator and prey traits has emerged as a potentially key driver of antipredator behaviour but remains underexplored in large vertebrate systems, particularly where sympatric prey share multiple predators. We sought to better generalize our understanding of how predators influence their ecosystems by considering how multiple sources of contingency drive prey distribution in a multi-predator–multi-prey system.
3. Specifically, we explored how two sympatric ungulates with different escape tactics—vertically agile, scrambling ibex Capra sibirica and sprinting argali Ovis ammon—responded to predation risk from shared predators with contrasting hunting modes—cursorial wolves Canis lupus and vertical-ambushing, stalking snow leopards Panthera uncia.
4. Contrasting risk posed by the two predators presented prey with clear trade-offs. Ibex selected for greater exposure to chronic long-term risk from snow leopards, and argali for wolves, in a nearly symmetrical manner that was predictable based on the compatibility of their respective traits. Yet, acute short-term risk from the same predator upended these long-term strategies, increasing each ungulates' exposure to risk from the alternate predator in a manner consistent with a scenario in which conflicting antipredator behaviours precipitate risk-enhancing MPEs and mediate predator facilitation. By contrast, reactive responses to wolves led ibex to reduce their exposure to risk from both predators—a risk-reducing MPE. Evidence of a similar reactive risk-reducing effect for argali vis-à-vis snow leopards was lacking.
5. Our results suggest that prey spatial responses and any resulting MPEs and prey-mediated interactions between predators are contingent on the interplay of hunting mode and escape tactics. Further investigation of interactions among various drivers of contingency in PREs will contribute to a more comprehensive understanding and improved forecasting of the ecological effects of predators.
|
Uchitelskaya gazeta. (1984). Return of snow leopard. January 3 1984.
Abstract: 10 snow leopards have settled in western extremities of the Hissar ridge. Almost 25 years ago, disturbed by anthropogenic activity, this rarest fauna representative abandoned the area being threatened. In a habitat usual for this species have now been created the Kyzylsu and Miraki nature reserves and the species is now rendering the highlands inhabitable again. Wild boar, Turkestan lynx, long-tailed marmot, snow leopard and black vulture, a total of 200 animal and bird species, can be found now in this area.
|
Zhirnov L.V. (1975). Extinct mammals of the USSR fauna and their distribution over natural zones.
Abstract: 18 taxons of rare and endangered mammals of the USSR are distributed over natural zones such as deserts and semi-deserts including riverine forests and elevations; mountains and highlands; forests and forest-steppe; and offshore strips of closed seas. A majority of endangered species is associated with deserts and mountains of Central Asia and Kazakhstan.
|
Barpiev I.M. (2002). Peculiarities of biodiversity in the Besh-Aral nature reserve.
Abstract: 224 animal species, including two relict and 20 endemic, are registered in the Besh Aral nature reserve (Kyrgyzstan). This nature reserve is inhabited by rare and endangered animal and bird species (e.g. Menzbier's marmot, snow leopard, Tien Shan brown bear, manul, Turkistan lynx, saker falcon, bearded vulture, golden eagle, Himalayan griffon, and others) included in the Red Data Books of Kyrgyzstan, former USSR, and Led List of IUCN.
|
Abdunazarov B.B. (1994). Rare and endangered animal species in the Kashkadaraya region.
Abstract: 41 percent of all vertebrate species listed in the Red Book of the Uzbek SSR (18 mammal species, 29 bird, 6 reptile, and 8 fish species) inhabit the Kashkadarya region. The mammals are Tien Shan brown bear, Central Asian otter, Turkistan lynx, snow leopard, and goitered gazelle. Nesting bird fauna includes the following species: black stork, Turkistan white stork, short toed eagle, booted eagle, golden eagle, bearded vulture, black vulture, griffon vulture, saker falcon, houbara bustard, and eagle owl. Migrating and wintering bird species are dalmatian pelican, rose pelican, mute swan, osprey, tawny eagle, imperial eagle, pin-tailed sandgrouse; and possibly Bonnli's eagle and Barbary falcon that have not been seen here since 1950-s. Rare reptiles are represented by two species: desert monitor and Central Asian cobra.
|
Zinchenko Yu.K. (1989). About characteristic of mammal fauna in the Markakol nature reserve (Vol. Part. II.).
Abstract: 50 mammal species permanently live in the nature reserve. There penetrate snow leopard, wolf, corsac, and wild boar on a relatively regular basis. Moral, roe deer, and elk migrate outside the Markakol depression in winter. Though mentioned in literature as species inhabiting the nature reserve, beaver, stone marten, and dhole are not met there today.
|
