Zhou, S. (1991). On “uncia uncia” and “meng ji” in Shan Hai Jin (Vol. 13).
Abstract: Meng ji is described in Shan Hui Jin (Classic of Mountains and Rivers) as a leopard-like animal adept in hiding with white fur and a patterned forehead. This article makes a comparison between “meng ji” and “uncia uncia” in terms of their shapes, fur colors, natural environments of habitats, habits, characteristics and native areas, and comes to the conclusion that “meng ji” is what we call “uncia uncia” nowadays. The description of “meng ji” in Shan Hui Jin should be the first record of Uncia uncia in the world.
|
|
Jackson, R., Hunter, D., & Emmerich, C. (1997). SLIMS: An Information Management System for Promoting the Conservation of Snow Leopards and Biodiversity in the Mountains of Central Asia. In R.Jackson, & A.Ahmad (Eds.), (pp. 75–91). Lahore, Pakistan: Islt.
|
Sludskiy A.A. (1973). Snow leopard or irbis Pantera (Uncia) uncia Schreber (1776) (Vol. Vol. 34. Hunting mammals of Kazakhstan).
Abstract: A detailed description of the snow leopard habitat in Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, China, Pakistan, and India is given. Provided are data concerning its distribution and population size in the USSR, Kazakhstan and other neighbour countries, as well as its habitat, catching, and fur trade. Reduction of the snow leopard catching volumes for zoological trade to 10 or less animals is recommended to preserve the species; establish two new highland nature reserves; improve the management of snow leopard raising in captivity.
|
|
Fox, J. L., & Nurbu, C. (1990). Hemis, a national park for snow leopards in India's Trans-Himalaya. Int.Pedigree Book of Snow Leopards, 6, 71–84.
|
Zakhidov T.Z. (1960). Irbis (Felis uncia) Ilvrs.
Abstract: The author provides information about snow leopard taxonomy, distribution, habitat and appearance. Biology of this animal is understudied. Snow leopard is able to make long jumps. It feeds upon ibex, wild sheep, marmots, partridge, and sometimes livestock, but never man. Gestation period is three months, at the end of May female gives birth to two or three cubs. Being very occasional, purchase of skin is of no practical value.
|
|
Fox, J. L., & Chundawat, R. S. (1997). Evaluation of Snow Leopard Sign Abundance in the Upper Indus Valley. In R.Jackson, & A.Ahmad (Eds.), (pp. 66–74). Lahore, Pakistan: Islt.
|
Jackson, R. M., & Ahlborn, G. (1988). Observations on the Ecology of Snow Leopard in West Nepal. In H.Freeman (Ed.), (pp. 65–87). India: Snow Leopard Trust and Wildlife Institute of India.
Abstract: This summary of a four year field study by Jackson and Ahlborn begging in 1982 and concluding in 1985, discusses behaviour, trapping and tracking techniques, home range, activity patterns, prey and habitat and survey methods.
|
|
Yanfa, L. (1994). Snow leopard distribution, purchase locations and conservation in Qinghai Province, China. In J.L.Fox, & D.Jizeng (Eds.), (pp. 65–72). Usa: Islt.
|
|
McCarthy, T., & Munkhtsog, B. (1997). Preliminary Assessment of Snow Leopard Sign Surveys in Mongolia. In R.Jackson, & A.Ahmad (Eds.), (pp. 57–65). Lahore, Pakistan: Islt.
|
Namgail, T., Fox, J., & Bhatnagar, Y. V. (2004). Habitat segregation between sympatric Tibetan argali Ovis ammon hodgsoni and blue sheep Pseudois nayaur in the Indian Trans-Himalaya. Journal of Zoology, 262, 57–63.
Abstract: Tibetan argali Ovis ammon hodgsoni and blue sheep Pseudois nayaur have almost completely overlapping distributions encompassing most of the Tibetan plateau and its margins. Such a sympatric distribution of related species with similar ecological requirements implies that there is some degree of resource partitioning. This may be accomplished on the basis of habitat and/or diet separation. This study evaluated such ecological separation on the basis of physical habitat partitioning by these two sympatric ungulates in Hemis High Altitude National Park, Ladakh, India, in an area where the argali established a small new population in 1978. Such separation was tested for
on the basis of expected difference between the species in their proximity to cliffs, associated with species-specific anti-predator behaviour. Tibetan argali selected habitats away from cliffs while blue sheep selected habitats close to cliffs. Blue sheep also selected steep slopes whereas argali selected gentle slopes. The two species did not differ
in their use of habitats in terms of elevation. They did, however, differ in their use of plant communities; blue sheep selected sub-shrub and grass-dominated communities whilst argali selected forb-dominated communities. We suggest that the two species coexist in this site as a result of the differential use of habitat associated with their
species-specific anti-predator strategies.
|
