Health status assessment of wild ungulates based on body condition evaluation technique in Muthangha wildlife sanctuary, Wayanad, Kerala, India

Introduction

The physical condition of an animal is a vital indicator of its health, survival prospects, and overall fitness. One of the most reliable ways to assess this condition is by examining the reserves of fat and muscle that the animal maintains, which are strongly influenced by the quality and availability of nutrition in its habitat (Kie, 1988) [6] . Thus, the body condition of an individual not only reflects its internal physiological state but also provides insights into the type and adequacy of fodder available within a given ecosystem. Over the years, a variety of techniques have been developed to evaluate body condition with precision. Traditional approaches include indices such as the kidney fat index and the bone marrow fat index, which serve as direct measures of stored energy (Jakob et al., 1996; Cook et al., 2007) [5,4] . More advanced methods, such as bioelectrical impedance analysis, have allowed researchers to estimate body composition by measuring electrical conductivity through tissues, offering a relatively accurate but minimally invasive tool (Pitt et al., 2006; Barthelmess et al., 2006) [10,1] . Alongside these, morphometric measurements-such as body weight, body length, chest or abdominal circumference, and proportional ratios derived from these values have proven to be practical indicators of condition in both wild and captive settings. One of the key advantages of body condition assessment lies in its ability to provide information on the health status of animals without causing them undue harm or stress. Noninvasive methods, including visual scoring systems, allow ecologists to monitor wildlife from a distance. For instance, visual body condition indices developed for deer assess fat and muscle coverage at easily observable skeletal landmarks such as the ribs, the lateral vertebral processes, the pelvic girdle, and the tuber ilium (Chitariya et al., 2018) [3] . Despite the inherent subjectivity of ocular assessments, these scoring systems have been successfully applied in a variety of habitats, yielding consistent results across populations (Riney, 1960; 1982; 1995) [11] . Such scoring approaches often employ standardized point scales to evaluate the nutritional and health status of freeranging herbivores (Singh et al., 2009) [14] . These systems are especially valuable in ecological research, where understanding population health is closely tied to broader questions about resource limitation, habitat quality, and the impacts of environmental change (Lane et al., 2014; Carpio et al., 2015) [8,2] . Moreover, the concept of "condition" itself is not merely a static measurement but rather reflects the short-term physiological capacity of an animal to cope with external challenges, including fluctuations in diet, exposure to diseases, and environmental stressors (Pedrotti & Fraquelli, 2001) [9] . In this way, body condition scoring emerges as a powerful tool that bridges individual health assessments with population-level ecological insights, making it indispensable in wildlife biology, conservation management, and ecological monitoring.

Material and Method Study area

Muthanga Wildlife Sanctuary is a sprawling rainforest located in the Wayanad district of Kerala, India. The sanctuary is part of the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve, a UNESCO-designated biosphere reserve that encompasses a significant portion of the Western Ghats. The sanctuary is renowned for its rich biodiversity and diverse ecosystems, including semi-evergreen, moist deciduous, and dry deciduous forests. This varied landscape provides a haven for a wide array of flora and fauna. The sanctuary is home to a diverse range of animal species, including elephants, tigers, leopards, deer, monkeys, and a variety of bird species. Muthanga is recognized as a Project Elephant site, emphasizing the importance of elephant conservation in the region.

Climatic condition

The Muthanga Wildlife Sanctuary in Kerala, India has a variety of climate and is home to a rich diversity of plant and animal life:

Climate

The sanctuary experiences a range of climate, including: Summer: From April to June, the sanctuary is extremely hot, with temperatures reaching up to 32°C. This is a good time to see wildlife as animals come out to drink water. However, the heat can be unbearable and forest fires may occur.

Monsoon: From July to September, the sanctuary is extremely humid and visibility is low. This is not a good time to visit.

Winter: From October to March, the sanctuary is comfortable with flowers in full bloom. This is a good time to visit for birdwatching, but sightings may not be as good.

Rainfall

The sanctuary receives about 2,200 mm of rainfall, with heavy rains occurring from June to August.

Methodology

The current study was conducted in the Sanctuary from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. The ungulates' health status was assessed using the Body Condition Evaluation approach (Table 1) while they were kept at a safe distance and not disturbed. The wild herbivores' body condition will be assessed using a point system, as recommended by Riney (1960) [11] and updated by Shrivastav and Sharma (2000) [17] . The assessment of an animal's bodily condition entailed determining its physical appearance by visually examining the degree of bony process protuberance on its body surface as well as the state of its skin coat. Each animal will receive a point based on the examination of its main features, including its skin coat, flank, ribs, pelvic girdle, spinal column, and lumbar shelf. Table 2 lists the suggested scores for each bodily part's related condition quality. Animals receiving a score of 0-5 were classified as poor, those scoring 6-8 as fair, and those scoring 9-12 as good. Secondary data were also gathered. Additionally, the study included normal statistical procedures (Snedecor & Cochran, 1994) [16] . The assessment of body condition among wild ungulate species in Muthangha Wildlife Sanctuary provides valuable insights into the overall health and nutritional status of these populations. Table . 2 presents the evaluation of three representative ungulate species: sambar (Rusa unicolor), spotted deer (Axis axis), and barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak). A total of 57 individuals were examined, and their body condition was categorized as good, average, or poor. This categorization serves as an indirect indicator of habitat quality, food availability, and environmental pressures that shape the wellbeing of herbivores within the sanctuary. Among the three species, the sambar population displayed a predominance of animals in the average body condition category, with 64.28% of individuals falling into this group. Only 21.42% were recorded in good condition, while 14.28% showed signs of poor body condition. This distribution suggests that although most of the sambar are surviving adequately, a significant proportion may not be attaining optimal nutritional intake.

Result and Discussion

Conclusion

According to the current research on the health status assessment of wild ungulates in Muthangha Wildlife Sanctuary, Wayanad, Kerala, India, using the body condition evaluation technique, the two ungulate species found there had average body conditions. This could be because there were more deer in the area, which could have led to competition for food, or because there were fewer fodder species and shed trees within the sanctuary. More plant saplings that can serve as a supplemental food source and enhance the physical condition of ungulate species can be planted inside the forest area to improve the sanctuary's upkeep.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementI would like to sincerely thank Kerala Forest Department, as well as all of my friends and family for their support during the research process. I also want to thank the College of Forestry's SHUATS personnel for helping me along the way.

References

1. Barthelmess EL, Phillips ML, Schuckers ME. The value of bioelectrical impedance analysis vs. condition indices in predicting body fat stores in North American porcupines (Erethizon dorsatum). Canadian Journal of Zoology. 2006;84(12):1712-1720. https://doi.org/10.1139/Z06-162
2. Carpio AJ, Guerrero-Casado J, Ruiz-Aizpurua L, Tortosa FS, Vicente J. Interpreting faecal nitrogen as a non-invasive indicator of diet quality and body condition in contexts of high ungulate density. European Journal of Wildlife Research. 2015;61(4):557-562. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344015-0920-5
3. Chitariya LM, Amol R, Nidhi R, Sharma RK, Akhilesh M, Shrivastav AB. Non-invasive assessment of body condition of wild herbivores of Pench Tiger Reserve. Journal of Indian Veterinary. 2018;95(4):43-45.
4. Cook RC, Stephenson TR, Myers WL, Cook JG, Shipley LA. Validating predictive models of nutritional condition of mule deer. Journal of Wildlife Management. 2007;71(6):1934-1943. https://doi.org/10.2193/2006-331
5. Jakob EM, Marshall SD, Uetz GW. Estimating fitness: A comparison of body condition indices. Oikos. 1996;77(1):61-67. https://doi.org/10.2307/3545585
6. Kie JG. Performance in wild ungulates: Measuring population density and condition of individuals. General Technical Report PSW-106. Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture; 1988.
7. Kishor B. Barrier design for zoos. New Delhi: Central Zoo Authority; 2008.
8. Lane EP, Clauss M, Kock ND, Hill FWG, Majok AA, Kotze A, et al. Body condition and ruminal morphology responses of free-ranging impala (Aepyceros melampus) to changes in diet. European Journal of Wildlife Research. 2014;60(4):599-612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-014-0821-y
9. Pedrotti L, Fraquelli C. Condizioni e fertilità del cervo nel Parco Nazionale dello Stelvio. Bormio (SO), Italy: Consorzio Parco Nazionale dello Stelvio; 2001.
10. Pitt JA, Larivière S, Messier F. Condition indices and bioelectrical impedance analysis to predict body condition of small carnivores. Journal of Mammalogy. 2006;87(4):717-722. https://doi.org/10.1644/05MAMM-A-370R2.1
11. Riney T. A field technique for assessing physical condition of some ungulates. Journal of Wildlife Management. 1960;24(1):92-94. https://doi.org/10.2307/3796364
12. Riney T. Evaluating condition of free-ranging red deer (Cervus elaphus), with special reference to New Zealand, Part I and II. New Zealand Journal of Science and Technology. 1955;36(5):429-483.
13. Singh S, Shrivastav AB, Sharma RK. Assessments on the body condition, endoparasitism and husbandry of rescued wild antelopes. Journal of Veterinary Parasitology. 2012;26(1):13-15.
14. Singh S, Shrivastav AB, Sharma RK. The epidemiology of gastrointestinal parasitism and body condition in free-ranging herbivores. Journal of Threatened Taxa. 2009;1(10):535-537. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o2127.535-7
15. Singh S. Study on the status and management of wildlife health, offense and trade in Allahabad district of Uttar Pradesh [doctoral dissertation]. Allahabad: Sam Higginbottom Institute of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences; 2013.
16. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. Statistical methods. 7th ed. New Delhi: Oxford & IBH Publishing Co.; 1994. p. 312-317.
17. Srivastav AB, Sharma RK. Evaluation of body condition of animals. In: A manual of wildlife health management in protected areas. Jabalpur: College of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry; 2000. p. 57.
18. Upadhyay KP. Analysis on the zoo architecture and health management of wild animals in Sarnath Deer Park at Varanasi District of Uttar Pradesh [master's thesis]. Allahabad: School of Forestry and Environment, Sam Higginbottom Institute of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences; 2015.