Torsten Wronski, Ann Apio, Martin Plath, Christiane Averbeck

• Grouping patterns within the genus Tragelaphus suggest that species inhabiting open areas tend to live in larger groups, while species preferring dense habitats live solitarily or in small family groups. We asked if similar variation would be concealed in the within-species variation of bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus). Recent molecular phylogeographic analyses revealed several locally adapted forms of bushbuck in different ecoregions on the African continent. We compared group sizes of south-eastern bushbuck (Tragelaphus sylvaticus) among six different populations ("ecotypes"). To date, most data on the social organization of bushbuck have been collected from only one population in Queen Elizabeth National Park (QENP) in Uganda. This particular population, however, inhabits an unusual-comparatively open-habitat type, while bushbuck otherwise inhabit dense habitats, leaving doubt whether data collected in QENP are representative of the entire species. We, therefore, compared grouping patterns between ecotypes inhabiting rather openGrouping patterns within the genus Tragelaphus suggest that species inhabiting open areas tend to live in larger groups, while species preferring dense habitats live solitarily or in small family groups. We asked if similar variation would be concealed in the within-species variation of bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus). Recent molecular phylogeographic analyses revealed several locally adapted forms of bushbuck in different ecoregions on the African continent. We compared group sizes of south-eastern bushbuck (Tragelaphus sylvaticus) among six different populations ("ecotypes"). To date, most data on the social organization of bushbuck have been collected from only one population in Queen Elizabeth National Park (QENP) in Uganda. This particular population, however, inhabits an unusual-comparatively open-habitat type, while bushbuck otherwise inhabit dense habitats, leaving doubt whether data collected in QENP are representative of the entire species. We, therefore, compared grouping patterns between ecotypes inhabiting rather open habitats (e.g., dianae and haywoodi) and ecotypes occupying rather dense habitats (e.g., massaicus and ornatus). In bachelor groups and in all-female (spinster) groups, single sightings were the most frequent "group type" in all populations examined. We detected no significant difference among ecotypes in relative frequencies of group size categories in the case of bachelor groups. Spinster group sizes were slightly (albeit significantly) smaller in QENP than in all other areas. Moreover, a comparison of two areas inside (low human pursuit) and outside Lake Mburo National Park (high hunting pressure) in Uganda revealed no significant difference in grouping patterns in response to human pursuit (as reported for impala [Aepyceros melampus] inhabiting the same area). Altogether, our results suggest that group sizes in bushbuck are not dependent on the habitat type they inhabit; neither does human nuisance have an impact on grouping patterns. Hence, an "almost solitary" lifestyle appears to be a characteristic of the entire taxon.…