A STUDY ON MANAGEMENT OF BARKING DEER WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON HOUSING, FEEDING, PRODUCTIVE & REPRODUCTIVE
PERFORMANCE AT CHITTAGONG ZOO, BANGLADESH.
A Production Report Submitted by
Examination Roll: 2003/23 Reg. No. : 119
Internship ID: E- 21 Session : 2002-2003
This Production Report is Submitted for Fulfilment of the Degree of Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (DVM)
CHITTAGONG VETERINARY AND ANIMAL SCIENCES UNIVERSITY
KHULSHI, CHITTAGONG-4202.
A STUDY ON MANAGEMENT OF BARKING DEER WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON HOUSING , FEEDING, PRODUCTIVE & REPRODUCTIVE PERFORMANCE AT
CHITTAGONG ZOO, BANGLADESH.
A Production Report submitted as per approved style and content
………..
Signature of Author Md.Lutfor Rahman Roll No:2003/23 Reg.No:119 Intern ID: E-21
Date of Submission: ………
………
Signature of Supervisor Dr.Gauranga Ch. Chanda Professor,
Dept. of Dairy & Poultry Science.
Dean,
Faculty of Food Science &
Technology.
Date………..
CONTENTS
SL. No. NAME OF THE CONTENTS PAGE NO.
1 List of Contents 01
2 List of tables 02
3 Acknowledgement 03
4 Plagiarism Certificate 04
5 Abstract 05
6 Introduction & Objectives 06-08
7 Review of Literature 09-29
8 Materials & Methods 30-31
9 Results & Discussion 32-36
10 Conclusion 37
11 Bibliography 38-44
L I S T O F T A B L E S
SL. NO. NAME OF THE TABLE PAGE NO.
01 D e e r p o p u l a t i o n at C h i tt a g o n g z o o 30 02 H o u s i n g p a t e r n / E n c l o s u r e o f D e e r i n
C h i tt a g o n g z o o
32 03 M e a s u r e m e n t of s p a c e s s p e c i f i e d f o r
n i g h t s h e l t e r/ F e e d i n g s p a c e
32 04 F e e d i n g S t a t u s o f D e e r i n C h i t t a g o n g z o o 33 05 W at e r s u p p l e m e n t f o r D e e r i n C h i t t a g o n g
z o o
34 06 B o d y w e i g h t m e a s u r e m e n t o f D e e r i n
C h i tt a g o n g z o o
35 07 P r o d u c t i v e & r e p r o d u c t i v e p e rf o r m a n c e of
d e e r i n C h i t t a g o n g z o o
35
PLAGIARISM CERFICATE
It is given the assurance that this report is not a facsimile of any other study report. However various information are collected from some related books, journals , other printed papers & websites . These are
listed in the bibliography list which were essential in preparing this report. And it is claimed to be a plagiarism free study report.
The Author
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author is grateful to the almighty Allah without whose grace it would have eve r been possible to persue this study in this field of science & to complete
this production report writing for the degree of Doctor of Veterinary Medicine(DVM)
The author would like to thanks his reverned & beloved teacher & supervisor Professor Dr. Gauranga Ch. Chanda, Dept. of Dairy and poultry Science &
Dean, Faculty of Food Science & Technology, Chittagong Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Khulshi, Chittagong for his valuable advice, suggestions and kind cooperation during the study period .
The author would like to express his respect to Md. Hasanuzzaman, Assistant Professor, Dept. of Animal Science & Nutrition, Chittagong Veterinary& Animal Sciences University ,Khulshi,Chittagong.
The author would like to express his heart felt appreciation & thanks to Dr.
Md. Monjur Morshed, Curator, Chittagong Zoo & the zoo authority for their kind cooperation during the study period.
The author is ever indebted to his parents ; brother ,sister & friends for their sacrifice ,blessing and encouragement to get him in this position.
The Author
Rahman,L.(2009); Study on Management of Barking Deer with special Emphasis on Housing, Feeding, Productive & Reproductive Performance Of Chittagong Zoo, Bangladesh.
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted on the management including housing, feeding, productive and reproductive performance of barking deer in captive condition at Chittagong Zoo.
Data were collected for a period of 3 months from 19 deer from 10 June to 10 August on all age and sex group . The deer were kept within an open enclosure measured as 66.52sq.m with a fence of chain link mash, 3.6m in height. A small tin shed room of 10.5m x 8.5m in size has been kept for protecting the deer from natural calamities.
Available feeds supplied to deer were Gram, Rice bran, green gourd, pumpkin, Carrot and Amloki. The average birth weight of males and females were ranging from 3.25- 4.0 kg and 2.75-3.5 kg, males and females weaning weight were ranging from 10-12 kg and 08-10 kg respectively and adult males and females weight were ranging from 25-30 kg and 20-25 kg respectively. It was also observed that the weaning age, length f estrous cycle, age at first fawning and gestation length were ranging from 4-6 months; 12-20 days : 14-18 month and 7-8 month respectively. From the study, it was also observed that the feeding of barking deer need to be updated according to their nutritional requirement following some standard and overall management needs to be improved as well.
Key words: Barking Deer, Chittagong zoo, Feeds and Feeding. Management, Behaviour.
Chapter-I INTRODUCTION
There are five species of deer in Bangladesh namely Spotted Deer( Chitra harin) (Cervus axis axis Enxlebess. 1777), Barking Deer (Muntiacu.s muntjak Zimmermanr, 1780), Hog Deer (Axis porcinus Zimmermanr, 1780), Sambar Deer (Cervus unicolor unicolor Kerr, 1792) and Swamp Deer or Barasingh (Cervus duvaucili ranjitsinhi Groves, 1982) (Sarker and Sarker, 1988). According to present information Swamp Deer and Hag Deer have become virtually extinct. The Barking Deer and Sambar Deer is not threatened (ILTCN Bangladesh, 2000).
The Indian Muntjacs specifically are The Indian Muntjac (Muntiacus muntjak) is commonly called the "barking deer" due to the bark-like sound that it makes as an alarm when danger is present. Sometimes these deer will bark for an hour or more. This s widespread throughout Southern Asia, but are one of the least known Asian animals.
Paleontological evidence proves that Indian Muntjacs have been around since the late Pleistocene epoch at least 12,000 years ago. Since then, they have played a major role in Southern Asia for sport hunting as well as being hunted for its meat and skin. Often, these animals are hunted around the outskirts of agricultural areas because they can be considered a nuisance damaging crops and ripping bark off of trees. However, this animal is still in an abundance in Southern Asia numbering anywhere from 140,000-150,000 in China alone as of 2004.
Zoos and aquariums are recreational areas- providing a well desi where urban people can take time out. Meeting animals in enjoyable surroundings is at the source of people caring for animals and nature and thus becoming conservationists. Zoos and aquarium are conservation areas providing natural habitats for native species and building time bridges for species that are threatened in the wild. The major goals of zoos and aquariums is to protect and secure endangered species and ecosystems to achieve this goal they between their conservation activities and their daily work to gain public support.
The Indian Muntjac is the most widespread but least known of all the animals in South Asia. This species is distributed throughout South Asia, but more densely located in Southeastern Asia. Some specific countries the Indian Muntjak is found in are Northeastern Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Southern China, Vietnam, the Maylay peninsula, Riau Archipelago, Sumatra, Bangka, Belitung Islands, Java, Bali, and Borneo. The Muntjac is usually found in plentiful forests and places with dense vegetation such as grasslands, savannas, tropical deciduous forests, and tropical scrub forests. They are also very populated in the hilly country on the slopes of the Himalayas.
They are found at both sea level and medium height altitudes up to 9,800 ft. They never wander far from water. Also, males usually have their own territory which may overlap the territories of a few females but not of another male.
Muntjacs depend on a good quality forest habitat, both for food and for cover, more than sambar (Cervus unicolor) or chital do for instance. For that reason, muntjacs are likely to suffer more, and sooner, than other deer species from forest degradation resulting from cattle grazing, wood cutting or fodder collection for instance. In addition, because muntjacs are extremely nervous and easily alarmed, they are certainly very much disturbed by any human presence, especially if it includes the presence of feral dogs, even without active poaching. Nevertheless, since they are adaptable and require relatively small home ranges, they can continue to occur in forest patches near villages, albeit at low densities, where the much larger chital and sambar have long become extirpated. Such small remnants would however be non viable in the long run. The local abundance of muntjacs may therefore be a useful index of habitat quality. The increasing silencing of their conspicious bark could be taken as an alarm.
According to the recent deer conservation action plan of the IUCN, only the black muntjac of China (M. crinifrons) is considered vulnerable (Wemmer 1998). It must be emphasised however that in the case of four of the seven other species of muntjacs, a conservation status could not be assigned because of ‘deficient data’ (Wemmer 1998).
Given its wide geographical range and its great adaptability, the species M. muntjac as a whole may be one of the least threatened deer in the region. The IUCN gives status to all ten subspecies of M. muntjak (Wemmer 1998), presumably on the basis of sufficient data
Conservation of nature and natural resources is now a global concern. Without proper scientific knowledge on conservation management, natural resource utilization is very difficult. No other study has been performed like this.
Objectives of the Study :
1. To find out Feeding practices of the Barking Deer at Chittagong zoo.
2. To evaluate herd management practices of the Barking Deer at Chittagong Zoo.
3. To know the over all behaviour of Barking Deer.
Chapter-II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The muntjac or barking deer or rib faced deer are small, solitary, forest living species which are found over most of the oriental biogeographic region of the world (Prater, 1980). The most widespread species is the Indian or red muntjac (Muntiacus muntjak ,Zimmermann), of which there are ten recognized sub-species (Grubb and Gardner 1998) found in Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, South China, through Indochina to Peninsular Malaysia, Sumatra, Borneo, Java, Bali, Lombok and many smaller Indonesian islands (Grubb 1993). The muntjac of north India is M.m. vaginalis. The southern form is M.m. allieus. Third race M.m.
malabaricus is found in Malabar and extends to Sri Lanka (Prater 1980).
2.1. Taxonomy
Domain: Eukaryota - Whittaker & Margulis,1978 Kingdom: Animalia - Linnaeus, 1758 - animals
Subkingdom: Bilateria - (Hatschek, 1888) Cavalier-Smith, 1983
Branch: Deuterostomia - Grobben, 1908
Infrakingdom: Chordonia - (Haeckel, 1874) Cavalier-Smith, 1998 Phylum: Chordata - Bateson, 1885 - Chordates
Subphylum: Vertebrata - Cuvier, 1812 - Vertebrates
Infraphylum: Gnathostomata - Auct. - Jawed Vertebrates Superclass: Tetrapoda - Goodrich, 1930
Class: Mammalia - C. Linnaeus, 1758 - Mammals
Subclass: Theriiformes - (Rowe, 1988) M.c. Mckenna & S.k. Bell, 1997
Infraclass: Holotheria - (Wible Et Al., 1995) M.c. Mckenna & S.k. Bell, 1997 Superlegion: Trechnotheria - Mckenna, 1975
Legion: Cladotheria - Mckenna, 1975 Sublegion: Zatheria- Mckenna, 1975
Infralegion: Tribosphenida - (Mckenna, 1975) M.c. Mckenna & S.k. Bell, 1997
Subcohort:Theria - (Parker & Haswell, 1897) M.c. Mckenna & S.k. Bell, 1997
Cohort: Placentalia - (Owen, 1837) M.c. Mckenna & S.k. Bell, 1997
Magnorder: Epitheria - (Mckenna, 1975) M.c. Mckenna & S.k. Bell, 1997 Superorder: Preptotheria - (Mckenna, 1975) Mckenna, in Stucky &
Mckenna, in Benton, Ed., 1993
Grandorder: Ungulata - (C. Linnaeus, 1766) Mckenna, 1975 Mirorder: Eparctocyona - Mckenna, 1975
Order: Artiodactyla - Owen, 1848 - Even-Toed Ungulates
Suborder: Ruminantia - Scopoli, 1777
Superfamily: Cervoidea - (Goldfuss, 1820) Hay, 1930 Family: Cervidae- (Goldfuss, 1820) Gray, 1821:307
Subfamily: Muntiacinae Tribe: Muntiacini
Genus: Muntiacus-Rafinesque, 1815
Specific name: muntjak - (Zimmermann, 1780)
Scientific name: - Muntiacus muntjak (Zimmermann, 1780)
2.2 .General Characteristics
Muntjacs have a reddish coat of a rather uniform hue, without any conspicuous markings on the legs or tail. The belly and the inside of the legs are a little paler. The tail is short and pointed, the muzzle is rather large and black. There are no noticeable seasonal changes in coat colour. Newborn have a spotted coat, but since they are very small and remain hidden rather than following their mother during the first few weeks of life, one is unlikely to see spotted fawns in the field. There is no sexual differences in coat colour except for the two black lines that run along the antler pedicles of males and that extend down the face. Both sexes have large preorbital glands located at the corner of the eyes, that appear as a sigmoid fold of skin right in front of the eye. They are larger in males and are very conspicuous when everted prior to marking with them or during intense aggressive interactions (Dubost 1971, Barrette 1976, 1977a). In addition both sexes have a pair of frontal glands : two straight slits on the face, between the eyes (Barrette 1976).
Males are only a little larger than females in body weight (e.g. about 22 kg vs 20 kg : Sunquist 1981, Phillips 1984). Based on skeletal measurements males are not larger than females (e.g. M. m. muntjak, maxillary tooth row length, in mm : females = 60.3 ± 2.1, n
= 7, males = 60.2 ± 2.6, n = 12; Barrette1987). Thus, compared to most other deer, muntjacs show little sexual dimorphism in body size (Barrette 1987, Clutton-Brock 1987, Geist and Bayer 1988).
Males have antlers with a short brow line and a simple beam that can reach about 15 cm
in length, and that tend to curve inwards at the tip in older males. They grow from pedicles that spring from the frontal bones and that can be as long as the antlers. The pedicles are continuous with prominent bony ridges that extend down the face past the eyes, all the way to the anterior border of the preorbital glands (thus the name rib-faced deer). In addition, males have well developed upper canines that protrude about 2 cm from the maxillary bone, and are usually visible even when the animal’s mouth is shut (Chapman 1997). These teeth are pointed, sharp and apparently “hinged” (Aitchison 1946). These tusks, along with the antlers, are used in male-male combats (Barrette 1977b) and are more important to a male’s reproductive success than his antlers are (Chapman et al. 1997). Males are believed to defend themselves against dogs with their tusks (Brooke 1874, Dansi1970).
Muntjacs’ tongue is exceptionally long, allowing them to lick their own eye and preorbital glands, which they actively do while urinating or defecating as part of the elaborate protocol they use while scent marking (Dubost 1971, Barrette 1977a, d).
Fig.-2: Female Fig.-1: Male
2.3.Ecology
Muntjacs are likely to be found in most forest habitats that are closed enough to conceal them from human observer (Wood 1931, Powell 1964). In such a habitat the animal exhibits its primary anti predator tactics, i.e. hiding from both predators & poachers, Given its small body size a muntjac needs a small absolute quantity of food per unit time, but a large quantity relative to its body size. Also, its food must be highly digestible, i.e.
low in fiber and rich in protein or sugar (Hofmann and Stewart 1972, Jarman 1974, Hofmann 1985, Kay 1987). Therefore, muntjacs feed on fruits, bud’s, freshly sprouted leaves, and seeds (but not large ones : see Dinerstein 1987). They are thus neither browsers nor grazers but nibblers, or gleaners (Barrette 1977c). They will occasionally graze near the forest cover but only on immature, actively growing grass blades (Barrette 1977c, Jackson et al. 1977, Harding 1986, Dinerstein 1987, Chapman et al. 1993).
Muntjacs are sedentary and occupy rather small home ranges all their life. They have never been shown to exhibit seasonal shifts in habitat use or any form of migration. There is no convincing evidence of territoriality in M. muntjak. Muntjacs are vulnerable to all large carnivores. For instance they can be an important prey for the leopard (Panthera pardus) (Eisenberg and Lockhart 1972), and the tiger (Panthera tigris) (Sunquist et al.
1999).
2.4. Behaviour
Indian Muntjacs are regarded as extremely solitary animals, rarely observed with other muntjacs, except for a mother and her young and during the rutting season. Males acquire territories that they mark with scent markers by rubbing their frontal preorbital gland (located on their head) on the ground and on trees, scraping their hooves against the ground, and scraping the bark of trees with their lower incisors. These scent markers allow other Muntjacs to know whether a territory is occupied or not. Males will often fight with each other over these territories, sufficient vegetation, and for primary preference over females when mating using their short antlers and an even more dangerous weapon, their canines. If a male is not strong enough to acquire his own
territory he will most likely become prey to a leopard or some other predator. During the time of the rut, territorial lines are temporarily disregarded and overlap while males roam constantly in search of a receptive female.
These deer are incredibly alert creatures. When put into a stressful situation or if a predator is sensed, Muntjacs will begin making a bark-like sound. Barking was originally thought of as a means of communication between the deer during mating season as well as an alert. However, in more recent studies it has been identified as a mechanism used solely in alarming situations meant to cause a predator to realize that it has been detected and move elsewhere or to reveal itself. The barking mechanism is used more frequently when visibility is reduced and can last for over an hour regarding one incident.
Muntjacs exhibit both diurnality and nocturnality.
Muntjacs are solitary deer and this probably is a consequence of their need for concentrated food (Hofmann 1985) which itself an effect of their small size (Geist 1974, Jarman 1974). Being nibblers, their food is widely dispersed as small, rich items. In these circumstances individuals in a group, even of small size, would have to compete constantly for the highly clumped food (Jarman 1974). Individuals therefore are induced to forage singly.
There is no such thing as a herd of muntjacs (Wood 1931, Powell 1964). Even under conditions that encourage the formation of aggregations (e.g. a large clump of fallen fruits under a fruiting tree, or a small water hole at the end of a drought) the largest group recorded numbered four (Barrette 1977c). In addition, such groups are accidental, temporary and result more from a convergence towards a given ecological necessity, than a result of social attraction. Among the animals seen in the field, over 65% are solitary (Eisenberg and Lockhart 1972, 1977c, Seidensticker 1976). This value varies among social classes. Adult females are least solitary, they are usually accompanied by one fawn, sometimes by a yearling female (presumably their daughter) and a fawn. But they are almost never seen with another adult female. Adult males are the most solitary. They
spend short periods of a few days with an œstrus female until she is bred, occasionally tolerate a yearling male in their vicinity, but are otherwise alone. Adult males are extremely aggressive towards each other, engaging in fierce fights with antlers and tusks (Dubost 1971, Barrette 1977b).
Muntjacs deposit scent in their home range with their facial glands and seem to use feces and urine to mark as well (Dubost 1971, Barrette 1977d). Thus, a local population of muntjacs probably form some kind of social unit held together more or less loosely by a net of scent that informs the individuals on their conspecifics identity, sexual status and wherebouts. For muntjacs, solitary therefore does not mean asocial.
In addition to scent, vocalisations also keep muntjacs in contact with each other. As their name indicates, barking is a loud and commonly used call. Barking is neither a mating, nor a territorial call, it is an alarm call, given in response to the presence of a predator or of a human disturbance (Dubost 1971, Barrette 1977a, c, Yahner 1980, Oli and Jacobson 1995). A muntjac that hears a distant bark pays attention to it, stopping momentarilly from foraging for instance and showing some alert behaviors like a raised head, stiff gait or front feet stamping. Therefore, barking informs a muntjac both of the presence of a potential danger and of a conspecific in the vicinity. It should be added that barking can also be used by a subordinate individual in the presence of a dominant one as a way of gaining access to a clumped resource apparently by making the dominant believe that a predator has been perceived nearby (Barrette 1977c).
The spatial organization of muntjacs is rather simple. Females have home ranges that are smaller than those of males and whose size is presumably a function of the abundance and distribution of food. Males have larger home ranges encompassing those of a few females (Dubost 1970, Harding 1986, Chapman et al. 1993). Thus the distribution of females is controlled by food, that of males is a response to the distribution of females.
Compared to other deer, muntjacs spend much time grooming one another in every type of pairs that they form (adult male-adult female, adult male-yearling male, adult female-
yearling female or fawn) (Dubost 1971, Barrette 1977a). By comparison, in the Axis deer (Axis axis) for instance, social grooming is very rare except between a female and her young fawn. It otherwise occurs only as an immediate prelude to copulation, the male licking a femal’s vulva and fore legs (Barrette 1987).
Muntjacs’ tongue is exceptionally long, allowing them to lick their own eye and preorbital glands, which they actively do while urinating or defecating as part of the elaborate protocol they use while scent marking (Dubost 1971, Barrette 1977a, d).
Fig.-3: Mounting of deer
Fig.-4: Mounting Behaviour
Fig.-5: Suckling of milk
Fig.-6: Maternal Behaviour
Fig.-8: Playing of Deer Fig.-7: Playing of Deer
2.5. Housing:
The important aspect for housing is that the enclosure should be so designed to prevent the entry of stray dogs and other predators like jackal into the enclosure or to prevent the escape of the deer out of the enclosure. The area of the enclosure depends upon the species and number of deer to he displayed. The "Recognition of Zoo Rules, 1992"
stipulates the minimum prescribed size of outdoor open enclosure for a pair of brow- antlered deer/ hangul/ swamp deer as 1500 square meters with an extra area of 125 square meters for each additional animal. The deer are maintained in captivity in spacious outdoor open enclosures or paddocks bounded on all sides usually with 2.0-2.5 meters high fence with chain- link mesh or partly with wet/ dry moat on the viewers' side and chain-link mesh fence/ wall on the other sides or with wet/ dry moat all around the enclosure. Stand-of barriers are provided on the viewers' side to keep the visitors at bay.
Similarly the minimum prescribed size of feeding/ resting cubicle/ night shelter for these species has been specified as 3.0 x 2.0 x 2.5 meters. These specifications hold good for all large sized Indian deer. (Acharjo and Mishra, 1981)
Sufficient number of trees, plants and bushes are desirable inside the enclosure to provide cover, shade, privacy and for rubbing of antlers. Wherever necessary tree guards may be provided to trees/plants to minimize damage due to nibbling and rubbing of antlers.
(Acharjo and Mishra, 1981)
2.6. Feeding:
The deer are ruminant herbivores feeding on their choicest food items like grass, leaves, fruits, twigs, and young shoots of edible trees and plants available in the wild. In contrast, the same animals in captivity are dependant upon the food offered to them. Incidentally the digestive system and food habits of deer are similar to cattle, sheep and goat and we could adopt same nutritional principles in absence of information on the precise nutritional requirements of different species of deer in captivity and the diet of these animals can be compounded on the basis of our knowledge on feed requirements of domestic ruminants. (Acharjo and Mishra, 1981).
Food availability is one of the most important factors influencing the distribution of free ranging wild ungulates and hence formulation of management strategy for a protected area necessarily requires adequate information on the food habits of different species of deer (Chamard and Box, 1964; Fitzgerald and Waddington. 19,9: Hoelechek et al., 1982; Gill et al., 1983).
Equally important for sound management is the information on spatiotemporal variation in food availability, possibility of competition food regulation the population. (Kumar, 2001). Dear can be is classified as intermediate feeding on a mixture of browse and grass (Kumar, 2001). Dear do utilize garland opportunistically when legal quality forage is available there. (Mishra, 1982; Moe and Wegge, 1994).
But in captive condition, for keeping them nutritionally balanced. Supply of green fodders (Maize fodder, Para grass and bucksha grass) vegetables (Cabbages, poi shak and carrot) along with concentrate feeds (Soya bean meal, Wheat bran, Vitamin, mineral premix and common salt) were provided (Azad et al., 2005).
Feeding of captive deer is now greatly simplified by the development of a polluted ration which seemingly provides the essential nutrients for optimum growth and maintenance. (Azad et al., 2005).
Malnutrition in captive animals results in deficiency symptoms (due to mineral deficiency), stunted growth, effecting the reproductive performance of animals, increased frequency in neonatal and post natal deaths, increased disease susceptibility etc.
In order to overcome problems related to the nutritional disorders the Zoo administration should formulate the diet chart of the animals and reviewing it periodically is very important. (Kumar, 2001)
Collection of information on natural food preference provides an indication intakes and whether the diets are high or low in protein, fiber or secondary plant metabolites, which may influence acceptability, digestibility or metabolism Oral anatomy and
gastrointestinal tract morphology have a high correlation with natural diet. The presence of a rumino-reticulum suggests that qualitative nutrient requirements are similar to those of cattle and sheep, with significant syntheses of amino acids and B-vitamins. (Kumar, 2001)
Dhaka zoo authority used to supply green fodders, leafy vegetables and succulent vegetables in the various scissor depends on availability in the market. Khira, (Cucumis sativas). Sasa (Saha Senanensis) Misty Cummra (Cucurbita moschata), Cabbage (Brass.sica olaracea) were supplied in various seasons (Azad et al., 2005).
The concentrates are fed in the forenoon plus seasonal fresh grass and green fodder in the afternoon. The quantity of food requirement of an individual is determined according to species, age, sex, size, weight and physiological status of the animal like state of pregnancy and nursing status, young and growing animals etc. Deer replacing antlers and pregnant does have high demand for minerals especially calcium. (Acharjo and Mishra, 1981)
The deer in captivity are group feeders. Therefore, they need to be provided with sufficient feeding space enabling them to have their full share of food and exercise besides chances of avoiding infighting. Inadequate and poor quality of food may give rise to nutritional stress manifested by deficiency diseases. (Acharjo and Mishra, 1981)
Hygienic storage and daily inspection of all food items for quality and quantity before feeding, regular and timely distribution of fresh and nutritious food must be ensured to prevent diet related risks. Clean water from protected water supply system may be provided daily. Salt licks are always made available inside the enclosure to avoid mineral deficiency. (Acharjo and Mishra, 1981)
Fig: Feeding of Deer
Fig: Feeding of Deer
2.7. Productive and Reproductive Performance:
The Indian Muntjacs are polygamous animals. Females reach puberty during their first to second year of life. These females are polyestrous, with each cycle lasting about 14 to 21 days and an estrus lasts for 2 days. The gestation period is 6 to 7 months and they usually bear one offspring at a time but sometimes produce twins. Females usually give birth in dense growth so that they are hidden from the rest of the herd and predators. The young leaves its mother after about six months to establish its own territory. Stags often fight between one another for possession of mating the roes. Indian Muntjacs are distinguished from other ungulates in showing no evidence of a specific breeding season within the species
Muntjacs breed and give birth in all months of the year (Chapman and Dansie 1970, Barrette 1977c, Chapman et al. 1993, Pei et al. 1995, Chapman et al. 1997). This is made possible because females experience a post-partum oestrus, ovulating within a few days after parturition (Chapman and Dansie 1970, Barrette 1977a, c). Thus for a given female the interbirth interval is not 12 months as it would be if reproduction was seasonal, but about seven months (Chapman 1993, Pei et al. 1995, Chapman et al. 1997). This is to say that a female can get pregnant almost continuously for her entire adult life. Since a female also can conceive as early as at 10 months of age (Chapman 1993), it makes for a rather high productivity both at the individual and at the population level, even if females almost always give birth to single fawns.
One curious feature is found in the reproductive tract of muntjacs. Although both ovaries are active, most of the embryos develop in the right horn of the uterus (Chapman and Dansie 1970). In such a situation we would expect that the horn which the newborn fawn has just vacated would not be in a condition to allow a successful implantation within few days days after parturition. Yet, what exactly happens is that other uterine horn available is fit for implantation.
For births to occur in all months of the year it is not natural that females ovulate in all the months, it is necessary that males are also capable of breeding in all months. Usually,
male deer can breed only while their antlers are hard. Antler growth and spermatogenesis are both controlled and synchronized by the level of testosterone secretion (Lincoln 1985). In this respect, muntjacs are a remarkable exception : males can breed even while their antlers are in velvet (Chapman and Harris 1991, Chapman et al. 1997). This means that a male is always available for mating whenever he meets an estrus female. Given the solitary habit and the density of the species, it probably happens that a female does not encounter a male at her first post-partum oestrus. In such a case she will ovulate again, at about 15 days interval (Barrette 1977c, Yahner 1979, Chapman 1993) presumably until she is bred. Newborn fawns have a spotted coat and have a mean weight between 1.2 and 1.5 kg depending on the sample studied (Acharjyo and Mishra 1981).
One aspect of males antler cycle which is all the more curious since breeding is non- seasonal and a male can breed at anytime, is that, at the population level, antler cycle is rather synchronous (Barrette 1977a, c, Mishra 1982, Acharjyo and Patnaik 1984, Chapman and Harris 1991). It seems that each male usually sheds his antlers every 12 months. At the population level, the synchrony is strong e.g. 32 of 34 antler castings in April-May (Acharjyo and Patnaik 1984), not a single male in velvet for 6 months of the year (Barrette 1977c) most antlers shed within two months (Chapman and Chapman 1982, Chapman et al. 1997).
Males are well equipped with weapons (antlers and tusks) that they use in combat among themselves (Barrette 1977b), but they are not much larger than females in body size, and seem to have large testis for their bodysize.
Courtship and mating is vigorous (Dubost 1971, Barrette 1977a, Yahner 1979). During the some 24 hours that a female is in estrus, a male mates with her several times at short intervals and remains in very close proximity to her. It would be interesting to obtain data on relative testis size of muntjacs and other tropical deer, in order to confirm that they are relatively large in muntjac, and thus confirm the possibility of sperm competition in this deer. That would explain the reduced weight dimorphisim and could help to understand other curious aspects of reproduction in muntjacs.
Azad et al., 2005 reported that adult males and females weights were 80.44::L 1.79 and 57. 6±1.79 kg, respectively, the highest and lowest adult males and females' weights were 89.20 to 65.20kg and 68to 50.20kg, respectively in Dhaka Zoo, which is more or less similar to the findings of Ables, 1997, who recorded the average adult weight of males and females about 85 and 70 kg.
Average males and females weaning weights were 19.98t1.28 and 18±1.05 kg and the highest and lowest weaning weights were 27.10, 15.30 kg and 24.30, 14.30 kg, respectively in Dhaka Zoo (Azad et al., 2005) which is more or less similar to the findings of Mulley et al, 1984; stated that the mean males and females weaning weights were 19.4 and 18.5 kg.
The average length of estrous cycle is 19 days, with a range of 17-21 days (Chapple et al., 2003), relates with the finding of Mylrea et al., 2004; (18 days, ranging from 12-23 days) and of Azad et al., 2005 (14-21 days).
Ables, 1997 reported hat the average age at first fawning was ranging from 14-17 months, which is supported by the findings of Vos, 1982 (1.5-2 years) and Azad et al., 2005 (14-18 months).
Azad et al., 2005 reported that the average gestation length was ranging from 223 to 238 days, which is supported by Chapple et al., 2003 (231 to 237 days) at chital hinds.
Usual litter size in spotted deer is one rarely two (Acharjo and Mishra, 1981). Azad et al., 2005 reported that the age of wearing was ranging from 4 to 6 months. Which is more on less similar to the findings of Mulley et al., 1990 (14-21 weeks); Mully and Flesch, 2001 (16 weeks) and Flesch et al., 1999 (12 to 20 weeks).
2.8. Health Care Measures:
Das, (1988) opined that one of the mandates of any captive rearing facility is to maintain the collection of wild animals in optimum health. It can only be achieved by good management practices coupled with health care/ disease control programme. The deer in captivity suffer from variety of infectious and non-infectious diseases like sister domestic ruminants.
Acharjo and Mishra, (1981) reported that there must be a well-equipped Veterinary Hospital under the charge of specially qualified and experienced veterinarian to attend the sick deer and initiate prophylactic/ curative measures to optimize health condition.Zoo should be equipped with facilities for controlling the animals by blowpipe, capture gun with required equipments, drugs, chemicals etc. and pathological laboratory to carry out routine clinical tests and surgical equipments to conduct operations.
Morbidity due to parasitic infestations has a great damaging effect on the well being of resident animals and when coupled with mortality specially in young deer could be devastating. Therefore, a de-worming schedule consisting of planned programme of examination of faceal samples to detect the parasitic infestation followed by
administration of appropriate anthelmintics at regular intervals is necessary to lessen the incidence of parasite disease problems in deer.
Under the prevailing management practices, FMD Quadrivalent vaccine is being only given to a few Sambar, chital and hog deer at very few captive rearing locations in India.
No other vaccines are being administered to captive deer in India at present. But as a precautionary measure, domestic ruminants available around such locations should be given vaccine against common infectious diseases.
There should be quarantine enclosure for housing all newly received deer for a period of thirty days and an isolation ward to accommodate the resident deer suffering from infectious diseases.
A well equipped post-mortem room for conducting post-mortem examination (PME) of a11 dead animals and a carcass disposal facility (incinerator/ pit) for effective disposal of dead animals after PME should be in place away from animal display areas and Veterinary Hospital Complex. (Acharjo and Mishra, 1981)
Chapter –III
MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1. Study Period:
The study was carried out from 10 June to 10 August at Chittagong Zoo.
3.2. Study Location:
The study was conducted at Chittagong Zoo which is located at khulshi, Pahartali, Bangladesh adjacent to Foy’s lake. The Zoo was established at 28`h February 1989. Its total area is about 6.0 acres. The land of the zoo is covered with sloppy, hilly, flat bends along the side lakes with steep sides. There is natural forest over the hills with good numbers of trees within the zoo area. The zoo is surrounded by a boundary wall of about six feet high. At present there are about 67 species and total number of animals is about 365.
3.3. Study Population:
There are four species of deer in Chittagong Zoo. These are Spotted Deer (Axix axis), Barking Deer (Muntiacus munt jak), Sambar Deer (Cervus unicolor) and Hog Deer (Axis porcinus)).
Table-1: Deer population at Chittagong Zoo
Species of Deer in Chitta on Zoo Population size No
2. Barking Deer (Muntiacus muntj'ak) 19
1. Spotted Deer (Axix axis) 12
3. Sambar Deer (Crlvus unicolor) 3
4. Hog Deer (Axis porcinus) 2
he study was carried out on the management of Barking Deer. Nineteen barking deer consisting of adult male (9), adult females (5) & juvenile (3) were present at the time of the study.
3.4. Collection of Data:
Data were collected on physical visit to the Zoo. The following criteria were recorded 3. 4.1. Housing Pattern
-Area of the enclosure.
-Fence materials and height.
3. 4. 2. Feeding Pattern -Feed ingredients.
-Daily ration &Frequency of feeding.
-Daily intake of feed nutrients.
3. 4. 3. Productive and Reproductive profile -Weight measures of different aged deer
- Information about puberty, length of estrous cycle, gestation period, , age at first fawning, litter size, weaning period ,survival rate(mortality of fawns)
&other special traits.
3.5. Study Procedures:
During the study period (12 weeks) the zoo was visited in every alternative day. Most of the management practices were observed physically and required data were collected from the record books of the zoo with the coordination of the Zoo authority in addition to current data.
Chapter-IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1. Housing of Barking Deer:
The pattern of housing of Deer at Chittagong Zoo as stated in a tabular form as below
Table-2: Housing pattern/Enclosure of Deer in Chittagong Zoo
Species Outdoor open space (Sq.m) Height of fence (m)
Existing Standard Existing Standard
Barking Deer 66.52 1200 3.6m 2.0-2.5
Spotted Deer 500.31 1500 2.25m 2.0-2.5
Sambar Deer 957.66 1500 2.28m 2.0-2.5
Hog Deer 59.3 1200 3.4 2.0-2.5
Table-3: Measurement of spaces specified for night shelter/ Feeding space
Species Length (m) Width (m) Height (m)
Existing Standard Existing Standard Existing Standard
Barking Deer 3.0 4.0 1.80 2.25 2.2 3.0
Spotted Deer 4.0 3.0 1.92 2.0 2.4 2.5
Sambar Deer 4.0 3.0 2.5 2.0 2.8 2.5
Hog Deer I 4.0 I 3.0 2.5 2.0 2.8 2.5
From the table-1 & 2; it was observed that the area of the enclosure for barking deer in Chittagong Zoo was 62.52 sqm. This is much less than the standard area. The height of the fence was 2.25m with chain link mash, within this enclosure there was space for night shelter or feeding space specified as 3.0 x 1.8 x 2.2 cubic meters, which correlates with the rules listed in "The Recognition of Zoo Rules, 1992".
(Acharjyo, 1981).
4.2. Feeding of Deer:
In this study, it was observed that. Feeding of BarkingDeer was devoid of Green Fodder, where as vegetables (Lau, Misty Kumra and Carrot @ of 1.8 kg, 1.8 kg and 1.6 kg per animal per day respectively) and concentrates (Gram and Rice bran @ 0.3 kg and 1.0 kg respectively) were supplied only. Green fodder was not given due to the parasitic infestation load said by zoo authority. After several parasitic infestations, green fodder supplement was stopped. Additionally Amoloki was given when available in the Market @ 20gm per individual deer.
Table-4: Feeding status of Barking Deer at Chittagong Zoo
Feed Ingredients Amount supplied (kg)/ animal/ day Total (kg)/ animal
Fore noon After noon l day
1. Gram 0.15 0.15 0.3
2. Rice bran 0.5 0.5 1.0
3. Gren gourd 1.1 1.0 2.1
4. Pumpkin 1.0 1.1 2.1
5. Carrot 0.80 0.80 1.5
6. Amoloki* 0.02 0.02 0.04
7. Common Salt 0.001 0.401 0.001
Total 3.421 3.421 6.842
* Seasonal, based on availability.
Here vegetables and concentrate were supplied altogether where as Acharjo and Mishra, 1981 reported, concentrates are fed in the forenoon plus seasonal fresh grass and vegetables in the after noon. In case of pregnancy, the amount of feed is increased.
Feeds were calculated as individual basis then given altogether for the Deer. In morning, feed were supplied around 11.00 am and around 4.00 pm in the evening
session. This ration for Barking Deer was not formulated on any standard in respect to their annual requirement for Crude Protein (CP) and Metabolisable Energy (ME).
4.3. Vitamin-mineral supplementation:
AD3E (Vitamin A, D & E preparations) - 15ml Calphos vet (Calcium and Phosphorous preparations) - 20ml DB vitamin( Vitamin and mineral multi-preparations) - 25ml
Normal saline - 2 gm/liter.
Here AD3E, Calphos vet and DB vitamin were supplied as vitamin mineral source, for 10 days consecutively and then made an interval of ten days and again continue. Normal Saline was given in summer season to reduce stress.
Table-:5: Water supplementation for Deer in Chittagong Zoo
Species Amount( L) Frequency
Barking Deer ± 5 Once daily
Spotted Deer ± 10 Once daily
Sambar Deer ± 12 Once daily
Hog Deer ± 5 Once daily
In Chittagong Zoo, it was observed that water was supplied once daily, more or less 5 liter per day for Barking deer, whereas more or less 10 liter and 12 liter for spotted and Sambar deer respectively.
4.4. Productive and Reproductive Performance:
The productive and reproductive traits of the deer were observed during the study period and the findings of the study are discussed in a tabular form below
Table-6:-Body weight measurement of barking Deer in Chittagong Zoo Birth weight (kg) Weight at Weaning (kg) Adult Weight (kg )
Male Female Male Female Male Female
3.25-4.0 2.75-3.5 10-12 8-10 25-30 20-25
In this study the adult males and females weight were 25-30 kg and 20-25 kg respectively, which is more or less similar to the findings of Phillips, 1984(20-22 kg).
Table-7: Productive and Reproductive performance of Deer at Chittagong Zoo Criteria Spotted Deer Barking Deer Sambar Deer Hog Deer 1. Fawning
season
All the month of the year except May
All the month of the year
All the month of the year
All the month of the year 2. Age at
puberty
1 year and 6month
1 year and 6month
1.6 - 2.0 years. 1 year and 6month 3. Length of
estrous cycle
14-22days 12-20 days 16-24 days 12-20 days
4. Gestation period
1 7-8 month 7-8month 6-8 month 7-8month
5. Litter size 1 1 1 1
6. Age at first fawning
12-18 months 14-18 month 18-24 months 14-18 months 7.Weaning age 4-6 months 4-6 months 6-8 months 4-6months In this study the average age at first fawning was ranging from 14-18 months; which is supported by Azad et al., 2005 (14-18 months); Ables, 1997 (14-17 months) and Vos, 1982 (1.5-2.0 years).
The length of estrous cycle was ranging from 12-20 days, which is more or less similar to the findings of Chapple et al., 2003(17-24 days); Mylrea et al., 2004 (12-23 days) and Azad et al., 2005 (14-21 days).
The gestation period was ranging from 7-8 months, which is more or less similar to the findings of Chapman,1993(6-7month); Chapple et al., 2003 (231-237 days).
In this study the weaning age was ranging from 4-6 months, which is supported by the findings of Mulley and Flesch, 2001 (16 weeks); Flesch et a1.,1999 (12-20 weeks) .
4.5. Health Management:
Regular health monitoring was done by Zoo veterinarians. Regular deworming was done within 2 month and 10 days intervals. Broad-spectrum antibiotics (Endex®, LTVet® etc) were used. Therefore parasitic infestation was rarely occurred. There is a Veterinary hospital. If any deer showed any sickness (self induced injury, antler i I njury, pneumonia), they were isolated from the group and were taken into isolation ,.nclosure for medication. Usually there was no vaccination was practiced for Deer in the Chittagong Zoo.
Chapter-V
CONCLUSION
The study was carried out to know the overall management of barking deer in captivity at Chittagong Zoo, giving more emphasis on housing, feeding, productive and reproductive profiles. The deer were kept within an open enclosure measured as 30.6x1b.35 sqm with a fence of chain link mash, 3.6m in height. Available feeds supplied to deer were Gram, Rice barn, Lau, Misty kumra, Carrot and Amoloki. In this study it was found that the average birth weight of males and females barking deer were ranging from 3.25-4.0 kg and 2.75-3.5 kg, males and females weaning weight were ranging from 10-12 kg and 08- 10 kg respectively and adult males and females weight were ranging from 25-30 kg and 20-25 kg respectively. It was also observed that the weaning age, length f estrous cycle, age at first fawning and gestation length were ranging from 4-6 months; 12-20 days: 14- 18 month and 7-8 month respectively. Zoo veterinarians did regular health monitoring with regular deworming. Usually no vaccination was practiced for Deer in the Chittagong Zoo.
5.1. Short-coming of the Study:
Though it was a data base work but in the work process the cordial help of the Zoo personnel was remarkable. Eventless there are some short-coming of this study are as follows
1. Study period was short.
2. Feeding profiles of the deer was evaluated without measuring their dietary requirement.
5.2. Recommendations:
The study revealed that the management of Barking Deer at Chittagong Zoo was partially standard in response to the actual standard means. No standard feeding system was followed according to the dietary requirement; therefore further study may be done on feeding management of the Barking Deer. Furthermore it can be developed as an ideal wildlife conservation centre.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Acharjo, L.N. and Mishra, C.G. 1981. Notes on weight and size at birth of eight species of Indian wild ungulates in captivity. J. Bombay. Nat Hist. Soc.77:504-507.
Acharjyo, L.N. and Patnaik, S.K. 1984. A note on antler casting of barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak) in captivity. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc., 81 : 690
Azad, M.A.K., Hossain, M.M. and Bhuiyan, A.K.F.H., 2005. Feeding and Management of Deer at Dhaka Zoo. Int. J. of Zoo. Research (1):
Aitchison, J. 1946. Hinged teeth in mammals : a study of the tusks of muntjacs and chinese water deer. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 116 : 329-338
Barrette, C.1976. Musculature of facial scent glands in the muntjac. J. Anat., 122 : 61-66.
Barrette, C.1977a. The social behavior of captive muntjacs, Muntiacus reevesi (Ogilby 1839). Z. Tierpsychol, 43 : 188-213
Barrette, C. 1977b. Fighting behaviour of muntjac and the evolution of antlers,Evolution,31:169-176.
Barrette, C. 1977c. Some aspects of the behaviour of muntjacs in Wilpattu
NationalPark,SriLankaMammalia,41:1-34.
Barrette, C. 1977d. Scent marking in captive muntjacs, Muntiacus reevesi. Anim. Behav., 25 : 536-541.
Barrette, C. 1987. The comparative behavior and ecology of chevrotains, musk deer, and morphologically conservative deer. In : Biology and management of the Cervidae. C. Wemmer (ed.). Smithsonian Institution, Washington. 200-213.
Chamrad, A. D. and Box T. W. 1964. Food habits of white deer in south Texas. Journal
of range management 21: 158-16%
Chapman, D.I. and Dansie, O. 1970. Reproduction and feotal development in female muntjac deer (Muntiacus reevesi Ogilby). Mammalia, 34 : 303-319.
Chapman, D.I. and Chapman, N.G. 1982. The antler cycle of adult Reeves’
muntjac.ActaTheriol.,27:107-114.
Chapman, N.G. 1993. Reproductive performance of captive Reeves’ Muntjac.
In : Deer of China: biology and management. N.Ohtaishi and H.I.
Sheng(eds.),Elsevier:199-203.
Chapman, N.G. 1997. Upper canine teeth of Muntiacus (Cervidae) with particular reference to M. reevesi. Z. Saügetierk., Supp. II : 32-36.
Chapman, N.G. and Harris, S. 1991. Evidence that the seasonal antler cycle of adult Reeves’ muntjac (Muntiacus reevesi) is not associated with reproductive quiescence.J. Reprod. Fert., 92 : 361-369.
Chapman, N.G., Claydon, K., Claydon, M., Forde, P.G. and Harris, S. 1993. Sympatric populations of muntjac (Muntiacus reevesi) and roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) : a comparative analysis of their ranging behaviour, social organization and activity.J. Zool. , Lond., 229 : 623-640.
Chapman, N.G., Furlong, M. and Harris, S. 1997. Reproductive strategies and the influence of date of birth on growth and sexual development of an aseasonally breeding ungulate : Reeves’ muntjac (Muntiacus reevesi ). J. Zool., Lond., 241:
551-570.
Clutton-Brock, T.H., Guinness, F.E. and Albon, S. D. 1982. Red deer. Behavior and
ecology of two sexes. University of Chicago Press. Clutton-Brock, T.H. 1987.
Dansie, O. 1970. Muntjac (Muntiacus sp.). British Deer Society Publication, 2: 3-20.
Dinerstein, E. 1987. Deer, plant phenology, and succession in the lowland forests of Nepal. In : Biology and management of the Cervidae. C. Wemmer (Ed.), Smithsonian Institution, Washington : 272-288.
Doris H. Wurster and Kurt Benirschke: Indian Momtjac, Muntiacus muntiak: A Deer with a Low Diploid Chromosome Number. Science 12 June 1970: Vol. 168. no.
3937, pp. 1364 - 1366.
Dubost, G. 1970. L’organisation spatiale et sociale de Muntiacus reevesi Ogilby 1839 ensemi-liberté. Mammalia, 34 : 331-355.
Dubost, G. 1971. Observations éthologiques sur le Muntjac (Muntiacus muntjac
Zimmermann 1780 et M. reevesi Ogilby 1839) en captivité et semi-liberté. Z.
Tierpsychol. 28 : 387-427.
Das, A.K. 1988. Some observations on the Manipur Brow- antlered deer
( Cervus eldi eldi) in Calcutta Zoo from 1970-1977. Zoo Zen. Vol. III (8&9):
67-75.
Dey, T.K., 2007. Deer population in the Bangladesh syndromes, Wildlife management and Nature conservation Division. Chittagong. Bangladesh, 7781.
Eisenberg, J.F. and Lockhart, M. 1972. An ecological reconnaissance of Wilpattu National Park, Ceylon. Smithsonian contributions to zoology, No. 101.
Fitzgerald, A.E. and Waddington. D. 1979. Comparison of two methods of
faecal: analysis of herbivore diet. Journal of wildlife management. 43: 468-473.
Flesch, J.S., Mulley, R.C. and Mulley, P.N.,1999/ the growth rate and metabolisable energy intake of farmed fallow deer between 12 and 25 weeks of age.
Australia Deer Farming, 10: 14-17.
Geist V., 1999. Deer of the world; Their Evolution, Behavior and Ecology. Sv:-ann Hill Press, Shrewsbury, Germany.
Geist, V. and Bayer, M. 1988. Sexual dimorphism in the Cervidae and its relation to habitat. J. Zool., Lond., 214 : 45-53.
Geist, V. 1974. On the relationship of social evolution and ecology in Ungulates. Amer.
Zool., 14 : 205-220.
Grubb, P. 1993. Order Artiodactyla. In : Mammal species of the world. A taxonomic and geographic reference. D.E. Wilson and D.M. Reeder (Eds.), Smithsonian
Institution Press, Washington, D.C. : 377-414.
Tragulidae, Moschidae, and Cervidae. In : Deer, status survey and conservation action plan. C. Wemmer (Ed.), IUCN/SSC Deer specialist group. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK : 6-16.
Gill, R. B. Carpenter, L. H. Bartmann, R.M., Boxer, D.L. and Schoonvcld, G.G. 1983.
Faecal. Analysis to estimate mule deer Diets, Journal wildlife Research, 5: 417- 424.
Hofmann, R.R. 1985. Digestive physiology of the deer – their morphophysiological specialization and adaptation. Bull. R. Soc. N.Z., 22 : 393- 407.
Hutchins, Michael, ed. "Muntjacs." Grzimek's Animal Life Encyclopedia. 2nd ed. 15 vols. Detroit: The Gale Group Inc, 2004.
Hendricks, H.H., 1975 the status of the tiger, (Panther Tigris line, 1758). Saaugetiere
Mitteilungen, 23:161-199.
Holecheck, J.L. Viagra, M. and Piper, R.D. 1982. Botanical composition Declination of range herbivore diets: A relics. Journal of Range management, 35: 309-315.
Hudson, R.J., 1999. Wildlife production: Trends and issues. In: Diversified Livestock.
httpalwww.deer.rr.ualbetra.callibrarylwcapkorea/ WCAP final. Html.
Jackson, J.E., Chapman, D.I. and Dansie, O. 1977. A note on the food of Muntjac deer (Muntiacus reevesi). J. Zool. Lond, 183 : 546-548.
Jarman, P.T. 1974. The social organization of antelope in relation to their ecology.
Behaviour, 48 : 215-267.
Khan, M.A.R., 1986.wildlife in Bangladesh mangrove ecosystem. J. Bombay Natl. Hist.
Soc., 83: 32-40.
Kumar, H.R., 2001. Feeding of Wild animal in captivity. In: Wild Life Nutrition and Feeding, Kanpur, India. pp: 17-22.
Kurt, Fred. "Muntjac Deer." Grzimek's Encyclopedia of Mammals. 1st ed. 5 vols. St.
Louis: McGraw-Hill, 1990.
Kay, R.N.B. 1987. Weights of salivary glands in some ruminant animals. J. Zool., Lond, 211 : 431-436.
Lincoln, G.A. 1985. Seasonal breeding in deer. Bull. Roy. Soc. N.Z., 22 : 165-179.
Miao, Z.H., Glatz, P.C. and Ru, Y.J. 2001. Managing fallow deer and red deer for animal house research. ANZCCART News, 14: 1-8.
Mishra, H. R. 1982. The coolly and behavior of chital (Allis axis) in the Royal Chit wan National Park , Nepal. Ph. D. Thais, Univ, of Edinburgh, UN.
Mylrea, G.E., Mulley, R.C., English, A.W. and Evans, G. 2004. Reproductive cycles of farmed female barking Deer . CISR publishing- Reproduction, Fertility and Development, 11: 167-174.5
Mulley, R.C. and Flesch, J.S., 2001. Nutritional requirements for pregnant and lactation red and fallow deer. A Report for the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. RIRDC Publication No. 110095. Canberra, Australia.
Mulley, R.C., 1984. Reproduction in fallow deer. In: Deer refresher course for veterinarians. Proceedings No. 72, the University of Sydney, Sydney, pp: 463464.
Mulley, R.C., English, A.W. and Kirby, A., 1990. The reproductive performance of farmed fallow deer in New South Wales. Australian vet. J., 67: 281-286.
Oli, M.K. and Jacobson, H.A. 1995. Vocalizations of barking deer (Muntiacus muntjac) in Nepal. Mammalia, 59 : 179-186.
Prater, S.H. 1980. The book of Indian Animals. Bombay Natural History Society, Bombay. Pp. 324.
Pei, K., Taber, R.D., O’hara, B.W. and Wang, Y. 1995. Breeding cycle of the For mosan Reeves’ muntjac (Muntiacus reevesi micrurus) northern Taiwan, Republic of China. Mammalia, 59 : 223-228.
Phillips, W.W.A. 1984. Manual of the mammals of Sri Lanka. Wildlife and nature protection society of Sri Lanka. 2nd edition.
Powell, A.N.W. 1964. The Muntjac or barking deer. J. Bengal Nat. Hist. Soc., 33 : 143 148.
Schaller, G.B. 1967. The deer and the tiger University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Seidensticker, J.C 1976. Ungulate populations in Chitawan valley, Nepal
Biological Conservation 101 183- 201.
Sunquist, M.E. 1981. The social organization of tigers (Panthera tigris) in Royal
Chitawan National Park, Nepal. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 336 : 1-98.
Sarker. S.U. and Sarker, N.J, 1988. Wildlife of Bangladesh. Department of Zoology,University of Dhaka, 53pp.
Sarquist, 1999. Sundarban biodiversity conservation project: An overview. Intl. Notes No. 79, pp: 4.
Schaller, G.B. 1967. The Deer and the tiger. Univ. of Chicago Pres, 1-370.
Vos, A.D., 1982 Deer farming guidelines on practical aspects, food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, Italy.
Wemmer, C. (Ed.) 1998. Deer. Status survey and conservation action plan. IUCN/SSC Deer specialist group. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
Wood, H.S. 1931. Notes on the natural history and shikar of Indian deer, I : the barking deer. J. Darjeeling Nat. Hist. Soc., 5 : 61-68.
Yahner, R.H. 1979. Temporal patterns in male mating behavior of captive Reeves’
muntjac (Muntiacus reevesi). J. Mamm., 60 : 560-567.
