Cited by 19Wildlife Ecology and ConservationRangeland and Wildlife ManagementAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies

Diet Analysis of Gaur (Bos gaurus gaurus Smith, 1827) by Micro-Histological Analysis of Fecal Samples in Parsa Wildlife Reserve, Nepal

Open access
Chetri, M·1970·Our Nature

Abstract

The uses of food plants by gaur Bos gaurus gaurus were studied by micro-histological analysis of fecal samples in Parsa Wildlife Reserve, Nepal with an aim to explore the diet composition, preferable food plants and monthly variation in plants consumption. The results have shown that the diet of gaur consisted of diverse species of plants (49 species). On an average, grass comprises a major proportion (66%), followed by browse (25%) and herb and others (5%). Although gaur consumes variety of food plants, six plant species: four grass- Themada sp., Phragmites karka, Imperata cylindrica and Vetiveria zizanoides and two browse – Wendlandia exserta and Phaulopsis imbricata are highly preferred. The highest browse to grass ratio (1.27) was estimated during January and least (0.7) during June.Keywords: Bos gaurus gaurus, Food habits, Micro-histological analysisdoi:10.3126/on.v4i1.499Our Nature Vol.4(1) 2006 pp20-28

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3126/on.v4i1.499

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In Nepal, grasses made up 66%, browse 26%, and herbs and other plants 8% of the diet of B. gaurus.

    “grasses made up 66%, browse 26%, and herbs and other plants 8% of the diet of B. gaurus studied in Nepal (Chetri 2003(Chetri , 2006));”

    From Bos frontalis and Bos gaurus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae) (2018) · cites this paper as Chetri 2006

    The Results and discussion section reports 66% grasses and 26% browse for gaur studied in Nepal, matching those parts of the claim. It reports 5% herbs and others, not 8%; the Abstract also gives 5% for that category. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In Nepal, B. gaurus has been found to feed on 49 plant species (23 grasses, 17 browse species, and 9 herbs and others).

    “in Nepal, B. gaurus has been found to feed on 49 plant species (23 grasses, 17 browse species, and 9 herbs and others- Chetri 2003Chetri , 2006) )”

    From Bos frontalis and Bos gaurus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae) (2018) · cites this paper as Chetri 2006

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 16 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Chetri, M. 2003. Food habits of gaur (Bos gaurus gaurus Smith, 1827) and livestock (cows and buffaloes) in Paras Wildlife Reserve, central Nepal. Himalayan Journal of Sciences 1(1): 31-36
  2. Fjellstad, J.I. and G. Steinheim. 1996. Diet and habitat use of Greater Indian one-horned rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis) and Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) during the dry season in the Babai valley, Royal Bardia National Park, Nepal. Agricultural University of Norway. (M. Sc. Thesis)
  3. Andre Deutsch, U. K. and Tiger Tops, Nepal pp. 26- 43.
  4. Gyawali, S. R. 1986. Diet analysis of greater one -horned rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis) by fecal analysis. Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal (M. Sc. Thesis)
  5. Jarman, P. J. and A. R. E. Sinclair. 1979. Feeding strategy and the pattern of resource partitioning in ungulates. In Serengeti : dynamics of an ecosystem, (Eds. A. R. E. Sinclair and M. Nortan -Griffiths) University of Chicago Press, Chicago. pp. 130-163.
  6. Jnawali, S. R. 1995. Population ecology of greater one - horned rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis) with particular emphasis on habitat preference, food ecology and ranging behaviour of a reintroduced population in Royal Bardia National Park in lowland Nepal. Agriculture Universtiy of Norway. (Ph. D. Dissertation)
  7. Prater, S.H. 1971. Wild oxen, Sheep Goats. In The Book of Indian Animals. Bombay Natural History Society. 3 rd edition. Oxford University Press. pp. 234-260.
  8. Ranjitsingh, M.K. 1991. Deer, Antelopes and Bovines. In Indian Wildlife (Eds. S. Israel and T. Sinclair) APA Publications (HK) LTD. pp. 91-98.
  9. Srivastava, K.K., A.K. Bhardwaj., S. George and V.J. Zacharias. 1996. Micro-Histological studies on the food habits of Sambar, Gaur and Cattle in Periyar Tiger Reserve in winter. Indian Forester 122 (10): 933-936

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chetri, M.
Affiliations
Tribhuvan University (NP)
Corresponding author
Chetri, M
Venue
Our Nature
Published
1970-01-01
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
20-28
ISSN
  • 1991-2951 (ISSN-L)
  • 2091-2781
OpenAlex
W2138954464
Cited by
19
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Our Nature (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Tribhuvan University
  • WWF Nepal
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Keywords
gaur, diet composition, food plants, seasonal diet variation, Poaceae, browse, herbivore foraging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review