Translator Disclaimer
7 March 2013 Oryx callotis (Artiodactyla: Bovidae)
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

Oryx callotis O. Thomas, 1982 (fringe-eared oryx) is a relatively large, long-bodied bovid, with an appropriate common name because of its distinguishing tufts of hair extending from the ends of the ears. It occupies arid lands in Kenya and Tanzania. O. callotis can go up to a month without drinking water if succulent vegetation is available. Some herds have been semidomesticated, and 60% of the presumed 17,000 wild individuals exist in wildlife reserves, currently receiving some protection from settlement and poaching. O. callotis is considered “Vulnerable” by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources but as a subspecies of O. beisa, which is listed as “Near Threatened.”

Synonymies completed 15 September 2012

Context and Content. Order Artiodactyla, suborder Ruminantia, infraorder Pecora, family Bovidae, subfamily Antilopinae, tribe Hippotragini. We followed the new ungulate taxonomy of Groves and Grubb (2011), who thoroughly and quantitatively updated the family Bovidae, among others, and reduced the traditional subfamily and tribal arrangement from Simpson's (1945) 5 subfamilies and 12 tribes to 2 subfamilies (Bovinae and Antilopinae) and 11 tribes. Groves and Leslie (2011) provided a narrative synthesis of those familial changes, followed by individual accounts and maps of each of the 279 species (Groves et al. 2011)—an increase from the 143 bovid species listed by Grubb (2005).

Forms of Oryx are found from the Arabian Peninsula westward into East Africa across the Sahara and southward into southwestern Africa, which represents a morphocline from primitive to derived species, related to horn length, skull breadth, and associated body size (Grubb 2000; Groves and Grubb 2011). Grubb (2005) recognized 4 species of Oryx (O. beisa, O. gazella, O. dammah, and O. leucoryx), whereas Groves and Grubb (2011) and Groves (2011) split O. beisa into 3 distinct species: O. beisa, O. gallarum, and O. callotis. The latter 2 were most recently considered subspecies of O. beisa, despite O. callotis being originally described as a separate species by O. Thomas (1892). This new taxonomy is rooted in the phylogenetic species concept and extensive morphological analyses. It is supported by expanding knowledge and interpretation of mitochondrial and nuclear DNA analyses across many species of ungulates (Groves and Grubb 2011) and, here, species of Oryx in particular (Iyengar et al. 2006; Masembe et al. 2006). The following key was prepared with specific characteristics, measurements, and statements provided by Groves and Grubb (2011) and Groves (2011).

  • 1. Pelage very pale white, with washed-out, light reddish markings on face and neck, and a vague stripe along the lower flanks to the haunches; very long horns on both sexes, “scimitar” shaped, sweeping upward, backward, and downward, generally >34 horn rings; extinct in the wild but formerly throughout Saharan AfricaO. dammah

  • Pelage brown to ocher-gray to near white with various black, often distinct, black markings on face, flanks, and legs; horns on both sexes arise parallel to the plane of the face, with slight to no downward projections at their ends; generally <34 horn rings2

  • 2. Pelage white, with distinct black markings from the eye downward to jaw connecting with throat patch; uniformly chocolate-brown to black legs with white patches just above the hooves; formerly throughout the Arabian Peninsula and extinct in the wild, now several reintroduced, free-ranging populations thereO. leucoryx

  • Pelage varies from gray to ocher-gray to dull brown with various dark body markings; black facial markings below the eye not connecting to the throat patch; legs with various bands or patches of dark brown to black; occurs in southwestern or northeastern Africa3

  • 3. Pelage pale fawn-gray, with a 90- to 116-mm black dorsal stripe and a very wide and distinct 119- to 129-mm flank band; mean greatest lengths of skulls from various locations, 409–425 mm; occurs in southwestern AfricaO. gazella

  • Pelage ocher-gray (pinkish wash) to dull brown, less pronounced dorsal stripe and flank band; greatest lengths of skulls from various locations, 347–398 mm; occurs in northeastern Africa4

  • 4. Pelage dark, dull, and brown to fawn; generally no connection between nasal and median face bands; dorsal stripe very reduced; diagnostic ear tufts of 5.1- to 7.6-cm hairs; occurs south of the Tana River in central Kenya south to northeastern TanzaniaO. callotis

  • Pelage ocher-gray (pinkish wash) to pale-to-pure gray; dorsal stripe more pronounced; lacking ear tufts5

  • 5. Pelage ocher-gray (pinkish wash) but not extending below the 20- to 44-mm flank band; dorsal stripe 30–43 mm but generally vague or lacking; occurs north of the Tana River in northern Kenya, presumably some distance into Somalia and southeastern EthiopiaO. gallarum

  • Pelage pale-to-pure gray; flank band 39–58 mm; dorsal stripe up to 71 mm in males, sometimes extending to the withers and in some cases fully up the neck; occurs in northern and central Somalia, northern Ethiopia, and western EritreaO. beisa

Context and Content. Context as for genus. No subspecies are recognized.

Nomenclatural Notes. The generic name Oryx can be variously traced in Greek to mean pickax referring to the sharp horns and in Latin to mean gazelle. The specific epithet callotis is from the Greek words call meaning beautiful and ot referring to the ear. “Beautiful ears” aptly describes the fringe-eared oryx (Fig. 1).

DIAGNOSIS

Oryx callotis is appropriately named for its most distinguishable feature, sharply pointed ears adorned with terminal black tufts of hair 5.1–7.6 cm long (Thomas 1892) that extend past the edges of the ears (Sclater and Thomas 1899) and often droop downward as they lengthen with age (Fig. 1). The other 5 species of Oryx (Groves 2011:plate 40; Groves and Grubb 2011) have generally rounded ears and all lack ear fringes (Thomas 1892). O. callotis has long, straight horns similar to those of O. gazella (gemsbok), O. beisa (beisa oryx), O. gallarum (galla oryx), and O. leucoryx (Arabian oryx), but they are not curved backward and downward like those of O. dammah (scimitar-horned oryx) or spirally twisted like those of Addax nasomaculatus (addax—Krausman and Casey 2007). Tips of the horns are 231–409 mm apart, which is wider than on O. beisa and O. gallarum; horns of O. callotis are relatively short and thick at the base and most comparable in thickness to those of O. gallarum (Groves 2011; Groves and Grubb 2011).

Pelage color of O. callotis most closely resembles that of O. beisa, and it is duller, darker, and browner than on O. gallarum. As on O. beisa, there is a black line passing through the eyes of O. callotis, but its black markings extend farther down to under the throat than on O. beisa (Thomas 1892). The flank band on O. callotis is 30–44 mm wide (n = 2), and the dorsal stripe is reduced (25–30 mm wide), faint, and confined to the rump (Groves and Grubb 2011). In contrast, the flank band on O. beisa is 39–58 mm wide; the dorsal stripe is 56–71 mm wide in males (n = 2) and 31–46 mm wide in females (n = 2), and it often extends “fully up the neck, or three-quarters of the neck, or just to the whithers” (Groves and Grubb 2011:207). O. gazella has the most pronounced flank band (119–229 mm wide) and dorsal stripe (adults, 90–116 mm wide; juveniles, 54–74 mm wide—Groves and Grubb 2011).

GENERAL CHARACTERS

All species of Oryx are compact and muscular, with relatively long bodies, short and slender legs, and broad necks (Kingdon 1997). There are no marked differences between male and female Oryx callotis. The body of both sexes is a rich fawn color with a distinctive, narrow (3–4.4 cm—Groves 2011), horizontal black band across the flank region and black tufts of hair above the hooves resembling false hooves (Kingdon 1997). The muzzle is white with striking black markings across the front and on the side of the face through the eyes and below the base of the ear down to the throat (Sclater and Thomas 1899; Thomas 1892; Groves 2011). The skin on the neck of O. callotis is extraordinarily thick (Sclater and Thomas 1899), and a short, stiff, chestnut-brown mane is present (Estes 1991; Groves 2011). The long and slender tail ends with a flowing brush of long black hairs (Estes 1991).

Few measurements have been reported specifically for O. callotis (Groves 2011; Groves and Grubb 2011). Generally, mature individuals of the northeastern African oryx group weigh 116–188 kg (females) and 167–209 kg (males), shoulder heights are 110–120 cm, head-to-body lengths are 153–170 cm, and tail lengths are 45–50 cm (Kingdon 1997; Groves 2011; Groves and Grubb 2011). One sample of 16 O. callotis of unreported sex in southeastern Kenya had a mean body mass of 126.9 kg (coefficient of variation [CV] = 11.5%—Ssemakula 1983), suggesting that the sample was dominated by immature individuals. The only age-specific insight on mass is for two 3-year-old male O. callotis that had dry-season masses of about 176 kg, based on dressed carcass mass of 95 kg ± 5.0 SD, 54% of the total mass (Onyango et al. 1998).

Horns of both sexes are long, straight, and very slightly curved backward and downward (Estes 1991). They are heavily ringed from their bases up to about one-half of their lengths (Fig. 1), depending on wear from jousting and “brooming” on vegetation, and then smooth to their tips. Mean number of rings per horn tends to be lower for O. callotis (16.25 rings, range 13–23 rings, n = 4) than for O. gallarum (21.17 rings, range 17–24 rings, n = 12) and O. beisa (20 rings on a single sample—Groves and Grubb 2011:table 56). Horns of all Oryx taxa arise from the top of the skull, parallel to the plane of the face (i.e., premaxillae, nasal, and frontal bones; Fig. 1); this contrasts with many other bovids, including other Hippotragini (e.g., Hippotragus), horns of which arise upward from the top of the skull and are not parallel to the plane of the face.

Unlike many horned ungulates, female and male O. callotis (and other Oryx species) are very difficult to differentiate based on shape and length of their horns (Groves and Grubb 2011; C. P. Groves, pers. comm.). According to early reports, horns on female O. callotis are 76–81 cm long (Thomas 1892) and are typically longer, straighter, and thinner than those of males, which may serve females better as a defense against predators (Packer 1983). Horns of males are somewhat shorter but thicker at the base (circumference 12–14 cm—Groves 2011) than those of females, permitting twice as much force in intrasexual combat (Packer 1983). Female and male O. callotis are also difficult to distinguish in the field unless external genitalia or obvious sexual behaviors can be seen, or offspring are present with females.

DISTRIBUTION

Oryx callotis currently is found in southeastern Kenya and northeastern Tanzania (Fig. 2), having expanded into the Serengeti Plain in Tanzania in the 1970s (Walther 1978; Estes 1991; Groves 2011). Populations of O. callotis and the O. gallarum are geographically separated by the Tana River and the Aberdare Mountains in southern Kenya (Stewart and Stewart 1963; Ansell 1972; Groves 2011). Groves and Grubb (2011:207) remarked on specimens of O. callotis “from S of Mt. Longido, and from 100 mi. S of Kilimanjaro.”

Much of what is known about the ecology and physiology of O. callotis came from studies on the Galana Ranch (5,000 km2) in southeastern Kenya during the 1970s. More than 150 individuals were reared in semidomestication as part of a mixed wild–domestic ranching effort (Stanley Price 1978). When Kenya banned commercial production and sale of wildlife in 1977 (Groves and Leslie 2011), the ranch suspended its work with O. callotis (see “Husbandry”).

FOSSIL RECORD

Fossil evidence (Gentry 2000; Bibi et al. 2009) and phylogenetic analyses of behavior and various aspects of morphology and anatomy (Vrba and Schaller 2000) suggest that the tribes Hippotragini (oryxes and roan and sable antelopes), Alcelaphini (hartebeests and wildebeests), and Caprini (sheep, goats, and relatives) form a monophyletic clade of bovids, with a common ancestor dating to the middle Miocene, about 15 million years ago. Fossil genera such as Protoryx, Pachytragus, Tethytragus, and Gentrytragus may be early offshoots of the common ancestor of the Hippotragini–Alcelaphini–Caprini clade (Bibi et al. 2009).

The most recent common ancestor of all Hippotragini was found at Toros-Menalla, Chad; these fossils had “a mix of derived and primitive characters” (Bibi et al. 2009:5) and were dated from the late Miocene, about 7 million years ago (Bibi et al. 2009; Geraads et al. 2008; Harris et al. 1988). Younger fossils, specific to Oryx, were found scattered within 750 m of exposed strata on the northwestern shore of Lake Turkana in the extreme northwestern corner of Kenya, near the Ethiopian border (Harris et al. 1988)—an area now within the distribution of Oryx gallarum (Groves 2011); specimens were dated at 1.0–3.4 million years old. These fossils were used in cladistic analyses to estimate that the African oryx lineage originated during the late Pliocene–early Pleistocene, about 2.5 million years ago (Vrba 1995).

FORM AND FUNCTION

The skull of Oryx callotis is “comparatively broad” (Fig. 3) relative to other northeastern African oryxes (Groves and Grubb 2011:207). Few skull measurements of O. callotis have been published, but skull characteristics that have been measured include (mean ± SD in mm): skull length, 377.40 ± 9.156 (n = 15, not differentiated by sex); biorbital breadth, 157.36 ± 8.031 (n = 18); toothrow length, 105.94 ± 4.176 (n = 18); horn length, 743.42 ± 70.21 (n = 19); horn breadth, 127.50 ± 10.308 (n = 5); and horn tip-to-tip distance, 293.00 ± 81.273 (n = 4—Groves and Grubb 2011:table 56). Dental formula of O. callotis is i 0/3, c 0/1, p 3/3, m 3/3, total 32.

Oryx callotis is categorized as a roughage grazer and eats primarily coarse, fibrous plants (Hofmann and Stewart 1972). It has a ruminal, 4-chambered digestive system that slows passage of food and enhances breakdown of plant material, and there are no absorptive papillae in the rumen (Hofmann and Stewart 1972). Fecal particle sizes from digestive residue (Poppi et al. 1980) reflect dietary choice in ruminants, and those from O. callotis suggest it is primarily a grazer; percentage of fecal particles passing through various sieve sizes are: 4-mm sieve, 0.72%; 2-mm sieve, 5.10%; 1-mm sieve, 4.47%; 0.5-mm sieve, 8.69%; 0.25-mm sieve, 15.05%; 0.125-mm sieve, 24.07%; and <0.125-mm sieve, 41.90% (Clauss et al. 2002). In contrast, passages of fecal particles in an intermediate feeder such as the nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelusLeslie 2008) are: 4-mm sieve, 2.72%; 2-mm sieve, 1.23%; 1-mm sieve, 5.40%; 0.5-mm sieve, 9.32%; 0.25-mm sieve, 12.71%; 0.125-mm sieve, 14.05%; and <0.125-mm sieve, 54.57% (Clauss et al. 2002). In feeding trials with a free-ranging mixed herd of 5 O. callotis (tame and castrated males), 5 sheep, and 5 zebu cattle on the Galana Ranch in southeastern Kenya, daily fecal output in grams per day and percent fecal nitrogen concentrations of O. callotis were 1,378 ± 91.2 SE and 1.22 ± 0.051 in the dry season (April–August) and 969 ± 67.5 and 1.57 ± 0.022 in the wet season (January–May—Stanley Price 1985). The relatively low levels of fecal nitrogen suggested diets of only 7.6–10.2% crude protein (Leslie et al. 2008) and reflected the low-quality grasses that O. callotis generally consumed, regardless of season (Stanley Price 1985).

Oryx callotis is physiologically adapted to survive in arid environments characteristic of Kenya and Tanzania by minimizing both water loss and heat gain (Taylor 1970a, 1970b; King et al. 1975; King 1979). Panting and evaporative cooling help keep the body temperature lower than ambient temperatures, but this increases the volume of water lost from an individual to the environment. To conserve water, O. callotis can reabsorb water during digestion, concentrate its urine, and extract most of the water from its feces (Estes 1991). Its body temperature can rise from its normal 35.7°C to 45°C before an individual begins cooling behaviors, such as nasal panting and sweating; cooling the blood as it passes through the nasal passages minimizes damage to the brain (Estes 1991). Other water-saving adaptations include seeking shade and reducing activities to slow heat gain (Estes 1991; King et al. 1975) and minimizing rumination during the hottest periods of the day (Lewis 1977; Stanley Price 1985).

In a comparative study of effects of trampling of vegetation and compaction of soil by wild and domestic bovids relative to subsequent erosion on the Galana Ranch, mean total hoof area and mean hoof pressure of 16 O. callotis (sex not reported) were 148.72 cm2 (CV = 10.1%) and 0.86 kg/cm (CV = 10.5%), respectively (Ssemakula 1983). Both metrics place O. callotis between domestic sheep and goats on the low end (55.15–63.36 cm2 and 0.69–0.73 kg/cm) and domestic cattle and common elands (Taurotragus oryx) on the high end (234.90–314.22 cm2 and 0.98–1.09 kg/cm). Stocking densities and other management practices of mixed wild–domestic operations were potentially more responsible for trampling damage than “inherent differences in [species-specific] ecological impact” (Ssemakula 1983:327).

ONTOGENY AND REPRODUCTION

Oryx callotis is sexually mature by 18–24 months (Kingdon 1997), and gestation is 8.5–9 months (Wacher 1988). Neonates weigh 9–11 kg (Benirschke 2002) and are born with small horn-buds covered with hair (Estes 1991). Benirschke (2002) examined 3 captive pregnant females that died at the San Diego Wild Animal Park, California (United States), in different stages of gestation from early (neonatal mass = 51.6 g or just 0.5% of an average full-term mass of 10 kg, crown-to-rump length = 10 cm) to midterm (4.625 kg or 46%, 48 cm). All 3 pregnancies were in the right uterine horn, and there were no subplacentas. As in most mammals, very thick and abundant mucus occurred in the endocervical canal (Benirschke 2002). In the midterm pregnancy, 100 moderately convex cotyledons, 4–9 cm in diameter, were detected, and the epitheliochorial placenta weighed 1,200 g. The umbilical cords were 3–19 cm by 2.5 cm, depending on the length of pregnancy and fetal development; 2 were straight and the other was slightly spiraled to the right (Benirschke 2002).

Female O. callotis breed and give birth, usually to a single offspring, throughout the year, but young are often more numerous early in the dry season from June to August (Leuthold and Leuthold 1975). When it is time to give birth, the female moves away from the herd (Wacher 1988). The newborn stays hidden for the first 2–3 weeks, and both mother and offspring rejoin the herd 3–4 weeks after birth (Wacher 1988). Within a few weeks of rejoining the herd, females can mate again (Wacher 1988; Estes 1991) and can produce an offspring every 10.5–11 months under good environmental conditions (Stanley Price 1978).

Cryopreserved sperm from a captive male O. callotis was considered to be of good quality because of its high survivability, motility, capacitation, and acrosome reaction and therefore suitable for in vitro fertilization (Kouba et al. 2001). Effective in vitro fertilization protocols could be implemented to increase genetic diversity and reduce the risk of inbreeding depression in captive O. callotis.

ECOLOGY

Space use

Oryx callotis thrives in arid grasslands and bushlands, but its highest densities are found in grasslands and woodlands that receive annual rainfall of 400–800 mm (Kingdon 1997). O. callotis is typically found in grasslands of Digitaria macroblephara and Panicum coloratum, woodlands of Acacia tortilis and Commiphora schimperi, bushlands of Acacia stuhlmannii, and bushy grasslands of Pennisetum mezianum and A. stuhlmanii (Kahurananga 1981). Physiognomy of these varied habitats directly affects food availability and levels of nutrition, which in turn affect densities that populations of O. callotis and other East African herbivores can attain. For example, patterns of aboveground primary production (= food availability) vary considerably under canopies (705 g/m2) and in root zones (430 g/m2) of Acacia, and beyond into open grasslands (361 g/m2), in Tsavo National Park, Kenya (Belsky et al. 1989).

Oryx callotis is nomadic, with home ranges typically <400 km2 (Wacher 1988). Kingdon (1997) summarized home-range size for O. beisa in general as 200–300 km2 for females and 150–200 km2 for males. Location of rainfall and availability of green vegetation determine movements of groups (Wacher 1988). One herd traveled 17 km in the same direction in a single day, and a male walked as much as 4 km in an hour (Estes 1991). Densities of O. beisa appear to be low at 0.5–0.2 individuals/km2 (East 1999; Graham et al. 1996; Thouless 1995). Comparable estimates are not available for wild populations of O. callotis, but the highest reported density of semiconfined O. callotis on Galana Ranch in southeastern Kenya was 1.4 individuals/km2, with an estimated 6,000–8,000 individuals, in the late 1970s (Stanley Price 1978).

Diet

Like other oryx species, Oryx callotis is herbivorous, eating >80% grasses, as seasonal changes in availabilities and nutrient content permit. In southern Kenya, grasses eaten by O. callotis include Bothriochloa, Brachiaria, Chloris roxburghiana, Cymbopogon pospischilii, and Enneapogon cenchroides (Field 1975). In addition to grasses, O. callotis eats large amounts of herbaceous Commelina and Indigofera schimperi in the wet season and tubers and swollen stems of Pyrenacantha in the dry season (Field 1975). The short face and dental morphology (wide incisor row and high-crowned molars) of O. callotis are adapted for selecting nutrient-rich parts of coarse grasses (Field 1975; King and Heath 1975; Estes 1991). Annual diets of O. callotis at Galana Ranch averaged 83.3% grass (± 16.2% SD), 8.5% forbs (± 13.5%), and 7.9% browse (± 7.9%) in 1970–1972 (Field 1975). Monthly diets varied considerably within and between wet (November–May) and dry (June–October) seasons: wet season = 47.9–98.7% grass, 0–38.6% forbs, and 0–13.5% browse and dry season = 43.6–99.1% grass, 0–51.9% forbs, and 0–27.8% browse (Field 1975).

To supplement drinking water, O. callotis eats succulent plant species and digs up roots, bulbs, and tubers (Ayeni 1975; Estes 1991; Kingdon 1997). Individuals have been observed repeatedly uncovering tubers of Pyrenacantha malvifolia by digging with one forefoot; after a tuber is exposed, they scrap off chunks with their incisors (King et al. 1975), staining their muzzles red with dirt in the process (Root 1972). Other selective feeding strategies probably extend the time O. callotis can go between drinking, such as feeding on the dwarf shrub Disperma predominately at night when the leaves can contain 40% preformed and metabolic water, if relative humidity is high, instead of only 1% water during the daytime (King 1979; Taylor 1968). Congeneric O. gallorum and Grant's gazelles (Nanger granti) could theoretically be independent of free water if they concentrated their feeding on leaves of Disperma at night when its percent water content can rise, at a relative humidity of 85%, from near zero to about 40% in 6 h after sunset (Taylor 1968).

If succulent grasses are available, O. callotis can survive up to a month without drinking standing water (Stanley Price 1978). One domesticated group refused water for 25 days (King and Heath 1975), but O. callotis will often drink if water is regularly available (Stanley Price 1985; Kingdon 1997). O. callotis has been observed visiting artificial water holes in Tsavo National Park, Kenya, but very infrequently (Ayeni 1975). In a controlled study on the Galana Ranch, Kenya, a group of O. callotis was provided water every other day, and each individual drank 34 ml kg W−0.85 day−1 ± 6.6 SE (equivalent of 2.2 l/day) in the wet season and 56 ± 3.3 ml kg W−0.85 day−1 (3.6 l/day) in the dry season, which was considerably less than domestic sheep and zebu cattle (Stanley Price 1985). O. callotis requires only 15–25% of the daily water that domestic cattle require (King and Heath 1975; Stanley Price 1978). Water turnover rates of O. callotis (30–124 ml kg−1 day−1) are generally lower than those of dromedary camels (Camelus dromedarius—38–76 ml kg−1 day−1), common elands (66–177 ml kg−1 day−1), and domestic livestock (63–178 ml kg−1 day−1King et al. 1975; King 1979).

Diseases and parasites

Chemical dipping for ectoparasites, as is often done for domestic livestock, is not required in captive populations of Oryx callotis because they rarely have ticks (King and Heath 1975; Stanley Price 1978). Additionally, no trypanosomiasis antibodies have been recovered from captive individuals; thus, they are either not a reservoir for the parasite or are resistant to the disease (Stanley Price 1978). Viral malignant catarrhal fever is typical in cattle and wildebeest (Connochaetes) in East Africa. Antibodies to this necrotizing virus were isolated in herds of O. callotis at Galana Ranch, but viral particles were never recovered (Mushi and Karstad 1981).

Diarrhea from bacterial infections was identified to be the most frequent cause of death of neonates in captive zoo populations of O. callotis. Specifically, in San Diego Wild Animal Park from 1980 to 1981, the bacteria Cryptosporidium and Salmonella typhimurium were cultured from epithelial cells of the small intestine of 2 neonatal O. callotis (<21 days old) with diarrhea (Van Winkle 1985). Although these infections can be serious, mortality is usually low when young O. callotis are treated with supportive therapy (Van Winkle 1985). Twenty O. callotis from the Kilifi area in southeastern Kenya tested negative for caprine pleuropneumonia (Mycoplasma strain F38) in the late 1970s; this bacterial infection, which can cause acute and fatal pleuropneumonia, was documented in other ungulates capable of transmitting it to O. callotis (e.g., Cape buffalo [Syncerus caffer] and common impala [Aepyceros melampus]Paling et al. 1978).

Interspecific interactions

In Kenya and Tanzania, Oryx callotis can occur in the same area as Cape buffalo, common eland, Maasai giraffe (Giraffa tippelskirchi), southern gerenuk (Litocranius walleri), southern lesser kudu (Ammelaphus australis), ellipsen waterbuck (Kobus ellipsiprymnus), defassa waterbuck (K. defassa), common impala, Grant's gazelle, perhaps Peters's gazelle (Nanger petersii), and ostrich (Struthio camelusStanley Price 1978). O. callotis often was seen with herds of eastern Thomson's gazelle (Eudorcas thomsonii), Serengeti Thomson's gazelle (E. nasalis), kongoni (Alcelaphus cokii), plains zebra (Equus quagga), eastern white-bearded wildebeest (Connochaetes albojubatus), and Serengeti white-bearded wildebeest (C. mearnsi), although O. callotis did not interact or move with herds of other species in Serengeti National Park, Tanzania (Walther 1978).

Oryx callotis uses water holes during daylight hours in association with other “prey species” to enhance predator detection (Ayeni 1975). Individuals might give alarm snorts and watch intently if lions (Panthera leoHaas et al. 2005) or cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatusKrausman and Morales 2005) are nearby, but they usually pay no attention to golden jackals (Canis aureus) or spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocutaWalther 1978). If individuals of another prey species are alarmed or flee, O. callotis will follow (Walther 1978). On Galana Ranch, Kenya, a few individuals of O. callotis were killed by lions and leopards (Panthera pardus) annually (King and Heath 1975).

HUSBANDRY

Efforts to domesticate Oryx callotis were initiated on Galana Ranch in southeastern Kenya in the early 1970s. More than 150 wild individuals were captured and transferred to a large holding pen. New individuals usually charged around the pen for the 1st few days, but then joined the captive herd within 6 weeks. During the day, they were herded out to graze and brought back to a corral at night (Stanley Price 1978). In the 1st year, only 10% of the newly captive O. callotis could not be successfully habituated to the captive conditions. After 3 years of capture and handling, techniques improved and mortality of O. callotis was reduced to 7% during the first 6 weeks and 4% thereafter (King and Heath 1975).

Oryx callotis is ideal for domestication because it breeds well in captivity, producing an offspring every 10.5–11 months (King and Heath 1975; Stanley Price 1978). In captivity, they require no routine veterinary care except for deworming, have low water demands, and survive well on a 10% protein diet because they digest protein and fiber better than cattle. Husbandry of O. callotis requires more herders than with other livestock operations because they need to be penned up at night (Stanley Price 1978). In a captive population at the San Diego Wild Animal Park, it is sometimes necessary to hold males in all-male groups, which increases aggression. Adding melengestrol acetate, a synthetic progestogen, to food significantly reduces aggressive contacts and pursuit among captive male O. callotis (Patton et al. 2001). Individual O. callotis have survived 20–22 years in captivity (Jones 1993; Kingdon 1997). A male O. callotis born at the Brookfield Zoo, Chicago, Illinois (United States), in 1960 lived 21 years and 1 month, and a female born at the San Diego Wild Animal Park in 1964 lived 20 years (Weigl 2005).

Some individuals in the domesticated herd at Galana Ranch were harvested for meat in the 1970s (King and Heath 1975), but changes in wildlife laws in Kenya in 1977 effectively stopped further domestication of O. callotis. In the 1970s, African market prices for oryx meat were comparable to those for beef, but profits were 20% lower because herding costs were higher (King and Heath 1975). Meat from the loin and leg of O. callotis has a pH of 5.6 and contains 75.9–76.6% water, 20.2–20.3% crude protein, 0.2–0.3% crude fat (of which about 68% is saturated fat and about 48% of that is C18:0 fatty acids), and 1.0–1.1% ash (Onyango et al. 1998). In contrast to meat from domestic cattle, plains zebra, and kongoni, meat from O. callotis had the highest lightness and chromaticity, with a tendency to accumulate myoglobins at the surface, giving it a bright appearance (Onyango et al. 1998). Meat of O. callotis is extra lean, which contributes to a cold-dressed carcass mass of 57% compared to 52% in cattle (King and Heath 1975).

BEHAVIOR

Grouping behavior

Typically, Oryx callotis lives in mixed herds of 30–40 individuals, but herds as large as several hundred individuals have been observed during the wet season when grasses are abundant. The majority of individuals (70–90%) in such herds are females and their offspring, and strictly bachelor herds are not common (Wacher 1988). Females may join a new herd more easily than males; incoming males have horn-to-horn fights with the alpha male and even subordinate males in the herd (Walther 1978).

In mixed herds, both sexes, predominately juveniles, participate in a “tournament” of interactions to learn, explore, test, and reinforce the established, typically linear hierarchy (Kingdon 1997). As described by Kingdon (1997:440) for O. beisa in general, and likely no different for O. callotis, tournaments typically occur at dawn or during a rain shower and begin with 1 or more individuals galloping in broad circles in a “high-stepping, ‘floating' pace [with] the neck bunched, chin raised and the head swung from side to side in rhythm with the [fast] pace,” and the “black and white head flashes in time with the high-stepping knees and flying hooves” (Fig. 4). Male O. callotis have fights of low-to-medium intensity by clashing their horns frontally, parallel, or at an acute angle, but they do not attempt to gore each other. Fighting techniques include simple head butting, horn pressing, clash fighting, push fighting, and forehead pressing, with fencing and whirling as the most common tactics (Walther 1978; Estes 1991). If a powerful thrust is used, an attacker is capable of displacing his opponent 10–30 m. The alpha male sometimes defecates during a dispute, and both participants may take breaks to graze during the fight, but this only happens if the subordinate male initiates feeding (Walther 1978).

Male O. callotis control the herd's grouping and moving behavior (Walther 1978, 1991). The alpha male sometimes blocks the path if an individual is going in the wrong direction or straggling behind (Walther 1991). Females also coordinate herd movements by leading marches with a “pulling effect” (Walther 1978). During single-file marching, the alpha male brings up the rear. From this position, he may speed up or slow down individuals (Walther 1978, 1991). A herd also has coordinated movements for other activities such as lying, standing, grazing, or grooming. After a member changes activity, nearby members follow, and soon the whole herd has changed activity (Walther 1978). Herds of O. callotis may stay together for up to 1 year (Kingdon 1997).

Reproductive behavior

Sexually receptive females are present in the herd throughout the year but not in a predictable location. Some males form territories of 5–8 km2, but they typically cannot control all females, which leaves nonterritorial males opportunity to breed (Wacher 1988). Courtship begins with the female's ears back and head low. The male circles her while sniffing her backside and testing her urine for indication of estrus. If the female is receptive, the male lifts his forelegs and mounts her with his back legs bent, and his tail is typically held out. The male may nudge the female gently with his muzzle and occasionally rests his chin on her backside. The mating pair may copulate multiple times to ensure fertilization (Estes 1991).

Miscellaneous behavior

Daily activity patterns of Oryx callotis consist of alternating sessions of feeding and resting and ruminating throughout the day and night (Walther 1978). A herd typically grazes from about one-half hour after daybreak until 1000 h, rests and ruminates from 1000 h until 1400–1500 h, and then grazes again until sunset when it returns to a night resting place to bed down at about 2000 h. Throughout the night, individuals intermittently rest and graze until daybreak (Walther 1978), and the majority of daily rumination occurs at night (>95% according to Stanley Price [1985]). In free-ranging feeding trials in southern Kenya, activity patterns of O. callotis over a 48-h period varied depending on season: 4.6 h walking, 15.6 h feeding, 6.1 h standing, 21.6 h lying, and 0.05 h running during the dry season and 3.3 h walking, 10.4 h feeding, 12.5 h standing, 21.7 h lying, and 0.06 h running during the wet season (Stanley Price 1985). When ambient temperatures and solar radiation are high, O. callotis seeks shade for an average of 1.7 h, usually from 1100 h to 1500 h (Lewis 1978) to slow the rate of its rising body temperature (Estes 1991).

Throughout the day, individuals swat biting flies with their long tails (Mooring et al. 2007). Individual O. callotis rarely have ticks, probably because they groom themselves and each other with their teeth or by licking (Mooring et al. 2002). Comparisons of other bovids (e.g., Thomson's gazelle and kongoni) that are often syntopic with O. callotis show that the degree of grooming is correlated with body size and tick infestations; those species that groom often have fewer ticks (and a smaller body size with greater risk from blood loss because of their larger surface-to-body ratio) than those that do not (e.g., the large wildebeest—Olubayo et al. 1993). Male O. callotis spend less time grooming than females so they can remain more vigilant for predators, rival males, and estrous females; juveniles groom more than females because they accrue a large cost from weight loss with heavy infestations of ectoparasites and do not need to be as aware of danger as adults, who assume that role for them (Mooring et al. 2002).

GENETICS

Species of Oryx differ in their diploid number (O. gazella, 2n = 56; O. dammah, 2n = 56–58; and O. leucoryx, 2n = 57–58); however, Oryx callotis, O. beisa, and O. gallarum have indistinguishable karyotypes (2n = 58), as does the addax (Claro et al. 1996). All species of Oryx have 58 autosomal arms with a 1;25 centric fusion, and the X- and Y-chromosomes are conserved among the taxa. Specifically, O. callotis is distinguished by 2 metacentric autosomes and 54 acrocentric autosomes (Kumamoto et al. 1999). Mitochondrial cytochrome-b and control region DNA sequences show that O. callotis diverges significantly from O. beisa and O. gallarum, despite all 3 having the same karyotypes (Masembe et al. 2006). O. callotis is known to hybridize with O. beisa in captivity (Gray 1972).

CONSERVATION

During aerial surveys in the 1990s, East (1999) counted 8,050 Oryx callotis in Kenya and Tanzania, of which 5,240 (65%) were in protected areas; he extrapolated those numbers into a rangewide estimate of 17,000 individuals. The Species Survival Commission Antelope Specialist Group (2008) concluded that 10,000 breeding adult O. callotis remain in the wild, based on East's (1999) estimates, which have not been updated since the 1990s. Even though the majority (60%) of extant populations reside in protected areas, a 10% population decline is projected over the next 3 generations (21–24 years—Species Survival Commission Antelope Specialist Group 2008). Eventually, all O. callotis in southeastern Kenya probably will be confined to areas in the Kajiado and Kilifi districts and in and around Tsavo National Park that are protected from settlement and poaching. In Tanzania, O. callotis probably will be restricted to Tarangire National Park and Mkomazi Game Reserve (East 1999; Species Survival Commission Antelope Specialist Group 2008).

Distributions of many populations of wild bovid species, particularly in Africa and Asia, are no longer continuous and have been fragmented due to a combination of habitat loss to agriculture, competition with livestock (possibly disease transmission), and unrestrained hunting and poaching (Sausman 1993; Groves and Leslie 2011). Sizes of many populations of bovids have declined substantially, and the status of most, particularly given the new taxonomy of Groves and Grubb (2011), is largely or totally unknown (Groves and Leslie 2011). O. callotis is considered “Vulnerable” by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources but as a subspecies of O. beisa, which it lists as “Near Threatened” (Species Survival Commission Antelope Specialist Group 2008). Conservation needs could be clarified by updating the current status of all 3 species of northeastern African oryxes, formerly grouped together under O. beisa.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank C. P. Groves, Australian National University, for his review of the key and skull images; R. K. Rose, Old Dominion University (retired), for his detailed review of the manuscript; and D. E. Hulbert, C. Ludwig, and D. P. Lunde of the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History for assistance with preparation of the skull images. The Oklahoma Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit (Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, United States Geological Survey, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and Wildlife Management Institute cooperating) provided technical support during the preparation of this synthesis. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the United States Government.

LITERATURE CITED

  1. W. F. H Ansell 1972. Order Artiodactyla. Pp. 1–84 in The mammals of Africa: an identification manual ( J Meesterand H. W Setzer eds.). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
  2. J. S. O Ayeni 1975. Utilization of waterholes in Tsavo National Park (East). East African Wildlife Journal 13:305–323. Google Scholar
  3. A. J Belsky R. G Amindson J. M Duxbury S. J Riha A. R Aliand S. M Mwonga 1989. The effects of trees on their physical, chemical, and biological environments in a semi-arid savanna in Kenya. Journal of Applied Ecology 26:1005–1024. Google Scholar
  4. K Benirschke 2002. Fringe-eared oryx (Oryx gazella callotis). Comparative Placentation Project, University of California–San Diego, San Diego.  http://placentation.ucsd.edu/cpa/sdeer.html, accessed 14 July 2012. Google Scholar
  5. F Bibi M Bukhsianidze A. W Gentry D Geraads D. S Kostopoulosand E Vrba 2009. The fossil record and evolution of Bovidae: state of the field. Palaeontologia Electronica 12(3):1–11. Google Scholar
  6. F Claro H Hayesand E. P Cribiu 1996. The karyotype of the addax and its comparison with karyotypes of other species of Hippotraginae antelopes. Hereditas 124:223–227. Google Scholar
  7. M Clauss M Lechner-Dolland W. J Streich 2002. Faecal particle size distribution in captive wild ruminants: an approach to the browser/grazer dichotomy from the other end. Oecologia 131:343–349. Google Scholar
  8. P. J Cretzschmar 1826. Säugethiere. Pp. 1–78 in Atlas zu der Reise im Nördlichen Afrika. Zoologie. (E. Rüppell, ed.) Gedruckt und in Commission bei Heinr. Ludwig Brönner, Frankfurt, Germany. Google Scholar
  9. H. M. D de Blainville 1816. Sur plusieurs espèces d'animaux mammifères, de l'ordre des ruminans. Bulletin des Sciences par la Société Philomatique de Paris 1816:73–82. Google Scholar
  10. R East 1999. African antelope database 1998: beisa & fringe-eared oryx. Occasional Papers of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature Species Survival Commission 21:230–232. Google Scholar
  11. J. R Ellermanand T. C. S Morrison-Scott 1966. Checklist of Palaearctic and Indian mammals 1758 to 1956. Trustees of the British Museum (Natural History), London, United Kingdom. Google Scholar
  12. R. D Estes 1991. The behavior guide to African mammals including hoofed mammals, carnivores, and primates. University of California Press, Berkeley. Google Scholar
  13. C. R Field 1975. Climate and the food habits of ungulates on Galana Ranch. East African Wildlife Journal 13:203–220. Google Scholar
  14. A. W Gentry 2000. Caprinae and Hippotragini (Bovidae, Mammalia) in the Upper Miocene. Pp. 65–83 in Antelope, deer, and relatives ( E. S Vrbaand G. B Schaller eds.). Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut. Google Scholar
  15. D Geraads C Blondel A Likius H. T Mackaye P Vignaudand M Brunet 2008. New Hippotragini (Bovidae, Mammalia) from the late Miocene of Toros-Menalla (Chad). Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 28:231–242. Google Scholar
  16. A Graham B Netseraband C Enawgaw 1996. Trends in large herbivore numbers of Omo and Mago National Parks. National Parks Rehabilitation in Southern Ethiopia Project, Technical Report 2. Google Scholar
  17. A. P Gray 1972. Mammalian hybrids: a check-list with bibliography. 2nd ed. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux Farnham Royal, Slough, United Kingdom. Google Scholar
  18. J. E Gray 1821. On the natural arrangement of vertebrose animals. London Medical Repository 15:296–310. Google Scholar
  19. C. P Groves 2011. Genus Oryx. Pp. 688–692 in Handbook of the mammals of the world. Vol. 2. Hoofed mammals ( D. E Wilsonand R. A Mittermeier eds.). Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain. Google Scholar
  20. C. P Grovesand P Grubb 2011. Ungulate taxonomy. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Google Scholar
  21. C. P Grovesand D. M Leslie Jr 2011. Family Bovidae (hollow-horned ruminants). Pp. 444–571 in Handbook of the mammals of the world. Vol. 2. Hoofed mammals ( D. E Wilsonand R. A Mittermeier eds.). Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain. Google Scholar
  22. C. P Groves et al . 2011. Species accounts for Bovidae. Pp. 572–779 in Handbook of the mammals of the world. Vol. 2. Hoofed mammals ( D. E Wilsonand R. A Mittermeier eds.). Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain. Google Scholar
  23. P Grubb 2000. Morphoclinal evolution in ungulates. Pp. 156–170 in Antelope, deer, and relatives ( E. S Vrbaand G. B Schaller eds.). Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut. Google Scholar
  24. P Grubb 2005. Order Artiodactyla. Pp. 637–722 in Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference ( D. E Wilsonand D. M Reeder eds.). 3rd ed. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Google Scholar
  25. S. K Haas V Hayssenand P. R Krausman 2005. Panthera leo. Mammalian Species 762:1–11. Google Scholar
  26. J. M Harris F. H Brownand M. G Leakey 1988. Stratigraphy and paleontology of Pliocene and Pleistocene localities west of Lake Turkana, Kenya. Contributions in Science, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County 399:1–128. Google Scholar
  27. R. R Hofmannand D. R. M Stewart 1972. Grazer or browser: a classification based on the stomach-structure and feeding habits of east African ruminants. Mammalia 36:226–240. Google Scholar
  28. International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. 1956. Opinion 417. Rejection for nomenclatural purposes of volume 3 (Zoologie) of the work of Lorenz Oken entitled Okens Lehrbuch de Naturgeschichte published 1815–1816. Opinions and Declarations Rendered by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, London, United Kingdom 14:1–42. Google Scholar
  29. A Iyengar F. M Diniz T Gilbert T Woodfine J Knowlesand N Maclean 2006. Structure and evolution of the mitochondrial control region in oryx. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 40:305–314. Google Scholar
  30. M. L Jones 1993. Longevity of ungulates in captivity. International Zoo Yearbook 32:159–169. Google Scholar
  31. J Kahurananga 1981. Population estimates, densities and biomass of large herbivores in Simanjiro Plains, northern Tanzania. African Journal of Ecology 19:225–238. Google Scholar
  32. J. M King 1979. Game domestication for animal production in Kenya: field studies of the body-water turnover of game and livestock. Journal of Agricultural Science 93:71–79. Google Scholar
  33. J. M Kingand B. R Heath 1975. Game domestication for animal production in Africa: experiences at the Galana Ranch. World Animal Review 16:23–30. Google Scholar
  34. J. M King G. P Kingaby J. G Colvinand B. R Heath 1975. Seasonal variation in water turnover by oryx and eland on the Galana Game Ranch Research Project. East African Wildlife Journal 13:287–296. Google Scholar
  35. J Kingdon 1997. The Kingdon field guide to African mammals. Academic Press Limited, London, United Kingdom. Google Scholar
  36. A. J Kouba M. W Atkinson A. R Gandolfand T. L Roth 2001. Species-specific sperm–egg interaction affects the utility of a heterologous bovine in vitro fertilization system for evaluating antelope sperm. Biology of Reproduction 65:1246–1251. Google Scholar
  37. P. R Krausmanand A. L Casey 2007. Addax nasomaculatus. Mammalian Species 807:1–4. Google Scholar
  38. P. R Krausmanand S. M Morales 2005. Acinonyx jubatus. Mammalian Species 771:1–6. Google Scholar
  39. A. T Kumamoto S. J Charter S. C Kingswood O. A Ryderand D. S Gallagher Jr 1999. Centric fusion differences among Oryx dammah, O. gazella, and O. leucoryx (Artiodactyla, Bovidae). Cytogenetic and Genome Research 86:74–80. Google Scholar
  40. D. M Leslie Jr 2008. Boselaphus tragocamelus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae). Mammalian Species 813:1–16. Google Scholar
  41. D. M Leslie Jr R. T Bowyerand J. A Jenks 2008. Facts from feces: nitrogen still measures up as a nutritional index for mammalian herbivores. Journal of Wildlife Management 72:1420–1433. Google Scholar
  42. W Leutholdand B. M Leuthold 1975. Temporal patterns of reproduction in ungulates of Tsavo National Park, Kenya. East African Wildlife Journal 13:159–169. Google Scholar
  43. J. G Lewis 1977. Game domestication for animal production in Kenya: activity patterns of eland, oryx, buffalo and zebu cattle. Journal of Agricultural Science 89:551–563. Google Scholar
  44. J. G Lewis 1978. Game domestication for animal production in Kenya: shade behaviour and factors affecting the herding of eland, oryx, buffalo and zebu cattle. Journal of Agricultural Science 90:587–595. Google Scholar
  45. C Linnaeus 1758. Systema naturae per regna tria naturæ, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. I Tomus Editio decima, reformata. Holmiae, Impensis Direct. Laurentii Salvii, Stockholm, Sweden. Google Scholar
  46. R Lydekker 1908. The game animals of Africa. Rowland Ward, Limited, London, United Kingdom. Google Scholar
  47. C Masembe V. B Muwanika S Nyakaana P Arctanderand H. R Siegismund 2006. Three genetically divergent lineages of the oryx in eastern Africa: evidence for an ancient introgressive hybridization. Conservation Genetics 7:551–562. Google Scholar
  48. M. S Mooring D. T Blumstein D. D Reisig E. R Osborneand J. M Niemeyer 2007. Insect-repelling behavior in bovids: role of mass, tail length, and group size. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 91:383–392. Google Scholar
  49. M. S Mooring D. D Reisig J. M Niemeyerand E. R Osborne 2002. Sexually and developmentally dimorphic grooming: a comparative survey of the Ungulata. Ethology 108:911–934. Google Scholar
  50. E. Z Mushiand L Karstad 1981. Prevalence of virus neutralizing antibodies to malignant catarrhal fever virus in oryx. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 17:467–470. Google Scholar
  51. O Neumann 1902. Neue nordost- und ostaafrikanische Säugethiere. Sitzungsberichte der Gesellschaft Naturforschender Freunde zu Berlin 1902:93–101. Google Scholar
  52. L Oken 1816. Okens Lehrbuch der Naturgeschichte. Vol.3. Zoologie. August Schmid und Comp., Jena, Germany. Google Scholar
  53. R. O Olubayo J Jong G Orinda J. G Groothenhuisand B. L Hart 1993. Comparative differences in densities of adult ticks as a function of body size on some East African antelopes. African Journal of Ecology 31:26–34. Google Scholar
  54. C. A Onyango M Izumimotoand P. M Kutima 1998. Comparison of some physical and chemical properties of selected game meats. Meat Science 49:117–125. Google Scholar
  55. C Packer 1983. The horns of African antelopes. Science 221:1191–1193. Google Scholar
  56. R. W Paling K. J Macowanand L Karstad 1978. The prevalence of antibody to contagious caprine pleuropneumonia (Mycoplasma strain F38) in some wild herbivores and camels in Kenya. Journal of Wildlife Disease 14:305–308. Google Scholar
  57. P. S Pallas 1766. Miscellanea zoological quibus novae imprimis atque obscurae animalium species describuntur et observationibus iconibusque illustrantur. Hague comitun. Petrum van Cleef, The Hague, Netherlands. Google Scholar
  58. T. S Palmer 1904. Index generum mammalium: a list of the genera and families of mammals. North American Fauna 23:1–984. Google Scholar
  59. M. L Patton et al . 2001. Aggression control in a bachelor herd of fringe-eared oryx (Oryx gazella callotis), with melengestrol acetate: behavioral and endocrine observations. Zoo Biology 20:375–388. Google Scholar
  60. R. I Pocock 1918. On some external characters of ruminant Artiodactyla. Part III. The Bubalinae and Oryginae. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 9, 2:214–225. Google Scholar
  61. D. P Poppi B. W Norton D. J Minsonand R. E Hendricksen 1980. The validity of the critical size theory for particles leaving the rumen. Journal of Agricultural Science 94:275–280. Google Scholar
  62. A Root 1972. Fringe-eared oryx digging for tubers in the Tsavo National Park (East). East African Wildlife Journal 10:155–157. Google Scholar
  63. W Rothschild 1921. On two new races of Oryx. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 9, 8:209–210. Google Scholar
  64. E Rüppell 1835. Neue Wirbelthiere zu der Fauna von Abyssinien gehörig, entdeckt und beschrieben. Säugethiere. Commission bei Seigmun Schmerber, Frankfurt, Germany. Google Scholar
  65. K. A Sausman 1993. Conservation assessment and management plan for antelope. International Zoo Yearbook 32:117–124. Google Scholar
  66. P. L Sclaterand O Thomas 1899. Book of antelopes. Vol. IV. R. H. Porter, London, United Kingdom. Google Scholar
  67. G. G Simpson 1945. The principles of classification and a classification of mammals. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 85:1–350. Google Scholar
  68. Species Survival Commission Antelope Specialist Group. 2008. Oryx beisa ssp. callotis. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Red list of threatened species.  http://www.iucnredlist.org, accessed 14 July 2012. Google Scholar
  69. J Ssemakula 1983. A comparative study of hoof pressures of wild and domestic ungulates. African Journal of Ecology 21:325–328. Google Scholar
  70. M. R. S Stanley Price 1978. Fringe-eared oryx on a Kenya Ranch. Oryx 14:370–373. Google Scholar
  71. M. R. S Stanley Price 1985. Game domestication for animal production in Kenya: the nutritional ecology of oryx, zebu cattle and sheep under free-range conditions. Journal of Agricultural Science 104:375–382. Google Scholar
  72. D Stewartand J Stewart 1963. The distribution of some large mammals in Kenya. Journal of East African Natural History 24:1–52. Google Scholar
  73. C. R Taylor 1968. Hygroscopic food: a source of water for desert antelopes. Nature 219:181–182. Google Scholar
  74. C. R Taylor 1970a. Strategies of temperature regulation: effect on evaporation in East African ungulates. American Journal of Physiology 219:1131–1135. Google Scholar
  75. C. R Taylor 1970b. Dehydration and heat: effects on temperature regulation of East African ungulates. American Journal of Physiology 219:1136–1139. Google Scholar
  76. O Thomas 1892. Exhibition of, and remarks upon, a mounted head of an apparently new East-African antelope (Oryx callotis). Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 1892:195–196, plate 14. Google Scholar
  77. C. R Thouless 1995. Aerial survey for wildlife in Omo Valley, Chew Bahir and Borana areas of southern Ethiopia. Report to EWCO. Ecosystems Consultants, London, United Kingdom. Google Scholar
  78. T. J Van Winkle 1985. Cryptosporidiosis in young artiodactyls. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 187:1170–1172. Google Scholar
  79. E. S Vrba 1995. The fossil records of African antelopes (Mammalia, Bovidae) in relation to human evolution and paleoclimate. Pp. 385–424 in Paleoclimate and evolution, with emphasis on human origins ( E. S Vrba G. H Denton T. C Patridgeand L. H Burckle eds.). Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut. Google Scholar
  80. E. S Vrbaand G. B Schaller 2000. Phylogeny of Bovidae based on behavior, glands, skulls, and postcrania. Pp. 203–222 in Antelope, deer, and relatives ( E. S Vrbaand G. B Schaller eds.). Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut. Google Scholar
  81. T. J Wacher 1988. Social organization and ranging behaviour in the Hippotraginae. Pp. 102–113 in Conservation and biology of desert antelopes ( A Dixonand D Jones eds.). Christopher Helm, London, United Kingdom. Google Scholar
  82. F. R Walther 1978. Behavioral observations on oryx antelope (Oryx beisa) invading Serengeti National Park, Tanzania. Journal of Mammalogy 59:243–260. Google Scholar
  83. F. R Walther 1991. On herding behavior. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 29:5–13. Google Scholar
  84. R Weigl 2005. Longevity of mammals in captivity; from the living collections of the world. Kleine Senckenberg-Reihe 48:1–214. Google Scholar

Notes

[1] Edited by Associate Editor of this account was David Zegers. Pamela Owen reviewed the fossil section, and Alfred L. Gardner reviewed the synonymies. Editor was Meredith J. Hamilton.

Fig. 1

Mature male Oryx callotis south of Mount Kenya in central Kenya; note the diagnostic tufts of hair extending from the ends of the ears, pronounced horn rings, and the selective browsing. Photograph by Pål A. Olsvik used by permission.

Fig. 2

Distribution of Oryx callotis in Kenya and Tanzania, East Africa; the northern distributional boundary in Kenya is the Tana River (base map from Brigham Young University Geography Department,  https://geography.byu.edu/pages/resources/outlineMaps.aspx).

Fig. 3

Ventral, dorsal, and lateral views of skull and lateral view of mandible of Oryx callotis (United States National Museum of Natural History, specimen 18944, sex unknown), collected by W. L. Abbott (date unknown) near Taveta in southern Kenya and the northern border of Tanzania. Greatest length of skull is 374.4 mm, average basal circumference of horns is 15.2 cm, left horn length is 70 cm, and tip-to-tip distance is 22.8 cm. The basal circumference of horns may suggest a male specimen, but the high degree of similarity of horn and skull measurements of female and male O. callotis makes it impossible to know the sex of this specimen (C. P. Groves, pers. comm.).

Fig. 4

Oryx callotis galloping across an open grassland habitat in southern Kenya; such a gait is typical during circular tournament displays in which linear hierarchies are learned, tested, and reinforced (Kingdon 1997). Photograph by Glen Tepke ( www.pbase.com/gtepke) used by permission.

Dana N. Lee, Richard W. Dolman and David M. Leslie "Oryx callotis (Artiodactyla: Bovidae)," Mammalian Species 2013(897), (7 March 2013). https://doi.org/10.1644/897.1
JOURNAL ARTICLE
11 PAGES


SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
Back to Top