Abstract: Non-invasive methods enable stress evaluation through measuring fecal glucocorticoid metabolites (FGMs), and immunoglobulin A (IgA) in the feces avoiding stressful blood drawing or stressful restraining of animals in the field. However, FGMs and IgA are mostly analysed in freshly frozen samples, which is difficult when fresh samples cannot be frozen immediately or frozen samples cannot be stored or transported. Good results were also derived from air-dried fecal samples, which are hampered by unstable air humidity in the field. These difficulties may be overcome, when drying of samples could be induced with colorless silica gel (SiO2) granules in a secure set-up, such as an air tight tube. We determined the speed of drying 1.5 g of a fresh fecal sample from six horses on air and on silica gel. Furthermore, FGMs and IgA were analysed in differently stored subsamples from 12 horses: in frozen fecal samples, in air- or silica gel-dried samples stored for 1 day and for 7 days, and in wet fecal samples kept in a tube at room temperature for 7 days. FGM levels remained stable in feces dried on air or on silica gel for 7 days, whereas IgA quantities showed a significant loss. Under field conditions, when freezing or transporting the frozen samples is not possible and humidity hampers air drying, drying samples on silica gel in air tight tubes appears to be very helpful and reliable for analysing FGMs.

Abstract: Abstract Across the globe, wildlife populations and their behaviours are negatively impacted by people. Protected areas are believed to be an antidote to increasing human pressures but even they are not immune to the impact of anthropogenic activities. Areas that have been set aside for the protection of wildlife therefore warrant more attention when investigating the impact of anthropogenic pressures on wildlife. We use cheetahs Acinonyx jubatus as a case study to explore how a large carnivore responds to anthropogenic pressures inside wildlife areas. Using GPS-collar data we investigate cheetah space use, both when moving and stationary, and movement parameters (speed and turn angles) in relation to human disturbance, distance to human settlement, livestock abundance and livestock site use inside wildlife areas. Space use was negatively influenced by human disturbance, resulting in habitat loss and fragmentation and potentially reducing landscape permeability between neighbouring wildlife areas. Cheetahs were also less likely to stop in areas where livestock numbers were high, but more likely to stop in areas that were frequently used by livestock. The latter could reflect that cheetahs are attracted to livestock however, cheetahs in the study area rarely predated on livestock. It is therefore more likely that areas that are frequently used by livestock attract wild herbivores, which in turn could influence cheetah space use. We did not find any effects of people and livestock on cheetahs? speed and turn angles which might be related to the resolution of the data. We found that cheetahs are sensitive to human pressures and we believe that they could be an indicator species for other large carnivores facing similar challenges. We suggest that further research is needed to determine the levels of anthropogenic pressures needed to maintain ecological integrity, especially inside wildlife areas.