BIOTROPICA 31(3): 502-506 1999

Feeding Ecology of the Giant Otter, Pferonurabrasili'ensis'

Fernando C. W. Rosas2, Jansen A. S. Zuanon, and Sarah K. Carter3

lnstituto Nacional de Pesquisas da AmazBnia (INPA), C.P. 478, Manaus, AM, 6901 1-970, Brazil

ABSTRACT
,.
I he food habits of the giant otter, Pteronura bradiensis, were determined by analyzing fecal samples collected year-
round from communal latrines at Xixuah Creek (00"48'S, 61"33'W), Jauaperi River (central Brazilian Amazon)
between 1993 and 1994. Communal latrines were also sampled during the low water season at Aquidauana River
(19"32'S, 56"40'W), Pantanal of Mato Grosso do Sul (central Brazil). Fragments of vertebrae, mandibles, teeth, scales,
and fin spines provided an estimate of the diet composition. Remains of fish were present in all of the samples. The
main fish groups found at Xixuah Creek were Perciformes, represented specifically by Cichlidae (97.3% of all samples),
Characiformes (86.5%) and Siluriformes (5.4%). Thc Characiformes were represented mainly by Erythrinidae (Huplias
sp. 90.6%), followed by Serrasalmidae (28%). The Anostomidae occurred with a frequency of 18.7 percent, while
Characinae, Bryconinae, and Cynodontidae were only observed in 3.1 percent of the Characiformes records. At
Aquidauana River, the Characiformes were the most frequent fish group, represented in 100 percent of all samples,
followed by Siluriformes (66.6%) and Perciformes (33.3%). The fish from the main groups identified in the diet of
the giant otters prefer riverbanks, lakes, and flooded forests. The feeding habits of I'terunura brrtriliensis are probably
influenced by the vulnerability and abundance of the prey consumed by this carnivore.

Kq words: Amcwn; Brazil; ecology;feeding habits; Pteronura brasiliensis.

T H ~MAN^
. 0 1 I ~ R ,PTERONLJKA BRASILIFNSIS, along
with two other species of South American otters,
Lutra jdina and Lutra provocax, are considered
highly threatened (Chehkbar 1990). In Brazil, the
gianc otter is practically extinct in the south (Cheh-
kbar 1990, Rosas et al. 1991), and apparently, sig-
nificant populations are found only in the Pantanal
and the Amazon (Carter & Rosas 1997). These
latter authors have recommended that the vulner-
able status of giant otters be elevated to endangered
in the IUCN Red Data Book.
Despite being endangered, only a few ecologi-
cal and behavioral studies on the giant otter have
been published, and most of them have been car-
ried out during the low water season (Duplaix
1980, Laidler 1984, Schweizer 1992) when con-
ditions are favorable and the animals can be readily
observed.
According to the literature, Pteronura brasilien-
sis eats primarily fish and appears to be an oppor-
tunistic predator, capturing the most abundant spe-
cies (Duplaix 1980, Schweizer 1992). Studies car-
' Received 9 September 1996; revision accepted 9 March
1998.
* Present address: P6s-GraduaGSo em Zoologia, Centro de
Estudos do Mar/UFI'R, Av. Beira Mar, s/n. Pontal do Sul-
I'R, 83255-000, Brazil.
Present address: Washington Cooperative Fish and
Wildlife Research Unit, School of Fisheries, PO. Box
357980, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington,
98195-7980, U.S.A.
ried out in Suriname (Duplaix 1980), Guyana
(Laidler 1984), and Pantanal (Brazil) (Schweizer
1992) showed that fish of the orders Characifor-
mes, Perciformes, and Siluriformes are the most
frequent prey in the giant otter's diet.
In the present study, samples of giant otter feces
were collected year-round from communal latrines
in the region of Xixua6 Creek Uauaperi River, Bra-
zilian Amazon) and during the low water season at
Pantanal of Mato Grosso do Sul (Aquidauana Riv-
er, central Brazil), and analyzed for diet composi-
tion. Apart from describing the food habits, we also
studied ecological characteristics of the main prey
consumed to learn about the ecology of this en-
dangered species.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Four excursions to Xixua6 Creek (OO048'S,
61"33'W), Jauaperi River (Fig. 1) were conducted,
one in each of the following months: May 1993
(rising water), September 1993 (high water), Oc-
tober 1993 (receding water), and February 1994
(low water). Thus, an entire hydrological cycle was
sampled. Fecal samples were collected from 37
communal latrines in this area. Additionally, fecal
samples were collected from six communal latrines
in November 1993 (low water) along the Aquidau-
ana River (19"32'S, 56"40'W) in the Pantanal of
Mato Grosso do Sul (central Brazil; Fig. 1).
These communal latrines have a very strong

502

FIGURE 1. Study areas.
fish smell which, when mixed with the giant otter's
urine and feces, makes the odor very unpleasant
and easy to identify from a distance (Duplaix 1980,
Schweizer 1992, Carter & Rosas 1997). They are
very conspicuous places, usually located near carnp-
sites, where all members of a giant otter group def-
ecate (Duplaix 1980). The distribution of com-
munal latrines varies according to the water level,
Giant Otter Feeding Ecology 503
and their location changes from one season to an-
other.
All fecal samples collected were stored in plastic
bags and transported to the laboratory, where they
were washed with running water in a fine-mesh
sieve, sorted, and identified. The hard structures
used to identify the diet included mainly fragments
of vertebrae, mandibles, teeth, scales, and fin
504 Rosas, Zuanon, and Carter

TABLE 1. Frequenry of occurrencefor thejshgroups iden-

tijed in the feces of the giant otters from Xi-
xuau Creek. Sample size (N) is the number of
communal latrines surveyed.

% of the % of the
Prey items N order total
CHARACIFORMES 32 i6.50
Anostomidae 6 18.75 16.20
Leporinus sp. 3 9.37 8.10
Others 3 9.37 8.10
Characidae
Characinae 3.10 2.70
Bryconinae 3.10 2.70
Cynodontidae 3.10 2.70
Perciformes Characiformes Siluriformes
Erythrinidae
FIGURE 2. Frequency of occurrence for the fish orders
Hoplias sp. 25 78.10 67.60
found in the giant otter’s feces samples from XixuaG
Others 4 12.50 10.80
Creek (Brazilian Amazon).
Serrasalmidae 9 28.12 24.30
Serrasalminae 7 21.87 18.90
Myleinae 2 6.25 5.40
SILU KIFORMES 2 100.00 5.40 sponding to 24.3 percent of the total samples. An-
PERCIFORMES 36 97.30 ostomidae, represented mainly by the genus Lepor-
Cichlidae 36 100.00 97.30 inus, were present in six samples, representing
18.75 percent of the Characiformes records and
16.2 percent of the total. Characinae (carnivorous
spines. The material, when possible, was identified characids), Bryconinae (matrinxzs, sardinhas, and
at different taxonomic levels, ranging from order araris), and Cynodontidae (dog-tooth fish), oc-
to genus. Data analyses were based on the frequen- curred only once each, representing a relative fre-
cy of occurrence of prey categories. quency of 3.1 percent among the Characiformes
and 2.7 percent of the total samples. Unidentified
remains of Characiformes were present in 43.75
RESULTS
percent of the total records for the order.
Remains of fish were present in all fecal samples The occurrence of the Characiformes and Per-
from Xixuau Creek (Table 1). Traces of Percifor- ciformes in the feces from Xixua6 Creek did not
mes, specifically Cichlidae, were present in 36 of vary considerably during the year and were present
37 samples (97.3%; Fig. 2) collected in Xixuali in at least 77 percent of the samples in each season.
Creek. The Characiformes, represented by remains Siluriformes, however, were only found in the feces
of Anostomidae, Erythrinidae, Cynodontidae, collected during the low water period (February
Characidae (Characinae and Bryconinae), and Ser- 1994) and were present in 20 percent of the sam-
rasalmidae (Serrasalminae and Myleinae) occurred ples from that season.
in 32 of the samples, giving a total frequency of In the analyses carried out on the fecal material
86.5 percent. The Siluriformes had the lowest rep- from Aquidauana River, Characiformes were pre-
resentation with only two records (5.4%; Fig. 2). sent in 100 percent of the samples (N = 6). Sil-
Among the Characiformes, the Erythrinidae uriformes were recorded in four of the six samples
were present in 29 of 32 samples containing re- (66.6%), and Perciformes were identified in only
mains of Characiformes (90.6%), and comprised two samples (33.3%). Among the Characiformes
78.4 percent of the overall total. Within Erythrin- identified in the fecal material from Aquidauana
idae, the genus Hoplias (trahiras) was identified in River, Erythrinidae, represented essentially by Ho-
25 samples, corresponding to 86.2 percent of the plia, were present in 83.3 percent of the samples.
records for the family, 78.1 percent of the Chara- The Serrasalmidae and Anostomidae were each
ciformes samples, and 67.6 percent of all samples. present in 33.3 percent of the samples.
The Serrasalmidae, including Serrasalmw sp. (pi- The samples collected during the low water pe-
ranhas) and Myleinae (pacus), occurred in nine riod in Xixua6 Creek were plotted together with
(28.1 %) samples containing Characiformes, corre- those from Aquidauana River (Fig. 3). Perciformes

WXixuaU Creek
rll Aquidauana b v e i
~ .~
r-
Characiformes Perciformes Siluriformes
FIGURE 3. Frequency of occurrence for the fish orders
found during the low water season in the Xixuah Creek
(Amazon) and Aquidauana River (Pantanal).
were more frequent in the feces from Xixuali Creek
at this time of the year than in those from the
Aquidauana River, although Siluriformes were
more common in the feces from the latter site.
DISCUSSION
The results of this study indicate that Perciformes
are the most frequent prey of giant otters, followed
by Characiformes. This indicates the importance of
these groups in the diet of Pteronura briiliensis, in
contrast to the low representation by the Siluri-
formes (catfishes). The latter fish group was found
only during the low water period, which may re-
flect a greater vulnerability of these fish during this
season. Similar results, in terms of frequency of oc-
currence in spraints, were obtained by Laidler
(1984) in Guyana. Duplaix (1980) noted the pref-
erence for Characiformes compared to Perciformes
in Suriname, with the latter group having a similar
frequency to the Siluriformes. The low frequency
of occurrence of Siluriformes in the samples ana-
lyzed in the present study are not likely to be ex-
plained by a flaw in the samples or differential de-
composition of parts, since the skulls, fin spines,
and lateral bony plates of Siluriformes are highly
resistant and conspicuous.
We believe that the dietary information for the
Xixuali area applies to a core area in the home
range of a giant otter family group because of nu-
merous and frequent dens and campsites in the
area, both perennial and newly constructed (Carter
& Rosas 1997). In addition, the presence of a fam-
ily group of six giant otters was confirmed on two
separate excursions, and reliable information has
Giant Otter Feeding Ecology 505
indicated their regular presence in the area. Finally,
on four excursions to the area throughout the year
we found no single spraints, only numerous com-
munal latrines, which Duplaix (1980) has suggest-
ed is indicative of a core area in the home range.
While only communal latrines were found in
the Pantanal site as well, the brevity of the collec-
tion period and small sample size precludes further
discussion.
The results obtained in this study reveal the
predominance of medium-sized Cichlids (based on
the relative size of the scales and maxillary bones)
and trahiras, Hoplii sp. (Erythrinidae), in the giant
otter’s diet at Xixuali Creek, in agreement with the
results of Duplaix (1980) and Laidler (1984) from
Suriname and Guyana, respectively. Both groups of
fish prefer inhabiting riverbanks, lakes, and flooded
forests (igapbs), occupying areas close to the sub-
strate containing submerged branches, trunks, and
litter banks. The preference for these relatively shal-
low areas where visibility is higher may render these
fish more vulnerable to visually oriented predators
like the giant otters. This is especially relevant in
blackwater rivers, in which the penetration of light
is considerably reduced beyond depths of 1.5 m. A
second factor possibly contributing to the high par-
ticipation of Cichlidae and Erithrinidae in the giant
otter’s diet is the behavior of these fish. Cichlids
usually remain close to their defined territories,
moving only short distances to investigate the sur-
rounding environment. Trahiras are ambush hunt-
ers that spend most of the time lurking in strategic
places, using components of the subaquatic scenery
to hide while waiting for potential prey. Trahiras
are also solitary fish, and Cichlidae live in pairs or
small groups, except for temporary aggregations
motivated by the presence of a feeding source or
for reproductive purposes. It is unknown if fish
with the behavioral characteristics described above
are simply easier for giant otters to catch than other
fish species that may be very active, fast swimmers,
or wide-ranging, for example, or if Pteronura has
become more efficient at catching fish with these
behavioral patterns through specialization. It is
known, however, that giant otters spend more time
hunting in shallow water than in deep water (Laid-
ler 1984), that they are more successful at catching
fish in shallow than deep water (Laidler, op. cit.),
and that fish species preferring these shallow areas,
which show restricted movement, make up the
largest portion of giant otter’s diet. Other groups
of fish are consumed more or less occasionally, de-
pending on local or seasonal availability.
Although the fecal samples from Aquidauana
506 Rosas, Zuanon, and Carter

River (Pantanal) are small, the results agree with ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Schweizer's (1992) observations that the Pantanal
giant otters consume nocturnal and benthic fish,
which move slowly during the day and are there-
fore probably easier for the diurnal giant otters to
capture.
The difference in the relative frequency of the
Perciformes and Siluriformes in the giant otter's
diet in the two areas studied (Amazon and Pantan-
a1)may reflect differences in the availability of these
prey groups in habitats traversed by giant otters.
We would like to thank Anglia Survival TV (England)
for transportation and field support. We also thank the
AssociaGPo AmazBnia, which provided partial field sup-
port and allowed us to study the giant otters in Xixuau
Creek. Field support in the Pantanal was provided by the
Pousada Caiman. S . K. Carter was supported by a grad-
uate scholarship from the United States Fulbright Com-
mission; INPA provided infrastructure and technical sup-
port. We also thank Kesa K. Lehti, Emygdio Leite de
Aratijo Monteiro-Filho, Luis Ebensperger, Thomas H.
Kunz, and an anonymous reviewer for their suggestions
on the manuscript.

LITERATURE CITED

CAium, S. K., AND F. C. W. ROSAS.1997. Biology and conservation of the giant otter, Pteronura brasiliensis. Mammal
Rev. 27(1): 1-26.
CHwiIhAR, C. 1990. Action plan for Latin American otters. In I? Foster-Turley, S. Macdonald, and C. Mason (Eds.).
Otters. An action plan for their conservation, pp. 64-73. IUCN/SSC Otter Specialist Group, Gland, Switz-
erland.
Dim Aix, N. 1980. Observations on the ecology and behavior of the giant river otter Pteronura brasiliensis in Suriname.
Rev. Ecol. (Terre et Vie) 34: 495-620.
L A i i x r x , l? E. 1984. The behavioural ecology of the giant otter in Guyana. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Cam-
bridge, Cambridge England. 296 pp.
ROSAS,F. C. W., E. I? COLARES, I. G. COLARHS, A N D V. M. F. DA S ~ I V A .
1991. Mamiferos aquiticos da Amazijnia
brasileira. In A. L. Val, R. Figliuolo, and E. Feldberg (Eds.). Bases cientificas para estratkgias de preservaqPo
e desenvolvimento da AmazBnia, Vol. I., pp. 405411. Manaus, Brazil, 440 pp.
S:i iwmmx, J. 1992. Ariranhas no Pantanal. Ecologia e comportamento da Pteronura brmiliensis.Editora Brad Natureza
(EDIBRAN), Curitiba, Brazil. 200 pp.