Chapter 12: Bushpig Potamochoerus larvatus (F. Cuvier, 1822)129
Figure 12.3 Two young bushpig juve-
niles wedged in between an alpha sow
(left) and an alpha boar (right). (Photo
by A. H. W. Seydack.) (A black and white
version of this figure will appear in some
formats. For the colour version, please
refer to the plate section.)between adult females were recorded. Territorial bushpigs move
about their territories in an irregular way, traversing most parts
within relatively short periods (weekly), thereby ensuring regu-
lar presence in most parts (territory-spanning patrolling bouts).
Marking by territory-holders, both males and females, provided
indications of occupation when temporally absent.
The rearing unit in both European wild boar Sus scrofa
(Gundlach 1968) and warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus
(Mason 1982) is the matriarchal sounder. Both species have a
typically polygamous mating system. Contrasting this, observa-
tions indicative of monogamy in the bushpig, such as restriction
of breeding to the territorial dominant female, extended male
presence with the suckling female and paternal care behaviour,
have been recorded in Attwell and Bearder (1976), Skinner
et al. (1976) and Kingdon (1979). Monogamy as a mating system
in the bushpig was confirmed by close continual proximity of
members of adult heterosexual territorial pairs (Figure 12.3),
both during and outside periods of reproduction; the absence
of unrelated adult conspecifics from the territory; breeding only
by the territorial pair; and substantial paternal rearing invest-
ment (Seydack 1990). The sociobiological syndrome of resource
territoriality and monogamy, with its associated features such
as interfemale intolerance, body size monomorphism and male
parental care, is interpreted to represent a set of adaptations to
the nature of food resource dispersion typically encountered
by the species. The spatiotemporally dispersed nature of food
resources results in the search element of foraging to be of par-
ticular importance. Safeguarding foraging success through
spatial defence (territoriality) and restriction of intragroup
competition for food to within monogamous family groups is
accordingly considered adaptive (Seydack 1990).Rearing Behaviour
Usually between three and four small-sized, rather precocious
young are born, with a mean birth mass of 920 g (Seydack 1990),
but morphologically well-developed and functional. Somewhat
lower birth masses were recorded by Sowls and Phelps (1968).
The eyes of bushpig neonates at birth are open and the body
is covered with a hair coat. The neonates stand on their legs
shortly after birth. They follow the mother sow away from the
birth nest or hollow within the first one to three days, initially
for short distances only. At the ages of four to five days neo-
nates were observed playing, play fighting and performing root-
ing movements with their snouts. At the age of 9 days feeding
on solids was observed (Seydack 1990). During the farrowing
nest phase, which lasted two to three days, the sow neonate
unit was separate from other family group members, although
the boar remained in the vicinity of the unit. If weather condi-
tions at parturition were favourable, i.e. relatively warm, sows
did not prepare elaborate farrowing nests and farrowing took
place in shallow ground hollows. The building of bad-weather
nests was virtually confined to periods of rain combined with.01412:38:17