Fungal spores, especially those of coprophilous fungi, are present in dung middens of Rhinoceros unicornis (greater one-horned rhinoceros) in both forest and grassland areas of the Kaziranga National Park, India. The presence of coprophilous fungi on rhino dung, chiefly Sporormiella, Saccobolus, Ascodesmis, Cercophora, and Sordaria, is documented for the first time. The Sporormiella–Ascodesmis–Saccobolus assemblage is abundant and characterizes the rhino dung in forest and grassland areas. The presence of coprophilous fungi spores allows for an examination of the relationship between rhinoceros ecology and the flora and other fauna in the region. The overall dataset is useful in interpreting the present and past distribution of rhino and other associated animals based on the relative abundance of different types of coprophilous fungi spores and their relationship to paleoherbivory and paleoecology in India and adjoining areas.

The greater one-horned rhinoceros Rhinoceros unicornis is a flagship species for conservation in protected areas in India and Nepal. In India the species is afforded the highest level of legal protection under Schedule I of the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972. Although censuses of greater one-horned rhinoceros have been carried out for decades using the traditional total count method, no advanced scientific approach has been adopted for population estimation of the species in India or elsewhere. We optimized noninvasive genetic techniques for identification of greater one-horned rhinoceros from dung samples, and applied these to estimate the number of rhinoceros in Gorumara National Park, in West Bengal, India. Our results confirmed the presence of 43 individuals from 60 dung samples collected throughout the Park in 2011. We confirmed a male-to-female sex ratio of 3.8 : 1, based on analysis of DNA from dung samples, using a y-chromosome linked marker. Our results are in concordance with a census carried out by the West Bengal Forest Department that found 42 rhinoceros in the Park, with a male-to-female sex ratio of 3.5 : 1. Our study thus demonstrates the feasibility of using a noninvasive genetic approach for population estimation of greater one-horned rhinoceros in the wild.

Until the early 1980s the only surviving population of the greater one-horned rhinoceros Rhinoceros unicornis in Nepal was in Chitwan National Park. Between 1986 and 2003 87 rhinoceroses from Chitwan were translocated into Bardia National Park and Suklaphanta Wildlife Reserve in the western terai region to establish founder populations and reduce the threat of local extinction from natural catastrophic events, disease and/or poaching. The founder populations increased in number through births but a rise in poaching during the period of civil strife in Nepal during 1996–2006 resulted in a dramatic decline in the populations, including in Chitwan. In 2001 the Terai Arc Landscape programme was initiated to connect 11 protected areas in Nepal and north-west India and facilitate dispersal of megafauna and manage them as metapopulations. Corridors that were restored under the programme and that connect Bardia and Suklaphanta with protected areas in India are now used by the greater one-horned rhinoceros. The successes and failures of the last 2 decades indicate that new paradigms for protecting rhinoceroses within and outside protected areas are needed, especially with reference to managing this species at a landscape scale.

We assessed the abundance and distribution of the greater one-horned or Indian rhinoceros Rhinoceros unicornis in all its potential habitats in Nepal, using block counts. In April 2011 5,497 km were searched in 3,548 elephant-hours over 23 days. The validity of the block count was assessed by comparing it with counts obtained from long-term monitoring using photographic identification of individual rhinoceroses (ID-based), and estimates obtained by closed population sighting–mark–resighting in the 214 km2 of Chitwan National Park. A total of 534 rhinoceroses were found during the census, with 503 in Chitwan National Park (density 1 km−2), 24 in Bardia National Park (0.28 km−2) and seven in Suklaphanta Wildlife Reserve (0.1 km−2). In Chitwan 66% were adults, 12% subadults and 22% calves, with a female : male ratio of 1.24. The population estimate from sighting–mark–resighting was 72 (95% CI 71–78). The model with different detection probabilities for males and females had better support than the null model. In the Sauraha area of Chitwan estimates of the population obtained by block count (77) and ID-based monitoring (72) were within the 95% confidence interval of the estimate from sighting–mark–resighting. We recommend a country-wide block count for rhinoceroses every 3 years and annual ID-based monitoring in a sighting–mark–resighting framework within selected subpopulations. The sighting–mark–resighting technique provides the statistical rigour required for population estimates of the rhinoceros in Nepal and elsewhere.

Dry season diets and habitat use of increasing populations of Asian elephants Elephas maximus and greater one-horned rhinoceros Rhinoceros unicornis in the Babai Valley of Royal Bardia National Park, Nepal, are described, and an assessment is made of the potential for competition between them. The diets, analysed by microhistology, were different, with a similarity index of 37.5%, and with different grass/browse proportions: the rhino diet consisted of 63% grass and 28% browse; that of elephants was 24% grass and 65% browse. A tallgrass floodplain grass, Saccharum spontaneum, was the plant most eaten by rhinos, whereas elephants consumed a large proportion of bark of Bombax ceiba and Acacia catechu, as well as several browse species not eaten by rhino. The habitat use of elephants was determined by dung-counts within 30 km of 20-m wide belt transects, while that of rhino was taken from an earlier study. Elephants used a wider range of habitats than rhino, but two types, the tallgrass floodplain and khair–sissoo forest, were preferred by both species simultaneously. While elephants used the abundant sal forest extensively, rhino strongly avoided this habitat. Densities of both species were low at the time of study (<0.5 animals/km2), but their numbers are expected to increase markedly in coming years. Because available habitats for expansion are limited, this may lead to competition. Rhino might then become the weaker species, as elephants are more flexible in their ranging and foraging activities. The tallgrass floodplain habitat and its important forage grass S. spontaneum may then become the critical resources.