Because both IRC and CSE are known to feed on a wide range of prey animals, including invertebrates and vertebrates12–17, this study aimed to identify prey items from various taxonomic groups using multiple primer sets. By integrating the results of each primer set, we successfully identified various prey species from a wide range of taxa. A previous study that utilized visual analysis of stomach contents, which is thought to provide higher resolution of prey identification than that of fecal contents24, identified approximately 61.6% of prey items at the species level14. The present fecal DNA metabarcoding analysis identified 85.5% of prey items at the species level (Supplementary Table 2). Consequently, DNA-based methods appear to be well-suited for conducting detailed dietary analyses.
A comparison of the FOO of IRC prey items obtained in this study with that obtained in a previous study13suggests that for Mammalia, Reptilia, Amphibia, and Osteichthyes, DNA metabarcoding demonstrates the same level of detectability as visual analysis of fecal contents at the class level when identifying IRC prey items (Fig. 4). However, Aves and Insecta were detected less frequently in this study for several reasons. According to Watanabe (2012)13, winter birds, which visit Iriomotejima Island from autumn to winter, account for 40% of the bird species detected in fecal samples of IRC. In contrast, in this study, only 17.6% of the bird species were identified as winter birds. The number of migratory birds arriving in a particular area can vary significantly from year to year owing to various environmental changes25,26. Therefore, the annual variation in the number of winter bird visits between the samples analyzed in this study and those used by Watanabe (2012)13 may have influenced the results.
Insecta may not have been detected adequately using our method. One possible explanation for this is the insufficient accumulation of reference sequencing data in NCBI27. In particular, the sequence data of insects on Iriomotejima Island are still poor. Sufficient reference database is important to use the COI region as a barcode region due to the high genetic variation in genes that encode proteins in the COI region28,29. Indeed, many cockroaches Rhabdoblatta sp. were identified in a study conducted by Watanabe (2012)13, whereas they were not detected in the present study. The absence of sequence information for Rhabdoblatta sp. from Iriomotejima Island leads to the possibility that ambiguity in taxonomic assignment, or the failure to amplify its sequence due to mutations in primer biding region, contributed to the non-detection of Rhabdoblatta sp. Previous study that used a primer set amplifying the same region as the current study also noted the presence of uncertain taxonomic assignment resulting from an insufficient insect database30. Collecting sequence information on insects from Iriomotejima Island is a necessary step for the future.
We will not discuss details regarding Aves and Insecta below because the reasons for the limited detection of these taxa remain unclear; however, it is noteworthy that a significant comparison of diet between IRC and CSE was achieved in this study using the same methods for both species.
Additionally, the ranking of CSE prey frequency in winter was not accurately determined in this study due to the difference in prey species ranking by FOO and wPOO values. The inconsistency in rankings may be the result of the insufficient sample size of CSE feces in winter. However, the comparison of the frequency of each prey species between predators and seasons is meaningful.
Based on the results of the NMDS and PERMANOVA analyses at the order level (Fig. 6), significant differences were found between IRC and CSE in the composition of prey items in both summer and winter. To consider how prey animals differed between the two predators, we focus on each prey taxon.
Mammalian prey was detected in IRC feces in both seasons. Malacostraca (crabs) and Chilopoda (centipedes) were detected with higher FOO in CSE compared to IRC feces (Fig. 5). Previous studies have shown that Mammalia and crabs are the main prey animals of IRC and CSE, respectively, with FOO values of 30.9% in the visual analysis of IRC fecal contents and 57.1% in the analysis of CSE stomach contents13,16. While predation on centipedes by CSE has been observed visually12, it was not detected in their stomach contents presumably due to digestion16. Furthermore, although IRC have been shown to prey on Malacostraca and Chilopoda13, FOO values were low in the present study with 4.22% and 0.11%, respectively, in the visual analysis of their fecal contents. Previous studies also reported that the black rat could be a target of CSE predation12. However, the predation frequency of the black rat by CSE remains undetermined, and it was not detected in feces in the present study. In summary, it appears as though IRC feeds more frequently on Mammalia and that CSE feeds more frequently on crabs and centipedes. As the FOO values of Mammalia were not significantly different between the two predators in the summer season, additional research is required to examine the predation of Mammalia by CSE, especially the black rat.
Differences in the prey animals of IRC and CSE may be attributed to their distinct feeding behaviors. Iriomote cat actively hunts animals walking around the ground15,17, whereas CSE exhibits a sit-and-wait, or passive, foraging strategy based on perching and searching for prey animals on the ground12,31. The latter passive strategy of CSE may make it difficult to capture swiftly moving, larger-sized animals such as mammals which rarely appear in open areas. The frequent detection of crabs and centipedes in CSE feces may be explained by the fact that crabs and centipedes appear more frequently in open areas where CSE tend to hunt and exhibit slower movements.
The detection of Reptilia was significantly more frequent in IRC samples than in CSE samples during the summer. In particular, Japanese skink Pleistodon sp. exhibited the highest FOO and wPOO values among the detected IRC prey items, and the FOO was significantly higher than that in the CSE samples (Fig. 7 and Supplementary Table 2). This finding is concordant with that of a previous study that identified skink as a major prey for the IRC in summer13. However, in winter, the FOO of Reptilia was not significantly different between the two predators, probably due to the decreased FOO of Sakishima beauty snakes as well as skinks in the IRC samples during this season (Fig. 7 and Supplementary Table 2). In winter, the poikilothermic reptiles exhibit decreased activity owing to lower temperatures and appear only during warm daytime periods. Thus, the nocturnal predator IRC would have fewer opportunities to feed on reptiles13. On the other hand, CSE did not significantly affect the FOO of Reptilia between the two seasons. It is plausible that diurnal CSE has a sufficient chance of finding skinks in both seasons. Additionally, the detection of Sakishima smooth skink was significantly more frequent in the CSE in winter than in summer, and was not observed in the IRC (Fig. 7 and Supplementary Table 2). The potential for frequent feeding on Sakishima smooth skinks in CSE is the first finding of this study and requires further investigation.
IRC and CSE samples exhibited relatively high FOO and wPOO values for amphibians in both seasons (Fig. 5). Sakishima rice frogs were detected more frequently in the summer for both predators (Fig. 7 and Supplementary Table 2). This is possible because the biomass of the Sakishima rice frog is the highest on Iriomotejima Island, and its activity increases during the summer13,32. In CSE samples, the FOO and wPOO of this frog were the highest among all prey species in summer (Fig. 7), although frogs are generally nocturnal animals, and the FOO was significantly higher than that of the IRC samples. This may be due to the relative increase in daytime activity of the sakishima rice frog during summer. In winter, the FOO of Sakishima rice frogs decreased significantly in the CSE samples, and the difference between the two predators was not significant. This may be related to the decreased activity of Sakishima rice frogs during winter13. Other amphibian prey species, the Yaeyama narrow-mouthed toad and the Owston’s green tree frog, were detected for both predators in winter (Fig. 7 and Supplementary Table 2). The supposed competition for the frogs between IRC and CSE in winter requires further discussion, particularly with a larger CSE sample size.
In summary, despite previous studies indicating an overlap in prey items between the IRC and CSE12–17, we found differences in diets between the IRC and CSE in winter and summer, respectively. We performed fecal DNA barcoding analysis of each predator and calculated the frequency of detection of each prey item as an indicator. This enables a comparison between IRC and CSE diets for the first time. The proposed differential feeding habits of the two predators could be attributed to fundamental ecological differences such as activity patterns, foraging strategies, and seasonal variations in the activity of prey animals. It is noteworthy that prey animals with high biomass were shared by both IRC and CSE; however, we found at least partially significant differences in the FOO of each prey animal between predators. These quantitatively different diets of the IRC and CSE may contribute to distinguishing feeding habits between them. This could potentially allow both predators to survive on a small island with limited resources and challenging environmental conditions.
IRC and CSE subspecies in the Eurasian continent, that is, the leopard cat and the Crested Serpent Eagle, predominantly feed on rodents and snakes10,11,33–37. Dietary analysis of the subspecies of IRC in the Korean Peninsula, Prionailurus bengalensis euptilurus, revealed that rodents accounted for over 90% of their diet based on morphological observations of fecal samples35. Similarly, regarding the subspecies of CSE in India, Spilornis cheela melanotis, snakes constituted over 70% of their diet, based on direct visual observation of their feeding behavior33. In contrast, both IRC and CSE on Iriomotejima Island exhibited relatively lower FOO values for rodents (25.3%) and snakes (7.3%) (Supplementary Table 2). These island subspecies tended to feed on more diverse prey species than their continental counterparts (Fig. 8). This finding suggests that the unique small island ecosystem of Iriomotejima Island has influenced the ecology of IRC and CSE to adapt to their available prey, along with other external factors, resulting in dietary habits distinct from those of their continental counterparts.