Peters, 1876

(Eng) Peters' duiker

(Fre) Céphalophe de Peters

This duiker has been considered conspecific to C. natalensis and/or C. adersi (Wilson & Reeder, 1993). Here, pending a revision of the red duiker group and according to East (1996) and Wilson & Reeder (1993), it is treated as a separate species. It does not include C. weynsi.

Lower Risk, near threatened (LR: nt).

Information available on this species is quite scarce, and no specific studies on its ecology have been conducted. Notes on its habitat use and requirements are found in Gautier-Hion et al. (1980) and Heymans & Lejoly (1981). Feiler (1990) reports on its presence in Angola. Status and distribution in each country in which the species occurs are discussed in East (1988), together with some information on its ecology. General information on the ecology of the species is found in Haltenorth & Diller (1980) and Kingdon (1997).

Known extent of occurrence

The Peters’ duiker is present in southern Cameroon, southern C.A.R., west of the Ubangi-Zaire rivers in Congo and possibly in former Zaire, Eq. Guinea and Gabon (East, 1996; Wilson & Reeder, 1993). The distribution map was first obtained from Haltenorth & Diller (1980), later updated using country map boundaries in East (1988, 1990) as indicated by Dr. R. East (23 June '97) (Fig. 8.6.48.a).

This species occurs in primary and secondary lowland and montane forests, where it prefers dense undergrowth. Its absence in riverine strips and gallery forests in the savanna zone is specifically cited (East, 1990; Kingdon, 1997; Heymans & Lejoly, 1981).

Based on these environmental preferences, the following scores were assigned (Fig. 8.6.48.b) (8.6.48.a):

The output of the probabilistic-continuous (PC) distribution model is shown in Fig. 8.6.48.c.

The Index of Accordance of 19.44%, which is among the lowest in the databank, is probably due both to the low level of knowledge available on the specie and to the identification difficulties encountered during field work. The following comments should thus be taken cautiously. The known EO is mostly suitable, but the separated southern section appears to be of lower suitability and very fragmented. Both models indicate the same lower suitability in this section. With the exception of this part, the EO does not appear to be very fragmented and the suitable areas provide a large continuous patch. The large block of forests of Gabon, Congo and southern Cameroon certainly provides a continuous large distribution area. However, the high AWMSI shows that the shape of the suitable areas (and the total AO) is discontinuous and may indicate significant interspersion with less suitable areas, especially in the western and southern part of the range. About 5.5% of the total AO is included in existing protected areas.