Abstract
Human activities, together with associated livestock and domestic dog activity, can alter resource use and behavioural decisions in small- and medium-sized carnivores. However, long-term evidence at a common landscape scale remains limited regarding whether different disturbance sources drive the temporal and spatial responses of leopard cats (Prionailurus bengalensis) in multifunctional national parks. Using camera-trap data collected in the Yingjing section of Giant Panda National Park from October 2017 to April 2024, we examined leopard cat activity rhythms, potential habitat distribution, and the spatiotemporal relationships between leopard cats and broadly defined anthropogenic disturbance. The study area included 474 effective camera-trap stations and accumulated 283,279 camera-trap days. In total, 687 independent leopard cat detections were recorded at 181 stations. Leopard cats were predominantly nocturnal, with the highest daily activity occurring between 02:00 and 06:00, while annual activity was mainly concentrated from May to November. Comparing leopard cat activity patterns between disturbed and undisturbed sites revealed a high temporal overlap (Δ4 = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.84–0.97), with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.763). The conditional two- species occupancy model likewise detected no spatial association between leopard cats and humans (SIF = 1.00). In contrast, distance to settlements, distance to water sources, and elevation were the main predictors of potential leopard cat habitat, contributing 29.67%, 24.18%, and 19.04%, respectively. Potentially suitable habitat covered 328.03 km2, accounting for 39.60% of the Yingjing section. These results indicate that leopard cats showed no clear overall avoidance under the current anthropogenic disturbance conditions, although their habitat distribution was closely associated with distance from human settlements. Because the current definition of anthropogenic disturbance combines records of humans, livestock, and domestic dogs, future analyses should distinguish among multiple disturbance sources at the camera station–year–season scale to identify differentiated spatiotemporal responses that may be obscured by aggregated analyses.