revealed that the condition of these smaller alligators among the lakes was significantly

different and therefore the disproportionate sizes of alligators sampled did not affect the

overall condition results.

 The range of condition scores for all alligators (1.69 4. 13) was divided up into

quartiles and assigned a rank because Fulton's K does not have biological standards for a

"low" or a "high" condition score (Table 3-17). Alligators from Lakes Griffin and

Woodruff were both categorized as having a low to average condition; however, the Lake

Woodruff alligators were at the bottom of this range and the Lake Griffin alligators were

at the top of this range. Lake Apopka alligators fell into the fourth quartile and were

categorized as having a high condition. The condition of the Lake Apopka alligators

stood out as much higher (i.e., relatively more robust) than alligators from the other two

lakes even though they were all significantly different.

 Discussion

Alligator Diets among Lakes

 American alligators in this study consumed a wide variety of prey and this was

consistent with other adult alligator diet studies (Delany and Abercrombie 1986, Delany

et al. 1988, Delany et al. 1999, Wolfe et al. 1987). Diverse diets may be due to habitat

type, local prey abundance, prey vulnerability, and prey size. The prey composition and

prey biomass in alligator stomach samples in this study varied greatly. This variety

included samples containing fresh intact or partially digested prey, samples containing

old mostly digested prey, or a combination of both. However, most of the samples did

contain fresh prey indicating that the alligators were eating frequently. The number of

specimens and estimated biomass of the fresh prey also varied greatly. For example, one

sample contained six small fresh prey specimens, which was estimated at 80 g in