Spatial distribution in the bushy-tailed wood rat (Neotoma cinerea) and its implications for the mating system

Canadian Journal of Zoology

Volumn 74, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 565-569

  Topping, Michael G ^a   Millar, John S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BUSHY-TAILED WOOD RAT; MATING SYSTEM; POLYGYNY; PROMISCUITY;

NEOTOMA CINEREA;

EID: 0029773791     PISSN: 00084301     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/z96-062     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Boonstra, R., Xia, X., and Pavone, L. 1993. Mating system of the meadow vole, Microtus pennsylvanicus. Behav. Ecol. 4: 83-89.
2. Bryant, D.M. 1979. Reproductive costs in the house martin Delichon urbica. J. Anim. Ecol. 48: 655-675.
3. Clutton-Brock, T.H., Albon, S.D., and Guinness, F.E. 1984. Maternal dominance, breeding success and birth sex ratios in red deer. Nature (Lond.), 308: 358-360.
4. Cranford, J.A. 1977. Home range and habitat utilization by Neotoma fuscipes as determined by radiotelemetry. J. Mammal. 58: 165-172.
5. Dixon, K.R., and Chapman, J.A. 1980. Harmonic mean measure of animal activity areas. Ecology, 61: 1040-1044.
6. Dunnet, G.M., Ollason, J.C., and Anderson, A. 1979. A twenty-eight year study of breeding fulmars Fulmarus glacialis (L.) in Orkney. Ibis, 121: 293-300.
7. Egoscue, H.J. 1962. The bushy-tailed woodrat: a laboratory colony. J. Mammal. 43: 328-337.
8. Emlen, S.T., and Oring, L.W. 1977. Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science (Washington, D.C.), 197: 215-223.
9. Escherich, P.C. 1981. Social biology of the bushy-tailed woodrat, Neotoma cinerea. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool. 110: 1-132.
10. Finley, R.B. 1958. The woodrats of Colorado: distribution and ecology. Univ. Kans. Mus. Nat. Hist. Publ. No. 10. pp. 213-552.
11. Foltz, D.W., and Hoogland, J.L. 1981. Analysis of the mating system in the black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicanus) by likelihood of paternity. J. Mammal. 62: 706-712.
12. Getz, L.L., and Hofmann, J.E., 1986. Social organization in free-living prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 18: 275-282.
13. Harris, S., Cresswell, W.J., Forde, P.G., Trewhella, W.J., Woollard, T., and Wray, S. 1990. Home-range analysis using radio-tracking data- a review of problems and techniques particularly as applied to the study of mammals. Mammal. Rev. 20: 97-123.
14. Harvey, P.H., Stenning, M.J., and Campbell, B. 1985. Individual variation in seasonal breeding success of pied flycatchers. J. Anim. Ecol. 54: 391-398.
15. Hickling, G.J. 1987. Seasonal reproduction and group dynamics of bushy-tailed woodrats (Neotoma cinerea L.). Ph.D. thesis, University of Western Ontario, London.
16. Hofmann, J.E., Getz, L.L., and Gavish, L. 1984. Home range overlap and nest cohabitation of male and female prairie voles. Am. Midl. Nat. 112: 314-319.
17. Kenward, R. 1987. Wildlife radio tagging: equipment, field techniques and data analysis. Academic Press, London.
18. Kenward R, 1990. RANGES IV. Software for analyzing animal location data. Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Wareham, England.
19. Kruuk, H. 1978. Spatial organization and territorial behaviour of the European badger Meles meles. J. Zool. (1965-1984), 184: 1-19.
20. Le Boeuf, B.J. 1974. Male-male competition and reproductive success in elephant seals. Am. Zool. 14: 163-176.
21. Moses, R.A. 1992. Intrasexual competition and reproductive success in female bushy-tailed woodrats. Ph.D. thesis, University of Western Ontario, London.
22. Moses, R.A., and Millar, J.S. 1992. Behavioural asymmetries and cohesive mother-offspring sociality in bushy-tailed wood rats. Can. J. Zool. 70: 597-604.
23. Moses, R.A., and Millar, J.S. 1994. Philopatry and mother-daughter associations in bushy-tailed woodrats: space use and reproductive success. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 35: 131-140.
24. Ostfeld, R.S. 1985. Limiting resources and territoriality in microtine rodents. Am. Nat. 126: 1-15.
25. Ostfeld, R.S. 1986. Territoriality and mating system of California voles. J. Anim. Ecol. 55: 691-706.
26. Ostfeld, R.S., Lidicker, W.Z., and Heske, E.J. 1985. The relationship between habitat heterogeneity, space use, and demography in a population of California voles. Oikos, 45: 433-442.
27. Ostfeld, R.S., Pugh, S.R., Seamon, J.O., and Tamarin, R.H. 1988. Space use and reproductive success in a population of meadow voles. J. Anim. Ecol. 57: 385-394.
28. Ribble, D.O. 1991. The monogamous mating system of Peromyscus californicus as revealed by DNA fingerprinting. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 29: 161-166.
29. Ribble, D.O., and Salvioni, M. 1990. Social organization and nest co-occupancy in Peromyscus californicus, a monogamous rodent. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 26: 9-15.
30. Ryser, J. 1992. The mating system and male mating success of the Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana) in Florida. J. Zool. (Lond.), 228: 127-139.
31. Southwood, T.R.E. 1966. Ecological methods: with particular reference to the study of insect populations. Chapman and Hall, London.
32. Swihart, R.K., and Slade, N.A. 1985. Testing for independence of observations in animal movements. Ecology, 66: 1176-1184.
33. Tegelstrom, H., Searle, J., Brookfield, J., and Mercer, S. 1991. Multiple paternity in wild common shrews (Sorex araneus) is confirmed by DNA-fingerprinting. Heredity, 66: 373-379.
34. Van Winkle, W. 1975. Comparisons of several probabilistic home-range models. J. Wildl. Manage. 39: 118-123.
35. Wittenberger, J.F. 1979. The evolution of mating systems in birds and mammals. In Handbook of behavioral neurobiology. 3. Social behavior and communication. Edited by P. Marler and J.G. Vandenbergh, Plenum Press, New York. pp. 271-349.
36. Xia, X., and Millar, J.S. 1991. Genetic evidence of promiscuity in Peromyscus leucopus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 28: 171-178.
37. Zar, J.H. 1984. Biostatistical analysis. 2nd ed. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.