Individual and seasonal differences in antipredatory behaviour of root voles - A field experiment

Canadian Journal of Zoology

Volumn 80, Issue 9, 2002, Pages 1520-1525

  Borowski, Zbigniew ^a  

^a FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Poland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;

ANTIPREDATOR BEHAVIOUR; NATURAL HABITAT; REPRODUCTION;

SENSORY PERCEPTION;

ANTIPREDATOR DEFENSE; AVOIDANCE REACTION; BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY; BREEDING SEASON; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; SEASONAL VARIATION;

MAMMALIA; MICROTUS OECONOMUS; MURIDAE; MUSTELA NIVALIS;

EID: 0036922187     PISSN: 00084301     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/z02-154     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Borowski, Z. 1998a. Influence of predator odour on the feeding behaviour of the root vole (Microtus oeconomus Pallas, 1776). Can. J. Zool. 76: 1791-1794.
2. Borowski, Z. 1998b. Influence of weasel (Mustela nivalis Linnaeus, 1766) odour on spatial behaviour of root voles (Microtus oeconomus Pallas, 1776).). Can. J. Zool. 76: 1799-1804.
3. Borowski, Z. 1999. Influence of Predator Odours on the Space Use of Root Vole (Microtus oeconomus) in Biebrza Population, Po-land. Ph.D. thesis, Forest Research Institute, Warsaw, Poland.
4. Borowski, Z. 2000. The odour of terrestrial predator as an olfactory risk signal detected by rodents, and its consequences. Biol. Bull. Poznan, 37(1): 159-169.
5. Cade, W. 1979. The evolution of alternative male reproductive strategies in field crickets. In Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. Edited by M.S. Blum and N.A. Blum. Academic Press, New York. pp. 373-379.
6. Carlsen, M., Lodal, J., Leirs, H., and Jensen, T.S. 1999. The effect of predation risk on body weight in the field vole, Microtus agrestis. Oikos, 87: 277-285.
7. Cushing, B.S. 1984. A selective preference by least weasels for oestrus versus dioestrus urine of praire deer mice. Anim. Behav. 32: 1263-1265.
8. Cushing, B.S. 1985a. A comparison of activity patterns of oestrus and diestrous prairie deer mice, Peromyscus maniculatus bairdi. J. Mammal. 66: 136-139.
9. Cushing, B.S. 1985b. Estrous mice and vulnerability to weasel predation. Ecology, 66: 1976-1978.
10. Derting, T.L. 1989. Prey selection and foraging characteristics of least weasels (Mustela nivalis) in the laboratory. Am. Midl. Nat. 122: 394-400.
11. Desy, E.A., Batzli, G.O., and Liu, J. 1990. Effects of food and predation on behaviour of prairie voles - A field experiment. Oikos, 58: 159-168.
12. Endler, J.A. 1980. Natural selection on color patterns in Poecilia reticulata. Evolution, 34: 76-91.
13. Gliwicz, J. 1996. Life history of voles: Growth and maturation in seasonal cohorts of the root vole. Misc. Zool. 19(1): 1-12.
14. Gorman, M.L. 1984. The response of prey to stoat (Mustela erminea) scent. J. Zool. 202: 419-423.
15. Hanski, I., and Henttonen, H. 1996. Predation on competing rodent species: A simple explanation of complex patterns. J. Anim. Ecol. 65: 220-232.
16. Henttonen, K., Oksanen, T., Jortikka, A., and Haukisalmi, V. 1987. How much do weasels shape microtine cycles in the northern Fennoscandian taiga. Oikos, 50: 353-365.
17. Jȩdrzejewski, W., and Jȩdrzejewska, B. 1990. Effect of a predator's visit on the spatial distribution of bank voles: Experiments with weasels. Can. J. Zool. 68: 660-666.
18. Jȩdrzejewski, W., and Jȩdrzejewska, B. 1993. Predation on rodents in Bialłowieża primeval forest, Poland. Ecography, 16: 47-64.
19. Jȩdrzejewski, W., Rychlik, L., and Jȩdrzejewska, B. 1993. Responses of bank voles to odour of seven species of predators - Experimental data and their relevance to natural predator-vole relationship. Oikos, 68: 251-257.
20. King, C.M. 1989. The Natural History of Weasels and Stoats. Chris-topher Helm, London.
21. Korpimäki, E., Norrdahl, K., and Rinta-Jaskari, T. 1991. Responses of stoats and least weasels to fluctuating food abundances: Is the low phase of the vole cycle due to mustelid predation? Oecologia, 88: 552-561.
22. Korpimäki, E., Norrdahl, K., and Valkama, J. 1994. Reproductive investment under fluctuating predation risk: Microtine rodents and small mustelids. Evol. Ecol. 8: 357-368.
23. Korpimäki, E., Koivunen, V., and Hakkarainen, H. 1996. Micro-habitat use and behaviour of voles under weasel and raptor predation risk: Predator facilitation? Behav. Ecol. 7: 30-34.
24. Koskela, E., and Ylönen, H. 1995. Suppressed breeding in the field vole (Microtus agrestis): An adaptation to cyclically fluctuating predation risk. Behav. Ecol. 6: 311-315.
25. Koskela, E., Horne, T.J., Mappes, T., and Ylönen, H. 1996. Does risk of small mustelid predation affect the oestrus cycle in the bank vole, Clethrionomys glareolus? Anim. Behav. 51: 1159-1163.
26. Kotler, B.P., Ayal, Y., and Subach, A. 1994. Effects of predatory risk and resource renewal on the timing of foraging activity in a gerbil community. Oecologia, 100: 391-396.
27. Madison, D.M. 1978. Behavioral and sociochemical susceptibility of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus) to snake predators. Am. Midl. Nat. 100: 23-27.
28. Magnhagen, C. 1990. Reproduction under predation risk in the sand goby, Potamochistus minutus, and the black goby, Gobius niger: The effect of age and longevity. Behav. Ecol. Soc. 26: 331-335.
29. Magnhagen, C. 1991. Predation risk as a cost of reproduction. Trends Ecol. Evol. 6: 183-186.
30. Matuszkiewicz, W. 1981. The key of identification the plant association in Poland. Polish Scientific Publishers, Warsaw.
31. Noldus, L.P.J.J., van Lenteren, J.C., and Levis, W.J. 1991. How Trichogramma parasitoids use month sex pheromones as kairomones: Orientation behaviour in a wind tunnel. Physiol. Entomol. 16: 313-327.
32. Norrdahl, K., and Korpimäki, E. 1995a. Does predation risk constrain maturation in cyclic vole populations? Oikos, 72: 263-272.
33. Norrdahl, K., and KorpimÄki, E. 1995b. Mortality factors in a cyclic vole population. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 261: 49-53.
34. Norrdahl, K., and Korpimäki, E. 1998. Does mobility or sex of voles affect risk of predation by mammalian predators? Ecology, 79: 226-232.
35. Oksanen, L., and Lundberg, P. 1995. Optimalization of reproductive effort and foraging time in mammals: The influence of resource level and predation risk. Evol. Ecol. 9: 45-56.
36. Parson, G.J., and Bondrup-Nielsen, S. 1996. Experimental analysis of behaviour of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus) to odours of the short-tailed weasel (Mustela erminea). Ecoscience, 3: 63-69.
37. Prèvot-Julliard, A.C., Henttonen, H., Yoccoz, N.G., and Stenseth, N. Chr. 1999. Delayed maturation in female bank voles, Clethrionomys glareolus: Optimal decision or social constraint? J. Anim. Ecol. 68: 684-697
38. Raczyñski, J., Fedyk, S., Gȩbczyñska, Z., and Pucek, M. 1984. Distribution of Micromammalia against natural differentiation of the Biebrza Valley habitats. Pol. Ecol. Stud. 10: 425-445.
39. Sih, A., Krupa, J., and Travers, S. 1990. An experimental study on the effects of predation risk and feeding regime on the mating behavior of the water strider. Am. Nat. 135: 284-290.
40. Simms, D.A. 1979. North American weasels: Resource utilization and distribution. Can. J. Zool. 57: 504-520.
41. StatSoft Inc. 1995. STATISTICA for Windows. StatSoft, Inc., 2325 East 13th Street, Tulsa, OK 74104, U.S.A. Available from http://www.statsoft.com.
42. Stearns, S.C. 1992. The evolution of life histories. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
43. Stoddart, D.M. 1976. Effect of the odour of weasels (Mustela nivalis L.) on trapped samples of their prey. Oecologia, 22: 439-441.
44. Trivers, R.L. 1985. Social evolution. Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co., Inc., San Francisco.
45. Tuttle, M.D., and Ryan, M.J. 1981. Bat predation and the evolution of frog vocalizations in the neotropics. Science (Washington, D.C.), 214: 677-678.
46. Wolff, J.O., and Davis-Born, R. 1997. Response of gray-tailed voles to odours of mustelid predator: A field test. Oikos, 79: 543-548.
47. Ylönen, H. 1994. Vole cycles and antipredatory behaviour. Trends Ecol. Evol. 9: 426-430.
48. Ylönen, H., and Ronkainen, H. 1994. Breeding suppression in the bank vole as antipredatory adaptation in a predictable environment. Evol. Ecol. 8: 658-666.