The reproductive state of female voles affects their scent marking behavior and the responses of male conspecifics to such marks

Ethology

Volumn 110, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 257-272

  Ferkin, M H ^a   Lee, D N ^a,b   Leonard, S T ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI ST LOUIS   (United States)

^c LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INTERSEXUAL INTERACTION; REPRODUCTIVE STATUS; RODENT; SCENT MARKING;

MAMMALIA; MICROTUS; MURIDAE; RODENTIA;

EID: 2442483741     PISSN: 01791613     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2004.00961.x     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Asa, C. S., Mech, L. D. & Seal, U. S. 1985: The use of urine, faeces, and anal-gland secretions in scent marking by a captive wolf (Canis lupus) pack. Anim. Behav. 33, 1034-1036.
2. Boonstra, R., Xia, X. & Pavone, L. 1993: Mating system of the meadow vole, Microtus pennsylvanicus. Behav. Ecol. 4, 83-89.
3. Bronson, F. H. 1989: Mammalian Reproductive Biology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
4. Carter, C. S. & Getz, L. L. 1993: Monogamy and the prairie vole. Sci. Am. 268, 100-106.
5. Coquelin, A. 1992: Urine-marking by female mice throughout their reproductive cycle. Horm. & Behav. 26, 255-271.
6. Daly, M. 1977: Some experiments on the functional significance of scent marking in gerbils (Meriones unguiculatus). J. Physiol. & Comp. Psychol. 91, 1082-1094.
7. Dewsbury, D. A. 1982: Pregnancy blockage following multiple-male copulation or exposure at the time of mating in deermice, Peromyscus maniculatus. Behav. Ecol. & Sociobiol. 11, 37-42.
8. Dewsbury, D. A. 1985: Studies of periocopulatory pregnancy blockage and the gestation period in deer mice. Horm. & Behav. 19, 164-173.
9. Dewsbury, D. A. 1990: Individual attributes generating contrasting degrees of sociality in voles. In: Social Systems and Population Cycles in Voles (Tamarin, R. H., Ostfeld, R. S., Pugh, S. R. & Bujalksa, G., eds). Birkhäuser Verlag, Berlin, pp. 1-9.
10. Drickamer, L. C. 1995: Rates of urine excretion by house mouse (Mus domesticus): differences by age, sex, social status, and reproductive condition. J. Chem. Ecol. 21, 1481-1493.
11. Eliasson, M. & Meyerson, B. G. 1975: Sexual preference in female rats during estrous cycle, pregnancy, and lactation. Physiol. Behav. 14, 705-710.
12. Ferkin, M. H. 1999a: Meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus, Arvicolidae), over-mark and adjacent mark the scent marks of same-sex conspecifics. Ethology 105, 825-837.
13. Ferkin, M. H. 1999b: Scent over-marking as a competitive form of chemical communication in voles. In: Advances in Chemical Signals in Vertebrates, Number 8. (Johnston, R. E., Muller-Schwarze, D. & Sorenson, P., eds). Plenum Press, New York, pp. 239-246.
14. Ferkin, M. H. & Johnston, R. E. 1993: Roles of gonadal hormones in control of five sexually attractive odors of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Horm. Behav. 27, 523-538.
15. Ferkin, M. H. & Johnston, R. E. 1995a: Effects of pregnancy, lactation, and postpartum oestrous on odour signals and the attraction in females meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus. Anim. Behav. 49, 1211-1217.
16. Ferkin, M. H. & Johnston, R. E. 1995b: Meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, use multiple sources of scent for sex recognition. Anim. Behav. 49, 37-44.
17. Ferkin M. H. & Zucker, I. 1991: Seasonal control of odour preference of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus) by photoperiod and ovarian hormones. J. Reprod. & Fertil. 92, 433-441.
18. Ferkin, M. H., Dunsavage, J. & Johnston, R. E. 1999: What kind of information do meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, use to distinguish between the odors of the top and bottom-scent donors of an over-mark. J. Comp. Psych. 113, 43-51.
19. Ferkin, M. H. & Mech, S. G. & Paz-y-Mino C. G. 2001: Scent marking in meadow voles and prairie voles: a test of three hypotheses. Behaviour 138, 1319-1336.
20. González-Mariscal, G., Melo, A. I., Zavala, A. & Beyer, C. 1990: Variations in chin marking behavior of New Zealand female rabbits throughout the whole reproductive cycle. Physiol. & Behav. 48, 361-365.
21. Gosling, L. M. & Roberts, S. C. 2001: Scent marking in male mammals: cheat-proof signals to competitors and mates. Adv. Study Behav. 30, 169-217.
22. Huck, U. W., Lisk, R. D. & Gore, A. C. 1985: Scent marking and mate choice in the golden hamster. Physiol. & Behav. 35, 389-393.
23. Hurst, J. L. & Rich, T. J. 1999: Scent marking as competitive signals of mate quality. In: Advances in Chemical Signals in Vertebrates, Number 8. (Johnston, R. E., Muller-Schwarze, D. & Sorenson, P. W., eds). Plenum Press, New York, pp. 209-226.
24. Johnston, R. E. 1983: Chemical signals and reproductive behavior. In: Pheromones and Reproduction in Mammals (Vandenbergh, J. G., ed.). Academic Press, New York, pp. 3-37.
25. Johnston, R. E. 1999: Scent over-marking: how do hamsters know whose scent is on top and why should it matter? In: Advances in Chemical Signals in Vertebrates, Number 8. (Johnston, R. E., Muller-Schwarze, D. & Sorenson, P., eds). Plenum Press, New York, pp. 227-238.
26. Johnston, R. E., Munver, R. & Tung, C. 1995: Scent counter marks: selective memory for the top scent by golden hamsters. Anim. Behav. 49, 1435-1442.
27. Keller, B. L. 1985: Reproductive patterns. In: Biology of New World Microtus, 8th edn. (Tamarin, R. H., ed.). Special Publication, American Society of Mammalogists, pp. 725-778.
28. Lai, S. C., Vasilieva, N. Y. & Johnston, R. E. 1996: Odors providing sexual information in Djungarian hamsters: Evidence for an across-odor code. Horm. & Behav. 30, 26-36.
29. Madison, D. M. 1980: An integrated view of the social biology of meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus. Biologist 62, 20-33.
30. Milligan, S. R. 1982: Induced ovulation in mammals. Oxford Rev. Reprod. 4, 1-46.
31. Petrulis, A. & Johnston, R. E. 1997: Causes of scent marking in female golden hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus): specific signals or classes of information? J. Comp. Psychol. 111, 25-36.
32. Rich, T. J. & Hurst, J. L. 1999: The competitive counter-marking hypothesis: reliable assessment of competitive ability by potential mates. Anim. Behav. 58, 1027-1037.
33. Short, R. V. 1979: Sexual selection and its component parts, somatic and genital selection, as illustrated by man and the great apes. Adv. Study Behav. 9, 131-158.
34. Smith, W. J. 1998: Cognitive implications of information-sharing model of animal communication. In: Animal Cognition in Nature (Balda, R. P., Pepperberg, I. M. & Kamil, A. C., eds), Academic Press, New York, pp. 227-244.
35. Soares, M. J. & Diamond, M. 1982: Pregnancy and chin-marking in the rabbit, Oryctolagus cuniculus. Anim. Behav. 30, 941-943.
36. Takahashi, L. K. 1990: Hormonal regulation of sociosexual behavior in female mammals. Neurosci. & Biobehav. Rev. 14, 403-413.
37. Thomas, S. A. & Kaczmarek, B. K. 2002: Scent-marking behaviour by prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster, in response to the scent of opposite- and same-sex conspecifics. Behav. Proc. 60, 27-33.
38. Wallace, P., Owen, K. & Thiessen, D. D. 1973: The control and function of maternal scent marking in the Mongolian gerbil. Physiol. Behav. 10, 463-466.
39. Wolff, P. R. & Powell, A. J. 1979: Urination patterns and estrous cycling in mice. Behav. & Neural Biol. 27, 379-383.
40. Wolff, J. O., Mech, S. G. & Thomas, S. A. 2002: Scent marking in female prairie voles: A test of alternative hypotheses. Ethology 108, 483-494.
41. Woodward, Jr, R. L., Bartos, K. & Ferkin, M. H. 2000: Different response of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus) and prairie voles (M. ochrogaster) to over-marks from opposite- and same-sex conspecifics. Ethology 106, 979-992.
42. Yahr, P. 1983: Hormonal influences on territorial marking behavior. In: Hormones and Aggressive Behavior (Svare, B. B., ed.). Academic Press, New York, pp. 145-175.
43. Ziegler, T. E., Epple, G., Snowdon, C. T., Porter, T. A., Belcher, A. M. & Kūderling, I. 1993: Detection of the chemical signals of ovulation in the cotton-top tamarin, Saginus oedipus. Anim. Behav. 45, 313-322.