Disturbance and habitat use: Is edge more important than area?

Oikos

Volumn 115, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 23-32

  E Moenting, Alissa ^a   W Morris, Douglas ^a  

^a LAKEHEAD UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL DISTURBANCE; FORAGING BEHAVIOR; HABITAT USE; PREDATION RISK; RODENT;

CANADA; NORTH AMERICA; ONTARIO;

ANIMALIA; HELIANTHUS; MICROTUS; MICROTUS PENNSYLVANICUS; MURIDAE;

EID: 33749459023     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.2006.0030-1299.14763.x     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Abramsky, Z., Alfia, H., Schachak, M. et al. 1990. Predation by rodents and the distribution and abundance of the snail Trochoidea seetzenii in the Central Negev Desert of Israel. - Oikos 59: 225-234.
2. Abramsky, Z., Rosenzweig, M. L. and Subach, A. 2002a. Measuring the benefit of habitat selection. - Behav. Ecol. 13: 497-502.
3. Abramsky, Z., Rosenzweig, M. L. and Subach, A. 2002b. The cost of apprehensive foraging. - Ecology 83: 1330-1340.
4. Abramsky, Z., Rosenzweig, M. L., Belmaker, J. et al. 2004. The impact of long-term continuous risk of predation on two species of gerbils. - Can. J. Zool. 82: 464-474.
5. Andersson, M. 1981. Central place foraging in the whinchat, Saxicola rubetra . - Ecology 62: 538-544.
6. Andreassen, H. P. and Ims, R. A. 2001. Dispersal in patchy vole populations: role of patch configuration, density dependence, and demography. - Ecology 82: 2911-2926.
7. Arcis, V. and Desor, D. 2003. Influence of environment structure and food availability on the foraging behaviour of the laboratory rat. - Behav. Proc. 60: 191-198.
8. Baker, J. A. and Brooks, R. J. 1982. Impact of raptor predation on a declining vole population. - J. Mammal. 63: 297-300.
9. Batzli, G. O. 1985. Nutrition. - In: Tamarin, R. H. (ed.), Biology of New World Microtus. - Am. Soc. Mammal., Spec. Publ. 8: 779-806.
10. Bender, D. J, Contreras, T. A. and Fahrig, L. 1998. Habitat loss and population decline: a meta-analysis of the patch size effect. - Ecology 79: 517-533.
11. Birney, E. C., Grant, W. E. and Baird, D. D. 1976. Importance of vegetative cover to cycles of Microtus populations. - Ecology 57: 1043-1051.
12. Brown, J. S. 1988. Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competition. - Behav. Ecol Sociobiol. 22: 37-47.
13. Burnham, K. P. and Anderson, D. R. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach (2nd ed). - Springer-Verlag.
14. Charnov, E. L. 1976. Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. - Theor. Popul. Biol. 9: 129-136.
15. Davidson, D. L. and Morris, D. W. 2001. Density-dependent foraging effort of deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus). - Funct. Ecol. 15: 575-583.
16. Debinski, D. M. and Holt, R. D. 2000. A survey and overview of habitat fragmentation experiments. - Conserv. Biol. 14: 342-355.
17. Eadie, W. R. 1953. Response of Microtus to vegetative cover. - J. Mammal. 34: 263-264.
18. Efford, M. 1992. Comment-revised estimates of the bias in the 'minimum number alive' estimator. - Can. J. Zool. 70: 628-631.
19. Fraver, S. 1994. Vegetation responses along edge-to-interior gradients in the mixed hardwood forests of the Roanoke river basin, North-Carolina. - Conserv. Biol. 8: 822-832.
20. Golden, D. M. and Crist, T. O. 2000. Experimental effects of habitat fragmentation on rove beetles and ants: patch area or edge? - Oikos 90: 525-538.
21. Grand, T. C. and Dill, L. M. 1997. The energetic equivalence of cover to juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch ): ideal free distribution theory applied. - Behav. Ecol. 8: 437-447.
22. Hayes, A. F. 2003. (School of Communication, Ohio State University, Columbus OH. hayes.338@osu.edu). Heteroscedasticity-consistent standard error estimates for the linear regression model: SPSS AND SAS implementation [monograph on the Internet]. Columbus: Ohio State University; c2003 [cited 2004 Sept. 20]. Available from: http://www.jcomm.ohio-state.edu/ahayes
23. Heroldova, M. 2002. Food selection of Microtus agrestis in airpollution affected clearings in the Beskydy Mts. Czech Republic. - Folia Zool. Suppl. 1: 83-91.
24. Hilborn, R., Redfield, J. A. and Krebs, C. J. 1976. On the reliability of enumeration for mark and recapture census of voles. - Can. J. Zool. 54: 1019-1024.
25. Kotler, B. P. 1992. Behavioral resource depression and decaying perceived risk of predation in two species of coexisting gerbils. - Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 30: 239-244.
26. Kotler, B. P. 1997. Patch use by gerbils in a risky environment: manipulating food and safety to test four models. - Oikos 78: 274-282.
27. Kotler, B. P. and Blaustein, L. 1995. Titrating food and safety in a heterogeneous environment: when are the risky and safe patches of equal value? - Oikos 74: 251-258.
28. Kotler, B. P., Brown, J. S. and Hasson, O. 1991. Factors affecting gerbil foraging behavior and rates of owl predation. - Ecology 72: 2249-2260.
29. Lima, S. L. and Dill, L. M. 1990. Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. - Can. J. Zool. 68: 619-640.
30. Lima, S. L. and Zollner, P. A. 1996. Towards a behavioral ecology of ecological landscapes. - Trends Ecol. Evol. 11: 131-135.
31. Lin, Y. K. and Batzli, G. O. 2001. The influence of habitat quality on dispersal, demography, and population dynamics of voles. - Ecol. Mongr. 71: 245-275.
32. LoBue, J. and Darnell, R. M. 1959. Effect of habitat disturbance on a small mammal population. - J. Mammal. 40: 425-437.
33. Long, J. S. and Ervin, L. H. 2000. Using heteroscedasticity consistent standard errors in the linear regression model. - Am. Stat. 54: 217-224.
34. Lortie, C. J., Ganey, D. T. and Kotler, B. P. 2000. The effects of gerbil foraging on the natural seedbank and consequences on the annual plant community. - Oikos 90: 399-407.
35. MacArthur, R. H. and Levins, R. 1964. Competition, habitat selection and character displacement in a patchy environment. - Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 51: 1207-1210.
36. Manson, R. H. and Stiles, E. W. 1998. Links between microhabitat preferences and seed predation by small mammals in old fields. - Oikos 82: 37-50.
37. Manson, R. H., Ostfeld, R. S. and Canham, C. D. 1999. Responses of a small mammal community to heterogeneity along forest-old-field edges. - Landscape Ecol. 14: 355-367.
38. Mech, S. G. and Zollner, P. A. 2002. Using body size to predict perceptual range. - Oikos 98: 47-52.
39. Mitchell, W. A. and Valone, T. J. 1990. The optimization research program: studying adaptations by their function. - Q. Rev. Biol. 65: 43-52.
40. Moenting, A. E. 2004. Habitat change and the scale of predation risk. MSc thesis. - Lakehead Univ., Thunder Bay, ON, Canada.
41. Moody, A. L., Houston, A. I. and McNamara, J.M. 1996. Ideal free distribution under predation risk. - Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 38: 131-143.
42. Nickel, A. M., Danielson, B. J. and Moloney, K. A. 2003. Wooded habitat edges as refugia from microtine herbivory in tallgrass prairies. - Oikos 100: 525-533.
43. Odling-Smee, F. J., Laland, K. N. and Feldman, M. W. 2003. Niche construction: the neglected process in evolution. - Princeton Univ. Press.
44. Ostfeld, R. S. and Canham, C. D. 1993. Effects of meadow vole population density on tree seedling survival in old fields. - Ecology 74: 179-1801.
45. Ostfeld, R. S., Manson, R. H. and Canham, C. D. 1999. Interactions between meadow voles and white-footed mice at forest-oldfield edges: competition and net effects on tree invasion of oldfields. - In: Barrett, G. W. and Peles, J. D. (eds), Landscape ecology of small mammals. - Springer Verlag, pp. 229-247.
46. Potvin, C., Lechowicz, M. J. and Tardiff, S. 1990. The statistical analysis of ecophysiological response curves obtained from experiments involving repeated measures. - Ecology 71: 1389-1400.
47. Pusenius, J. and Schmidt, K. A. 2002. The effects of habitat manipulation on population distribution and foraging behavior in meadow voles. - Oikos 98: 251-262.
48. Pusenius, J. and Ostfeld, R. S. 2002. Mammalian predator scent, vegetation cover, and tree seedling predation by meadow voles. - Ecography 25: 481-487.
49. Pusenius., J., Ostfeld, R. S. and Keesing, F. 2000. Patch selection and tree seedling predation by resident vs immigrant meadow voles. - Ecology 81: 2951-2956.
50. Robinson, G. R., Holt, R. D., Gaines, R. S. et al. 1992. Diverse and contrasting effects of habitat fragmentation. - Science 257: 524-526.
51. Schweiger, E.W., Diffendorfer, J. E., Holt, R. D. et al. 2000. The interaction of habitat fragmentation, plant, and small mammal succession in an old field. - Ecol. Mongr. 70: 383-400.
52. Schmitz, O. J., Krivan, V. and Ovadia, O. 2004. Trophic cascades: the primacy of trait-mediated indirect interactions. - Ecol. Lett. 7: 153-163.
53. van Apeldoorn, R., el Daem, M., Hawley, K. et al. 1993. Footprints of small mammals: a field method of sampling data for different species. - Mammalia 57: 407-422.
54. Zakrzewski, R. J. 1985. The fossil record - In: Tamarin, R. H. (ed.), Biology of New World Microtus. Am. Soc. Mammal. Spec. Publ. 8: 1-37.