Deer mouse demography in burned and unburned forest: No evidence for source-sink dynamics

Canadian Journal of Zoology

Volumn 86, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 83-91

  Zwolak, Rafał ^a   Foresman, Kerry R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGE STRUCTURE; BODY MASS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEMOGRAPHY; MARK-RECAPTURE METHOD; MONTANE FOREST; POPULATION DENSITY; REPRODUCTIVE PRODUCTIVITY; RODENT; SEX RATIO; SOURCE-SINK DYNAMICS; SURVIVAL; WILDFIRE;

MONTANA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

MUS; PEROMYSCUS; PEROMYSCUS MANICULATUS;

EID: 40549099018     PISSN: 00084301     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/Z07-126     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Ahlgren, C.E. 1966. Small mammals and reforestration following prescribed burning. J. For. 64: 614-618.
2. Anderson, P.K. 1970. Ecological structure and gene flow in small mammals. Symp. Zool. Soc. Lond. 26: 299-325.
3. Animal Care and Use Committee. 1998. Guidelines for the capture, handling and care of mammals as approved by the American Society of Mammalogists. J. Mammal. 79: 1416-1431. doi:10.2307/1383033.
4. Barry, R.E., Jr., Heft, A.A., and Baummer, T.E. 1990. Spatial relationships of syntopic white-footed mice, Peromyscus leucopus, deer mice, Peromyscus maniculatus, and red-backed voles, Clethrionomys gapperi. Can. Field-Nat. 101: 40-48.
5. Bock, C.E., and Bock, J.H. 1983. Responses of birds and deer mice to prescribed burning in ponderosa pine. J. Wildl. Manag. 47: 836-840. doi:10.2307/3808621.
6. Bowers, M.A., and Smith, H.D. 1979. Differential utilization of habitat by sexes of the deer mouse Peromyscus maniculatus. Ecology, 60: 869-875. doi:10.2307/1936854.
7. Bowman, J.C., Sleep, D., Forbes, G.J., and Edwards, M. 2000. The association of small mammals with coarse woody debris at log and stand scales. For. Ecol. Manag. 129: 119-124. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(99)00152-8.
8. Buech, R.R., Siderits, K., Radtke, K., Sheldon, H.L., and Elsing, D. 1977. Small mammal populations after a wildfire in Northeastern Minnesota. U.S. For. Serv. Res. Pap. NC-151.
9. Burnham, K.P., and Anderson, D.R. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag, New York.
10. Carey, A.B., and Johnson, M.L. 1995. Small mammals in managed, naturally young, and old-growth forests. Ecol. Appl. 5: 336-352. doi:10.2307/1942026.
11. Chao, A. 1989. Estimating population size for sparse data in capture-recapture experiments. Biometrics, 45: 427-438. doi:10.2307/2531487.
12. Citta, J.J. 1996. How to change the growth of wildlife populations: applications and experimental tests of sensitivity analysis. M.Sc. thesis, Wildlife Biology Program, School of Forestry, University of Montana, Missoula.
13. Clough, G.C. 1987. Relations of small mammals to forest management in northern Maine. Can. Field-Nat. 101: 40-48.
14. Conn, P.B., Arthur, A.D., Bailey, L.L., and Singleton, G.R. 2006. Estimating the abundance of mouse populations of known size: promises and pitfalls of new methods. Ecol. Appl. 16: 829-837. doi:10.1890/1051- 0761(2006)016[0829:ETAOMP]2.0.CO;2.
15. Converse, S.J., White, G.C., and Block, W.M. 2006. Small mammal responses to thinning and wildfire in ponderosa-pine dominated forests of the southwestern United States. J. Wildl. Manag. 70: 1711-1722. doi:10.2193/0022-541X(2006)70[1711:SMRTTA]2.0.CO;2.
16. Côte, M., Ferron, J., and Gagnon, R. 2003. Impact of seed and seedling predation by small rodents on early regeneration establishment of black spruce. Can. J. For. Res. 33: 2362-2371. doi:10.1139/x03-167.
17. Craig, V.J., Klenner, W., Feller, M.C., and Sullivan, T.P. 2006. Relationships between deer mice and downed wood in managed forests of southern British Columbia. Can. J. For. Res. 36: 2189-2203. doi:10.1139/X06-118.
18. Crête, M., Drolet, B., Huot, J., Fortin, M.-J., and Doucet, G.J. 1995. Chronoséquence après feu de la diversité de mammifères et d'oiseaux au nord de la forêt boréale québécoise. Can. J. For. Res. 25: 1509-1518.
19. Crone, E.E. 2001. Is survivorship a better fitness surrogate than fecundity? Evolution, 55: 2611-2614. doi:10.1554/0014-3820(2001)055[2611: ISABFS]2.0.CO;2.
20. Delibes, M., Gaona, P., and Ferreras, P. 2001. Effects of an attractive sink leading into maladaptive habitat selection. Am. Nat. 158: 277-285. doi:10.1086/321319.
21. DellaSala, D.A., Karr, J.R., Schoennagel, T., Perry, D., Noss, R.F., Lindenmayer, D., Beschta, R., Hutto, R.L., Swanson, M.E., and Evans, J. 2006. Postfire logging debate ignores many issues. Science (Washington, D.C.), 314: 51-52. doi:10.1126/science.314.5796.51b.
22. Diffendorfer, J.E. 1998. Testing models of source-sink dynamics and balanced dispersal. Oikos, 81: 417-433. doi:10.2307/3546763.
23. Doncaster, C.P., Clobert, J., Doligez, B., Gustafsson, L., and Danchin, E. 1997. Balanced dispersal between spatially varying local populations: an alternative to the source-sink model. Am. Nat. 150: 425-445. doi:10.1086/286074.
24. Fisher, J.T., and Wilkinson, L. 2005. The response of mammals to forest fire and timber harvest in the North American boreal forest. Mammal Rev. 35: 51-81. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2907.2005.00053.x.
25. Foresman, K.R. 2001. The wild mammals of Montana. Spec. Publ. Am. Soc. Mammal. No. 12.
26. Franken, R.J., and Hik, D.S. 2004. Influence of habitat quality, patch size and connectivity on colonization and extinction dynamics of collared pikas Ochotona collaris. J. Anim. Ecol. 73: 889-896. doi:10.1111/j.0021-8790.2004.00865.x.
27. Fretwell, S.D., and Lucas, H.L. 1970. On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. Acta Biotheor. 19: 16-36. doi:10.1007/BF01601953.
28. Galindo, C., and Krebs, C.J. 1985. Habitat use and abundance of deer mice: interactions with meadow voles and red-backed voles. Can. J. Zool. 63: 1870-1879. doi:10.1139/z85-278.
29. Graves, S., Maldonado, J., and Wolff, J.O. 1988. Use of ground and arboreal microhabitats by Peromyscus leucopus and Peromyscus maniculatus. Can. J. Zool. 66: 277-278. doi:10.1139/z88-040.
30. Grinnell, J. 1917. The niche-relationships of the California thrasher. Auk, 34: 427-433.
31. Gundersen, G., Johannesen, E., Andreassen, H.P., and Ims, A.R. 2001. Source-sink dynamics: how sinks affect demography of sources. Ecol. Lett. 4: 14-21. doi:10.1046/j.1461-0248.2001.00182.x.
32. Halama, K.J., and Dueser, R.D. 1994. Of mice and habitats: tests for density-dependent habitat selection. Oikos, 69: 107-114. doi:10.2307/3545289.
33. Halvorson, C.H. 1982. Rodent occurrence, habitat disturbance, and seed fall in a larch-fir forest. Ecology, 63: 423-433. doi:10.2307/1938960.
34. Hayes, J.P., and Cross, S.P. 1987. Characteristics of logs used by western red-backed voles, Clethrionomys californicus, and deer mice, Peromyscus maniculatus. Can. Field-Nat. 101: 543-546.
35. Holt, R.D. 1985. Population dynamics in two-patch environments: some anomalous consequences of an optimal habitat distribution. Theor. Popul. Biol. 28: 181-208. doi:10.1016/0040-5809(85)90027-9.
36. Howe, R.W., Davis, G.J., and Mosca, V. 1991. The demographic significance of 'sink' populations. Biol. Conserv. 57: 239-255. doi:10.1016/0006- 3207(91)90071-G.
37. Huggins, R.M. 1989. On the statistical analysis of capture-recapture experiments. Biometrika, 76: 133-140. doi:10.1093/biomet/76.1.133.
38. Huggins, R.M. 1991. Some practical aspects of a conditional likelihood approach to capture experiments. Biometrics, 47: 725-732. doi:10.2307/2532158.
39. Krefting, L.W., and Ahlgren, C.E. 1974. Small mammals and vegetation changes after fire in a mixed conifer - hardwood forest. Ecology, 55: 1391-1398. doi:10.2307/1935467.
40. Kyle, S.C., and Block, W.M. 2000. Effects of wildfire severity on small mammals in northern Arizona ponderosa pine forests. In Fire and Forest Ecology: Innovative Silviculture and Vegetation Management, Proceedings of the 21st Conference on Tall Timbers Fire Ecology, Tallahassee, Fla., 14-16 April 1998. Edited by W.K. Moser and C.F. Moser. Tall Timbers Research Inc., Tallahassee, Fla. pp. 163-168.
41. Layne, J.N. 1968. Ontogeny. In Biology of Peromyscus (Rodentia). Edited by J.A. King. Spec. Publ. Am. Soc. Mammal. No. 2. pp. 148-253.
42. Levins, R. 1969. Some demographic and genetic consequences of environmental heterogeneity for biological control. Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am. 15: 237-240.
43. Lidicker, W.Z. 1975. The role of dispersal in the demography of small mammals. In Small mammals: their productivity and population dynamics. Edited by K. Petrusewicz, F.B. Golley, and L. Ryszkowski. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. pp. 103-128.
44. Longland, W.S., and Price, M.V. 1991. Direct observations of owls and heteromyid rodents: can predation risk explain microhabitat use? Ecology, 72: 2261-2273. doi:10.2307/1941576.
45. Martell, A.M. 1984. Changes in small mammal communities after fire in north-central Ontario. Can. Field-Nat. 98: 223-226.
46. McPeek, M.A., and Holt, R.D. 1992. The evolution of dispersal in spatially and temporally varying environments. Am. Nat. 140: 1010-1027. doi:10.1086/285453.
47. Melchior, H.R., and Iwen, F.A. 1965. Trapping, restraining, and marking arctic ground squirrels for behavioral observations. J. Wildl. Manag. 29: 671-678. doi:10.2307/3798540.
48. Morris, D.W. 1983. Field tests of competitive interference for space among temperate zone rodents. Can. J. Zool. 61: 1517-1523. doi:10.1139/z83-204.
49. Morris, D.W. 1992. Scales and costs of habitat selection in heterogeneous landscapes. Evol. Ecol. 6: 412-434. doi:10.1007/BF02270701.
50. Morris, D.W. 1996. Coexistence of specialist and generalist rodents via habitat selection. Ecology, 77: 2352-2364. doi:10.2307/2265737.
51. Morris, D.W. 2005. Paradoxical avoidance of enriched habitats: have we failed to appreciate omnivores? Ecology, 86: 2568-2577. doi:10.1890/04-0909.
52. Morris, D.W., Diffendorfer, J.E., and Lundberg, P. 2004. Dispersal among habitats varying in fitness: reciprocating migration through ideal selection. Oikos, 107: 559-575. doi:10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.12894.x.
53. Parmenter, R.R., Yates, T.L., Anderson, D.R., Burnham, K.P., Dunnum, J.L., Franklin, A.B., Friggens, M.T., Lubow, B.C., Miller, M., Olson, G.S., Parmenter, C.A., Pollard, J., Rexstad, E., Shenk, T.M., Stanley, T.R., and White, G.C. 2003. Small-mammal density estimation: a field comparison of grid based vs. web-based density estimators. Ecol. Monogr. 73: 1-26. doi:10.1890/0012-9615(2003)073[0001:SMDEAF]2.0.CO;2.
54. Pfister, C.A. 1998. Patterns of variance in stage-structured populations: evolutionary predictions and ecological implications. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 95: 213-218. doi:10.1073/pnas.95.1.213.
55. Pidgeon, A.M., Radeloff, V.C., and Mathews, N.E. 2003. Landscape-scale patterns of black-throated sparrow (Amphispiza bilineata) abundance and nest success. Ecol. Appl. 13: 530-542. doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2003) 013[0530:LSPOBT]2.0.CO;2.
56. Pollock, K.H. 1982. A capture-recapture design robust to unequal probability of capture. J. Wildl. Manag. 46: 757-760. doi:10.2307/3808569.
57. Pollock, K.H., Nichols, J.D., Brownie, C., and Hines, J.E. 1990. Statistical inference for capture-recapture experiments. Wildl. Monogr. 107: 1-97.
58. Pulliam, H.R. 1988. Sources, sinks, and population regulation. Am. Nat. 132: 652-661. doi:10.1086/284880. Pulliam, H.R. 1996. Sources and sinks: empirical evidence and population consequences. In Population dynamics in ecological space and time. Edited by O.E. Rhodes, Jr., R.K. Chesser, and M.H. Smith. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 105-127.
59. Pulliam, H.R., and Danielson, B.J. 1991. Sources, sinks, and habitat selection: a landscape perspective on population dynamics. Am. Nat. 137: S51-S66. doi:10.1086/285139.
60. Rodenhouse, N.L., Sherry, T.W., and Holmes, R.T. 1997. Site-dependent regulation of population size: a new synthesis. Ecology, 78: 2025-2042.
61. Root, K.V. 1998. Evaluating the effects of habitat quality, connectivity, and catastrophes on a threatened species. Ecol. Appl. 8: 854-865. doi:10.1890/1051-0761(1998)008[0854:ETEOHQ]2.0.CO;2.
62. Roppe, J.A., and Hein, D. 1978. Effects of fire on wildlife in a lodgepole pine forest. Southwest. Nat. 23: 279-288. doi:10.2307/3669776.
63. Rosenzweig, M.L. 1991. Habitat selection and population interactions: the search for mechanism. Am. Nat. 137: S5-S28. doi:10.1086/285137.
64. Runge, J.P., Runge, M.C., and Nichols, J.D. 2006. The role of local populations within a landscape context: defining and classifying sources and sinks. Am. Nat. 167: 925-938. doi:10.1086/503531.
65. Schulte-Hostedde, A.I., and Brooks, R.J. 1997. An experimental test of habitat selection by rodents of Algonquin Park. Can. J. Zool. 75: 1989-1993. doi:10.1139/z97-831.
66. Seber, G.A.F. 1982. The estimation of animal abundance and related parameters. 2nd ed. MacMillan, New York.
67. Van Horne, B. 1981. Demography of Peromyscus maniculatus populations in seral stages of coastal coniferous forest in southeast Alaska. Can. J. Zool. 59: 1045-1061. doi:10.1139/z81-146.
68. Van Horne, B. 1982. Niches of adult and juvenile deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) in seral stages of coniferous forest. Ecology, 63: 992-1003. doi:10.2307/1937239.
69. Van Horne, B. 1983. Density as a misleading indicator of habitat quality. J. Wildl. Manag. 47: 893-901. doi:10.2307/3808148.
70. White, G.C., and Burnham, K.P. 1999. Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Study, 46(Suppl.): 120-138.
71. Wilson, K.R., and Anderson, D.R. 1985. Evaluation of two density estimators of small mammal population size. J. Mammal. 66: 13-21. doi:10.2307/1380951.
72. Wolff, J.O. 1985. The effects of density, food and interspecific interference on home range size in Peromyscus leucopus and Peromyscus maniculatus. Can. J. Zool. 63: 2657-2662. doi:10.1139/z85-397.
73. Wolff, J.O. 1989. Social behavior. In Advances in the study of Peromyscus (Rodentia). Edited by G.L. Kirkland and J.N. Layne. Texas Tech University Press, Lubbock. pp. 271-291.
74. Wolff, J.O., and Dueser, R.D. 1986. Noncompetitive coexistence between Peromyscus sp. and Clethrionomys gapperi. Can. Field-Nat. 100: 186-191.
75. Zwolak, R., and Foresman, K.R. 2007. Effects of a stand-replacing fire on small-mammal communities in montane forest. Can. J. Zool. 85: 815-822. doi:10.1139/Z07-065.