Influence of edge effects on common vole population abundance in an agricultural landscape of eastern France

• Autorzy: Delattre P. , Morellet N. , Codreanu P. , Miot S. , Quere J.P. , Sennedot F. , Baudry J.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Vole demographics are often modified close to wooded environments. Population monitoring in such settings reveals substantial edge effects, although these have seldom been quantified. This study compares the abundance of common voleMicrotus arvalis (Pallas, 1778) populations at various distances from three types of wooded environment (hedgerow, copse and forest) and in two types of habitat (temporary and permanent grassland). In temporary grassland, substantial edge effects were detected along the boundaries of forests and hedgerows. At 100 m from the forest edge, voles were twice more abundant than at 50 m, four times more than at 25 m and eight times more than at 5 m. In permanent grassland, the edge effect was such that voles were practically absent up to 100 m from the forest edge. For both types of grassland, the edge effect was more pronounced for forest habitat than for hedgerows, that is, for elements with a large surface area of wooded environment. Our results suggest that landscape context may greatly affect the local abundance of voles. Given the considerable damage done byM. arvalis, the presence of wooded patches in grassland areas leads to lower vole densities in adjacent areas and this might be an alternative method to controlM. arvalis as a pest species.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Theriologica
• Rocznik: 2009
• Tom: 54
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: p.51-60,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Delattre P.

• International Campus of Baillarguet, Center of Biology and Population Management, CS 30016 - 34988 Montferrier sur Lez cedex, France

autor

Morellet N.

autor

Codreanu P.

autor

Miot S.

autor

Quere J.P.

autor

Sennedot F.

autor

Baudry J.

Bibliografia

• Anderson M. and Erlinge S. 1977. Influence of predation on rodent population. Oikos 29: 591–597.
• Anderson P. 1986. Foraging range in mice and voles: the role of risk. Canadian Journal of Zoology 64: 2645–2653.
• Andren H. 1994. Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review. Oikos 71: 355–366.
• Batary P. and Baldi A. 2004. Evidence of an edge effect on avian nest success. Conservation Biology 18: 389–400.
• Bentley J. 2008. Role of movement, interremnant dispersal and edge effects in determining sensitivity to habitat fragmentation in two forest-dependent rodents. Austral Ecology 33: 184–196.
• Briner T., Nentwig W. and Airoldi J. P. 2005. Habitat quality of wildflower strips for common voles (Microtus arvalis) and its relevance for agriculture. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 105: 173–179.
• Butet A., Paillat G. and Delettre Y. 2006. Factors driving small rodents assemblages from field boundaries in agricultural landscapes of western France. Landscape Ecology 21: 449–461.
• Christensen P. and Hörnfeldt B. 2006. Habitat preference ofClethrionomys rufocanus in boreal Sweden. Landscape Ecology 21: 185–194.
• Dauber J. and Wolters V. 2004. Edge effects on ant community structure and species richness in an agricultural landscape. Biodiversity and Conservation 3: 901–915.
• Delattre P., De Sousa B., Fichet-Calvet E., Quéré J. P. and Giraudoux P. 1999. Vole outbreaks in a landscape context: evidence from a six year study ofMicrotus arvalis. Landscape Ecology 14: 401–412.
• Delattre P., Giraudoux P., Baudry J., Musard P., Toussaint M., Truchetet D., Stahl P., Poule M. L., Artois M., Damange J. P. and Quéré J. P. 1992. Land use patterns and types of common vole (Microtus arvalis) population kinetics. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 39: 153–169.
• Delattre P., Giraudoux P., Baudry J. and Quéré J. P. 1996. Effect of landscape structure on common vole (Microtus arvalis) distribution and abundance at several space scales. Landscape Ecology 11: 279–288.
• Delattre P., Giraudoux P., Damange J. P. and Quéré J. P. 1990. Recherche d’un indicateur de la cinétique démographique des populations du campagnol des champs,Microtus arvalis. Revue d’écologie, la Terre et la Vie 45: 375–384.
• 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.
• Donovan T., Jones P. W., Annand E. M. and Thompson F. R. 1997. Variation in local-scale edge effects: Mechanisms and landscape context. Ecology 78: 2064–2075.
• Duhamel R., Quéré J. P., Delattre P. and Giraudoux P. 2000. Landscape effects on the population dynamics of the fossorial form of the water vole,Arvicola terrestris sherman. Landscape Ecology 15: 89–98.
• Dunning J. B., Danielson B. J. and Pulliam H. R. 1992. Ecological processes that affect populations in complex landscapes. Oikos 65: 169–175.
• Ecke F., Löfgren O., Hörnfeldt B., Eklund U., Christensen P. and Sörlin D. 2001. Abundance and diversity of small mammals in relation to structural habitat factors. Ecological Bulletins 49: 165–171.
• Ecke F., Löfgren O. and Sörlin D. 2002. Population dynamics of small mammals in relation to forest age and structural habitat factors in northern Sweden. Journal of Applied Ecology 39: 781–792.
• Erlinge S., Göransson G., Hansson L., Högstedt G., Liberg O., Nilsson I. N., Nilsson T., Von Schantz T. and Sylvén M. 1983. Predation as a regulating factor on small rodent populations in southern Sweden. Oikos 40: 36–52.
• Erlinge S., Göransson G., Hogstedt G., Jansson G., Liberg O., Loman J. and Nillsson I. 1984. Can vertebrate predators regulate their prey? The American Naturalist 123: 125–133.
• Ewers R. M. and Didham R. K. 2008. Pervasive impact of large-scale edge effects on a beetle community. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105: 5426–5429.PubMedView Article
• Fichet-Calvet E., Pradier B., Quéré J. P., Giraudoux P. and Delattre P. 2000. Landscape composition and vole outbreak: evidence from an eight year study ofArvicola terrestris. Ecography 23: 659–668.
• Fletcher R. 2005. Multiple edge effects and their implications in fragmented landscapes. Journal of Animal Ecology 74: 342–352.
• Fitzgibbon C. D. 1997. Small mammals in farm woodlands: the effects of habitat, isolation and surrounding land--use patterns. Journal of Applied Ecology 34: 530–539.
• Giraudoux P., Delattre P., Habert M., Quéré J. P., Deblay S., Defaut R., Duhamel R., Moissenet M. F., Salvi D. and Truchetet D. 1997. Population dynamics of fossorial water voleArvicola terrestris scherman: a land use and landscape perspective. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 66: 47–60.
• Hanski I., Hansson L. and Henttonen H. 1991. Specialist predators, generalist predators, and the microtine rodent cycle. Journal of Animal Ecology 60: 353–367.
• Hansson L. 1977. Lanscape ecology and stability of population. Landscape Planning 4: 85–93.
• Hansson L. 1979. On the importance of landscape heterogeneity in northern regions for the breeding population densities of homeotherms: a general hypothesis. Oikos 33: 182–189.
• Hansson L. 1998. Local hot spots and their edge effects: small mammals in oak-hazel woodland. Oikos 81: 55–62.
• Hansson L. 1999. Intraspecific variation in dynamics: small rodents between food and predation in changing landscapes. Oikos 86: 159–169.
• Hansson L. 2002a. Rodent dynamics, population regulation and predation in changeable landscapes: importance forEchinococcus transmission. [In: Cestode Zoonoses: Echinococcosis and Cysticercosis. P. Craig and Z. Pawlowski, eds]. IOS Press: 267–285.
• Hansson L. 2002b. Dynamics and trophic interactions of small rodents: landscape or regional effects on spatial variation? Oecologia 130: 259–266.
• Harranger S. 1967. Les campagnols dans l’est de la France. Phytoma 192: 23–27.
• Haynes K. and Cronin J. T. 2006. Interpatch movement and edge effects: the role of behavioral responses to the landscape matrix. Oikos 113: 43–54.
• Hoover J., Tear T. H. and Baltz M. E. 2006. Edge effects reduce the nesting success of Acadian Flycatchers in a moderately fragmented forest. Journal of Field Ornithology 77: 425–436.
• Huitu O., Norrdahl K. and Korpimäki E. 2003. Landscape effects on temporal and spatial properties of vole population fluctuations. Oecologia 135: 209–220.
• Johnson A. R., Wiens J. A., Milne B. T. and Crist T. O. 1992. Animal movements and population dynamics in heterogeneous landscapes. Landscape Ecology 7: 63–75.
• Kingston S. and Morris D. W. 2000. Voles looking for an edge: habitat selection across forest ecotones. Canadian Journal of Zoology 78: 2174–2183.
• Lidicker W. Z. Jr 1988. Solving the enigma of microtine cycles. Journal of Mammalogy 69: 225–235.
• Lidicker W. Z. Jr 1994. A spatially explicit approach to vole population processes. Polish Ecological Studies 20: 215–225.
• Lidicker W. Z. Jr 1995. The landscape concept: something old, something new. [In: Landscape approaches in mammalian ecology and conservation. W. Z. Lidicker, ed]. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis: 3–19.
• Lidicker W. Z. Jr 1999. Responses of mammals to habitat edges: a landscape perspective. Landscape Ecology 14: 331–412.
• Lidicker W. Z. Jr 2000. A food web/landscape interaction model for microtine rodent density cycles. Oikos 91: 435–445.
• Lidicker W. Z. Jr 2002. From dispersal to landscapes: progress in the understanding of population dynamics. Acta Theriologica 47, Suppl. 1: 23–37.
• Lima S. L. and Zollner P. A. 1996. Towards a behavioral ecology of ecological landscapes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 11: 131–135.
• Lin Y. B. and Batzli G. O. 2004. Movement of voles across habitat boundaries: effects of food and cover. Journal of Mammalogy 85: 216–224.
• Moenting A. E. and Morris D. W. 2006. Disturbance and habitat use: is edge more important than area? Oikos 115: 23–32.
• Morilhat C., Bernard N., Bournais C., Meyer C., Lamboley C. and Giraudoux P. 2007. Responses ofArvicola terrestris scherman populations to agricultural practices, and toTalpa europaea abundance in Eastern France. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment 122: 392–398.
• Morilhat C., Bernard N., Foltete J. C. and Giraudoux P. 2008. Neighbourhood landscape effect on population kinetics of the fossorial water vole (Arvicola terrestris scherman). Landscape Ecology 23: 569–579.
• Oksanen T., Schneider M., Rammul Ü., Hambäck P. and Aunapuu M. 1999. Population fluctuations of voles in North Fennoscandian tundra: contrasting dynamics in adjacent areas with different habitat composition. Oikos 86: 463–478.
• Ostfeld R. S. 1992. Effects of habitat patchiness on population dynamics: a modelling approach. [In: Wildlife populations. D. R. McCullough and R. H. Barretl, eds]. Elsevier Applied Sciences, London: 851–863.
• Paton P. 1994. The effect of edge on avian nest success: how strong is the evidence? Conservation Biology 8: 17–26.
• Phillips M., Clark W. R., Nusser S. M., Sovada M. A. and Greenwood R. J. 2004. Analysis of predator movement in prairie landscapes with contrasting grassland composition. Journal of Mammalogy 85: 187–195.
• Polis G. A., Power M. E. and Huxel G. R. (eds) 2004. Food webs at the landscape level. University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 1–528.
• 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.
• Quéré J. P., Raoul F., Giraudoux P. and Delattre P. 2000. An index method of estimating relative population densities of the common vole (Microtus arvalis) at landscape scale. Revue d’écologie, la Terre et la Vie 55: 25–32.
• Rand T., Tylianakis J. M. and Tscharntke T. 2006. Spillover edge effects: the dispersal of agriculturally subsidized insect natural enemies into adjacent natural habitats. Ecology Letters 9: 603–614.PubMedView Article
• Smit R., Bokdam J., den Ouden J., Olff H., Schot-Opschoor H. and Schrijvers M. 2001. Effects of introduction and exclusion of large herbivores on small rodent communities. Plant Ecology 155: 119–127.
• Statistical Analysis System. 1999. SAS/STAT user’s guide, version 8 SAS. Institute Inc Cary NC USA.
• Stenseth N. C. 1980. Spatial heterogeneity and population stability: some evolutionary consequences. Oikos 35: 165–184.
• Storch I., Woitke E. and Krieger S. 2005. Landscape-scale effect in predation risk in forest-farmland mosaics of central Europe. Landscape Ecology 20: 927–940.
• Tallmon D. and Mills L. S. 2004. Edge effects and isolation: Red-backed voles revisited. Conservation Biology 18: 1658–1664.
• Wiens J. A. 1992. What is landscape ecology, really? Landscape Ecology 7: 149–150.
• Zheng D. and Chen J. Q. 2000. Edge effects in fragmented landscapes: a generic model for delineating area of edge influences. Ecological Modelling 132: 175–190.