Ecological distribution of bank voles and wood mice in disturbed habitats: preliminary results

• Autorzy: Douglass R. J. , Douglass K.S. , Rossi L.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The ceological distribution of bank voles Clethrionomys glareolus (Schreber, 1780) and wood mice Apodemus sylvaticus (Linnaeus, 1758) was studied over one breeding season in the Maritime Alps of Italy. These species are found in habitats that are continuously disturbed by domestic livestock grazing as well as habitats unattainable by livestock. Average numbers per 50 live traps of these two species were similar (7.1 bonk voles/habitat/month and 7.9 wood mice/habitat/mnnth) but they were distributed differently among six habitats (niche overlap = 0.33). Within habitats, bank voles preferred features associated with forests while wood mice preferred features asso­ciated with open habitats. Populations of the two species behaved demographically differently from each oLhcr. Bank voles exhibited more stable populations with a narrower ecological amplitude (B = 2.8) but persisted in more habitats than wood mice. Wood mouse populations were less stable but had a broader ecological amplitude (B = 3.8) than bank voles. Bank voles and wood mice apparently survive equally well under continuous disturbance but they do so demographically differently and in different habitats.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Clethrionomys glareolus; mouse; wood mice; mice; bank vole; Italy; habitat selection; vole; population dynamics; Apodemus sylvaticus

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Theriologica
• Rocznik: 1992
• Tom: 37
• Numer: 4
• Opis fizyczny: p.359-370,fig.

Twórcy

autor

Douglass R. J.

• Montana Tech, Butte, Montana, 59701, USA

autor

Douglass K.S.

autor

Rossi L.

Bibliografia

• Amori A., Cristaldi M. and Contoli L. 1984. Sui roditori (Gliridae, Aruicolidae, Muridae) dell' Italia peninsulare ed insulare in rapporto all'ambinete bioclimatico mediterrano. Animalia 11: 217 — 269.
• Bujalska G. and Grilm L. 1989. Social organization of the bank vole (Clethrionomys glareolus, Schreber, 1780) and its demographic consequences: A model. Oecologia 80: 70 - 81.
• Black H. L. 1968. Populations of small rodents in relation to grazing by cattle on foothill rangeland. M. S. Thesis, University of Utah, Utah: 1 - 56.
• Black H. L. and Frischknecht N. C. 1971. Relative abundance of mice on seeded and sagebrush grass range in relation grazing. For. Serv. Res. Note INT-147.
• Chitty D, and Phipps E. 1966. Seasonal changes in survival in mixed populations of two spevies of vole. J. Anim. Ecol. 35: 313 - 331.
• Daubenmire R. F. 1959. A canopy coverage method of vegetation analysis. NW Sci. 33: 196 - 302.
• Dickman C. R. and Doncaster C. P. 1987. The ecology of small mammals in urban habitats. I. Populations in a patchy environment. J. Anim. Ecol. 56: 629 - 640.
• Dickman C. R. and Doncaster C. P. 1989. The ecology of small mammals in urban habitats. II. Demography and dispersal. J. Anim. Ecol. 58: 119 - 127.
• Douglass R. J. 1976. Spatial interactions and microhabitat selections of two locally sympatric voles, Microtus montanus and Microtus pennsylvanicus. Ecology 57: 346 — 352.
• Douglass R. J. 1989. The use of radio-telemetry to evaluate microhabitat selection by deer mice. J. Mammal. 70: 648 - 652.
• Geuse P., Bauchau V, Le Baulenge E. 1985. Distribution and population dynamics of bank voles and wood mice in a patchy habitat in central Belgium: Preliminary results. Acta zool. fenn. 173: 65 - 68.
• Gliwicz J. 1989. Individuals and populations of the bank vole in optimal, suboptimal and insular habitats. J. Anim. Ecol. 58: 237 - 247.
• Grant W. E„ Birney E. C., French N. R. and Swift D. M. 1982. Structure and productivity of grassland small mammal communities related to grazing-induced changes in vegetative cover. J. Mammal. 63: 248 - 260.
• Hanley T. and Page J. 1982. Differentia] effects oT livestock use on habitat structure and rodent populations in great basin communities. Calif. Fish Game 68: 160 - 173.
• Krebs C. J. 1966. Demographic changes in fluctuating populations of Microtus californicus. Ecol. Monogr. 36: 239 - 273.
• Levins R. 1968. Evolution in changing environments.: Some theoretical explorations. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey: 1 - 120.
• Loy A. and Boitani L, 1984. The structural microhabitat, in the Mediterranean scrub environment of two rodent species Apodernus sylvaticus and Mus musculus. Recenti acaisizioni sul genere Apodemus in Italia. Supplemento alio Ricerche di Biologia della Selvaggina 9: 143 - 160.
• Neu C. W., Byers C. R. and Peek J. M. 1974. A technique for analysis of utilization-availability data. J. Wildl. Manage. 35: 541 - 545.R. J. Douglass et al.
• Philips P. 1936. The distribution of rodents in overgrazed and normal grasslands of central Oklahoma. Ecology 17; 673 - 679.
• Pianka E. R. 1973. The structure of lizard communities. A. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 4: 53 - 74.
• Smith C. C. 1940. The eflecct overgrazing and erosion upon the biota of the mixed grass prairie of Oklahoma. Ecology 21: 381 - 397.
• Viitala J. and Hoffmeyer I. 1985. Social organization in Clelkrionomys compared to Microtus and Apodemus-. Social odors, chemistry and biological effects. Ann. zool. fenn. 22: 359 - 371.
• Zar J. H. 1074. Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ: 1 - 620.