Can farm-management practices reduce the impact of house mouse populations on crops in an irrigated farming system?

Abstract

The impacts of a range of farm-management practices on house mouse (Mus domesticus) populations were tested in a large replicated field study in a complex irrigated farming system in southern New South Wales, Australia. An advisory panel, made up of farmers, extension officers, industry representatives and scientists developed a series of best-practice farm-management actions to minimise the impact of mice. Twelve experimental sites were split into six treated sites, where farmers were encouraged to conduct the recommended practices, and six untreated sites, where farmers conducted their normal farming practices. Mouse abundance was generally low to moderate for the 4-year project (5–60% adjusted trap success). We found significant reductions in population abundance of mice on treated sites when densities were moderate, but no differences when densities were low. Biomass of weeds and grasses around the perimeter of crops were significantly lower on treated sites because of applications of herbicide sprays and grazing by sheep. We could not detect any significant difference in mouse damage to crops between treated and untreated sites; however, levels of damage were low (<5%). Yields of winter cereals and rice crops were significantly higher on treated sites by up to 40%. An analysis of benefits and costs of conducting farming practices on treated sites compared with untreated sites showed a 2 : 1 benefit to cost ratio for winter cereals, 9 : 1 for rice and 4 : 1 for soybeans.

Ecologically Based Management of Rodents in the Real World: Applied to a Mixed Agroecosystem in Vietnam

“…A 65% reduction in macadamia nut damage by R. rattus was achieved through spraying weeds surrounding macadamia orchards with herbicide in Queensland, Australia (White et al 1998). Herbicide spraying and grazing of sheep on the perimeter of crop fields in an irrigated farming system in Australia reduced the abundance of house mice (Mus domesticus), but did not reduce damage (Brown et al 2004). Ploughing was the only farming practice that suppressed common vole (Microtus arvalis) populations on arable farms in Germany (Jacob 2003).…”

“…Rat damage is reduced and crop yields are higher up to 200 m from the TBS, so each TBS can protect an area of up to 15 ha (Lam 1988, Singleton et al 1998, 1999b, 2003a. Other techniques were: (2) conducting field sanitation prior to maximum tillering to reduce weed cover (Ylo¨nen et al 2002, Brown et al 2004); (3) reducing the bund (embankment) size between rice paddies to prevent burrowing by rats (Lam 1980, Leung et al 1999); (4) synchronizing planting and harvesting of crops to within 2À3 weeks to restrict the breeding season of the rats (Lam 1983, Leung et al 1999); (5) destroying rat burrows; and (6) undertaking coordinated rat drives prior to the commencement of breeding (Leung et al 1999, Brown et al 2001, Singleton et al 2005.…”

Interactions between rodents and weeds in a lowland rice agro‐ecosystem: the need for an integrated approach to management

“…Our results, however, serve to highlight the importance of effective crop protection practices targeting rodents and weeds if farmers are to achieve greater yields in the lowland areas. Brown et al (2004) conducted a manipulation study in southern Australia that reduced weed and grass biomass around the perimeters of irrigated rice fields on the assumption that such vegetation provides nesting sites and alternative food for house mice (Mus domesticus Rutty, 1772). They reported a benefit-cost of 9:1 for rice production in terms of profitability.…”

Assessment of the risk of inadvertently exporting from Australia a genetically modified immunocontraceptive virus in live mice (Mus musculus domesticus)

“…The model simulated three subsets (subunits) of a mouse population that is increasing, typically as precedes a mouse plague. The three subunits comprised: a breeding population in field crops that originates from: a few mice in the weedy boundaries (Brown et al 2003); non-breeding mice residing in infrastructure typified by various goods-transport vehicles, containers and grain-storage silos; and a breeding population at an export port typified by a shipping wharf, and shipping and aircraft container parks. Viral transmission could occur in all subunits of the mouse population.…”