Laboratory Breeding of the Little Pocket Mouse, Perognathus Longimembris

Hayden, Page; Gambino, J. J.; Lindberg, R. G.

doi:10.2307/1377682

Cited by 17 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 6 publications

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…She states that such a dominance hierarchy results from constant intraspecific strife. The intolerance of one heteromyid rodent for another of the same species is well known, hence the extreme difficulty of establishing reproducing colonies under laboratory conditions (Hayden, Gambino, and Lindberg, 1966). It is probable that under natural conditions intraspecific contact results in such intense repulsion that there is insufficient individual contact to permit establishment of a domina nce hierar chy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Home Range Dynamics in a Population of Heteromyid Rodents

Maza

French

Aschwanden

1973

Journal of Mammalogy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Home Range Dynamics in a Population of Heteromyid Rodents

Maza

French

Aschwanden

1973

Journal of Mammalogy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We checked traps frequently so that females were rarely restrained for longer than 10-20 min. We examined captured individuals for reproductive condition according to appearance of the vaginal area (Hayden et al 1966;Randall 1991a). Except when coming into or in oestrus, the vagina was closed and the vaginal area was unswollen.…”

Section: Measures Of Reproductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Familiarity and flexible mating strategies of a solitary rodent, Dipodomys ingens

et al. 2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Females were examined for three major conditions: shape of vulva, observable or palpable pregnancy, and condition of the mammae. Estrus in Perognathus is accompanied by conspicuous changes in the shape and size of the vulva (Hayden et al 1966), and therefore it was easy to identify the onset of estrus, at least prior to the first litters. The vagina was observed and notes were made whether it was "closed," "open," "puffy," "plugged or scabby," "bloody," or "purple.…”

Section: Trapping Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Population of Great Basin Pocket Mice, Perognathus parvus, in the Shrub‐Steppe of South‐Central Washington

O'Farrell¹,

Olson²,

Gilbert³

et al. 1975

Ecological Monographs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A population of Great Britain pocket mice, Perognathus parvus, was live—trapped in 1967—72 on a 2.7—ha study area in south—central Washington to determine their density, reproductive performance, longevity, movements, and home range, as well as their functional role in northern shrub—steppe habitat. During 41,310 trap—nights we captured 15,386 mice representing seven species: Perognathus parvus, Peromyscus maniculatus, Onychomys leucogaster, Reighrodontomys megalotis, Lagurus curtatus, Microtus montanus, and Sylvilagus nuttallii. Pocket mice accounted for 91%, deer mice 8%, and the remaining species only 1% of the captures. Most pocket mice remained inactive underground between December and February. Adult ♂ ♂became trappable at an average date of 26 March; ♀ ♀ emerged about 18 April. Once active, adults remained trappable for an average of 60 days in years of average—to—excellent food production, and for 90 days in years of poor production. Sex ratios of trappable animals differed significantly from 1:1 in about half the sampling periods, and usually favored adult ♂ ♂. Males had scrotal testes for an average of 4 mo, with the highest proportion in April. The first signs of estrus were observed in April, the first palpable pregnancies in May, and the last pregnant ♀ ♀ usually in July. In years of high food availability adult ♀ ♀ averaged 2 litters; in average years they had 1.1 litters; and in poor years, only one ♀ in three became pregnant. The average size of three litters found in live—traps was 3.7. In 1969, a year of excellent food production, juveniles from early litters bred during late summer. Subadults were first trapped in June for an average of 40—70 days. Survival from weaning to the following breeding season ranged between 56%—58% (1967, 1970) and 80% (1968); 17%—19% survived to the 3rd yr; and 2%—3% survived to the 4th yr. The highest overwintering success was in juveniles born during the year of lowest precipitation, poorest food supply, and reduced reproduction. Differential survival affected the age distribution of animals during the breeding season. One—year—olds dominated the breeding populations in 1968 and 1970; but in 1969 only 55% of the breeders were born the preceding year. The age distribution had little apparent effect on the reproductive success of the population. Perognathus parvus ceased aboveground activities between late summer and autumn depending upon environmental conditions, sex, and age. Population size was estimated by means of the Jolly—Seber stochastic model which helped interpret population responses when components of the population were not trappable. The peak autumnal population varied about a mean of 320 animals with only a twofold variation between the estimates for the lowest (206, 1968) and the highest (437, 1969) years. Within years the greatest variation was a fivefold increase in numbers observed between the early breeding season and fall population peak of 1969. The estimated summer population size showed a high degree of correlation with the amount of precipitat...

show abstract

Laboratory Breeding of the Little Pocket Mouse, Perognathus Longimembris

Cited by 17 publications

References 6 publications

Home Range Dynamics in a Population of Heteromyid Rodents

Home Range Dynamics in a Population of Heteromyid Rodents

Familiarity and flexible mating strategies of a solitary rodent, Dipodomys ingens

A Population of Great Basin Pocket Mice, Perognathus parvus, in the Shrub‐Steppe of South‐Central Washington

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About