Microhabitat Use in Rodent Communities: Predator Avoidance or Foraging Economics?

Price, Mary V.

doi:10.1163/002829684x00047

Cited by 26 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such species require more food than smaller insectivores to sustain their body mass, and may also extend their foraging activity throughout 24 h. In contrast, smaller species often increase their foraging activity only during "energy crises" when food is short (Hanski 1985, Dickman 1986c. Risk of predation may be a further factor influencing microhabitat selection in some species of small mammals (Rosenzweig 1973, Kotler 1984, Price 1984, and may be particularly important for species that are active by day. However, in many species of large insectivores, anatomical specializations for digging and for detecting the smell of buried prey suggest that microhabitats are selected largely on the basis of foraging economics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, small predators specialize in eating small prey because the costs of finding, catching and eating large prey are relatively high, whereas large predators specialize in eating large prey because the benefits of foraging for small prey are relatively slight (Griffiths 1980). However, body size may also influence other aspects of foraging behavior such as foraging mode and choice of microhabitat, which in turn may influence the sizes of prey encountered (Huey and Pianka 1981, Price 1983, Paulissen 1987. For example, Read (1984) has suggested that two small species of insectivorous marsupials can coexist with a larger competitor species because they have almost exclusive access to narrow cracks in the soil.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Body Size, Prey Size, and Community Structure in Insectivorous Mammals

Dickman¹

1988

Ecology

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Ecological Society of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Ecology.Abstract. This study investigates the relationship between body size and prey size in three two-species communities of insectivorous mammals in Australia and England. In captivity all species maximized their net energy intake by feeding preferentially on large prey, but in the field the larger species of insectivore in each community ate prey that were 25-29% longer than those eaten by the smaller species. Direct field observations showed that the larger species of insectivores dug extensively in the topsoil and subsurface litter to obtain prey, whereas the smaller species foraged on the litter surface or in trees. The larger species also exploited denser and structurally more complex microhabitats than their smaller relatives. These differences in foraging behavior allowed the larger insectivores in each community to exploit prey that were 7-19% longer than those encountered by the smaller species.Controlled removal of the larger species of insectivore from two communities produced marked changes in the microhabitat use and prey size selection of the remaining species. In the first community, a small eutherian shrew (Sorex minutes) ate more long prey and tended to move into tall grass when a larger congener, S. araneus, was removed. In the second community, a small dasyurid marsupial (Antechinus stuartii) also ate more long prey and decreased its use of trees when the larger A. swainsonii was removed.These results provide no evidence that body size directly influences prey size selection in insectivorous mammals. However, body size differences may influence prey size selection indirectly by conferring an asymmetric competitive advantage on larger insectivores, thus allowing them to actively exclude smaller species from microhabitats containing large prey. Community diversity of insectivorous mammals should therefore depend on the availability of different foraging microhabitats, and not on the distribution of prey sizes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Body Size, Prey Size, and Community Structure in Insectivorous Mammals

Dickman¹

1988

Ecology

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other factors such as predation (Kotler, 1984;Price, 1984), mate selection (Rosenzweig, 1979b), and biogeographical and historical constraints no doubt also influence habitat use, but it is the effects of intra-and interspecific densities that have captured the imagination of evolutionary and behavioral ecologists.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Density-dependent habitat selection: Testing the theory with fitness data

1989

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryAccording to density-dependent habitat selection theory, reproductive success should decline with increased density. Fitness should be similar between habitats if habitat selection follows an ideal free distribution; fitness should be dissimilar between habitats if habitat selection is modified by territorial behavior. I tested these assumptions by examining a variety of fitness estimates obtained from white-footed mice living in nest boxes in forest, forest edge and fencerow habitats in southwestern Ontario. As expected, mean litter size declined with increased population density. Litter sizes, adult longevity and the proportion of adult animals in breeding condition were not significantly different among the three habitats. The success at recruiting at least one offspring to the adult population and the number of recruits per litter were much greater in the forest than in either of the other two habitats. Fitness was thus unequal among habitats and the results confirm both assumptions of density-dependent habitat selection theory for territorial white-footed mice.

show abstract

“…Interspecific competition and niche partitioning is probably the dominant force shaping community organization in the wild (Pianka 1986;Tokeshi 1990;Chesson 2000;Chase and Leibold 2003), and it has been confirmed to occur in several small mammal communities (e.g. Price 1978Price , 1984. Anthropogenic disturbances may also change density, distribution, and evenness among species, for instance inducing habitat shifts (Krebs 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-random distribution across habitat types in sympatric, hardly catchable small mammals at a mountainous site in central Italy

Amori

Locasciulli

Luiselli³

2010

Rend. Fis. Acc. Lincei

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 17-year-long trapping study was carried out at a mountainous locality of central Italy (Majella National Park) in order to study the community structure of some infrequently caught small mammal species along the habitat niche axis. Null model analyses (with two competing randomization algorithms, RA2 and RA3) and Monte Carlo simulations were performed. The small mammal community was non-randomly structured according to RA2 with both Pianka and Czechanowski formulas, whereas it was random according to RA3 with both formulas. It is suggested that the observed pattern reflects mainly habitat checkerboards, with species being associated with different biotic and abiotic features of the sites which leads to less niche overlap than expected by chance.

show abstract

Microhabitat Use in Rodent Communities: Predator Avoidance or Foraging Economics?

Cited by 26 publications

References 0 publications

Body Size, Prey Size, and Community Structure in Insectivorous Mammals

Body Size, Prey Size, and Community Structure in Insectivorous Mammals

Density-dependent habitat selection: Testing the theory with fitness data

Non-random distribution across habitat types in sympatric, hardly catchable small mammals at a mountainous site in central Italy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About