Structure and diversity of small mammal communities of mountain forests in Western Carpathians

Suchomel, Josef; Purchart, Luboš; Čepelka, Ladislav; Heroldová, Marta

doi:10.1007/s10342-013-0778-y

Cited by 18 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Zejda, 1976;Dudich and Štollmann, 1981;Zbytovský et al, 2004;Anděra, 2010 etc.). However, the population of common shrew seems to decline even in forest habitats in recent years (Suchomel, 2007;Čepelka et al, 2011Čepelka et al, Suchomel et al, 2014. This may indicate a reduction in the habitat quality or it may be associated with multiannual population fluctuations (Zub et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Higher relative abundance remains in mountain regions where shrews probably find more appropriate habitats (eg. Suchomel et al, 2014). Forests in different stages of succession and under different types of management play a significant role for the existence of suitable habitats.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When using appropriate methodology, common shrew is sampled quite frequently both in straight research of small terrestrial mammals (Dudich and Štollmann, 1985;Šedivec and Whidden, 2006;Suchomel et al, 2014), and a non-target organism in a research of epigeic insects (Dudich et al, 1987). In recent decades, however, there is a significant decline in the abundance of its populations (this applies also to other Soricidae species).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Abundance of Common Shrew (Sorex Araneus) in Selected Forest Habitats of Moravia (Czech Republic)

Dokulilová¹,

Suchomel²

2017

Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abundance of common shrew (Sorex araneus) was evaluated on selected forest sites in Moravia, Czech Republic. Six types of habitats were assessed: forest clearings and mature forests in lowlands (173 -233 m), uplands (360 -600 m), and mountains (600 -1200 m). Data were collected over five-year-long periods; 2006 -2010 (uplands) and 2007 -2011 (lowlands and mountains). Small terrestrial mammals were captured using snap traps laid in lines. In total, 200 individuals of common shrew were trapped. Relative abundance among different habitats was statistically evaluated. The highest relative abundance was found in mountain forest clearings (n = 132, rA = 0.719). Lower abundance was in upland forest clearings (n = 15, rA = 0.384), in mature mountain forests (n = 32, rA = 0.355), and in the lowland forest clearings (n = 9 rA = 0.109). The lowest abundance was in mature upland forests (n = 9, rA = 0.031) and in mature lowland forests (n = 3, rA = 0.011). Differences between sites were statistically significant. Among all altitudes, shrew populations in plantations were significantly more numerous than those in mature forests. Mountain forest clearings with dense herb layer proved to be the most suitable habitat while mature lowland forests with less developed herbaceous layer were the least suitable. Forest clearings proved to be an important refuge for the populations of common shrew.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Abundance of Common Shrew (Sorex Araneus) in Selected Forest Habitats of Moravia (Czech Republic)

Dokulilová¹,

Suchomel²

2017

Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are many studies focusing on microhabitat preferences of the yellow-necked mouse and the bank vole (e.g. Pucek 1983, Mazurkiewicz & Rajska-Jurgiel 1987, Canova 1993, Chetnicki & Mazurkiewicz 1994, Miklós & Žiak 2002, Buesching et al 2008, Hille & Mortelliti 2010, Suchomel et al 2014. Summarising current knowledge, both species are considered forest generalists, however, the bank vole seems to be more selective in habitat use than the yellow-necked mouse.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding their microhabitat, the bank vole relies especially on dense undergrowth (Pucek 1983, Mazurkiewicz & Rajska-Jurgiel 1987, Chetnicki & Mazurkiewicz 1994, Miklós & Žiak 2002, Hlôška & Saniga 2005, Buesching et al 2008, Lešo et al 2014, Suchomel et al 2014, where it feeds mainly on forbs and forbs-like vegeta-tion, tree leaves, large tree seeds and fungi (Hansson 1985). On the other hand, the yellow-necked mouse inhabits forest stands of various ages (Montgomery 1978, Gurnell et al 1992, Marsh & Harris 2000, Miklós & Žiak 2002, Vukićević-Radić et al 2006, Suchomel et al 2014. However, the better seed availability may be a reason for preference of older forests in this granivorous species (Holišová & Obrtel 1980, Heroldová 1994, Marsh & Harris 2000.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response of the dominant rodent species to close-to-nature logging practices in a temperate mixed forest

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lešo P., Lešová A., Kropil R., Kanuch P., 2016. Response of the dominant rodent species to close-to-nature logging practices in a temperate mixed forest. Ann. For. Res. 59(1): 259-268.Abstract. The paper aims to answer the question whether differences exist in microhabitat preferences of the yellow-necked mouse and the bank vole between the natural forest and close-to-nature managed forest in the phase of stand regeneration. The two species were live-trapped during two periods in 2006 and 2007 on a square trapping grid established in a managed forest and a natural one. Ten microhabitat variables of each trapping point were measured to analyse their influence on the spatial distribution of the two species. At trapping points, the number of capture records for each species as a dependent variable was modelled using Generalised Linear Models. The herbal cover and a distance to the nearest woody debris were the most important measured microhabitat variables which affect the spatial distribution of both species. In the natural forest, the number of captures in both species increased significantly (p < 0.05) with a decreasing number of trees, increasing undergrowth coverage and decreasing distance to the nearest woody debris. In the managed forest, an increasing distance to the nearest tree and increasing herbal cover had a negative effect on the yellow-necked mouse occurrence (p < 0.001), while in contrast, the increase in values of the same variables increased frequency of occurrence of the bank vole (p < 0.001). Moreover, the bank vole was more frequent in the presence of woody debris (p < 0.002). The study demonstrated clearly that these species modify their spatial activity depending on the management of the woodland.

show abstract

Low impact of forest conversion on biodiversity: Evidence from small mammals in contrasting forests of Mt. Liangshan

Wen

Zhang

et al. 2023

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Secondary and plantation forests are the main alternative forests remaining after the deforestation of primary forests. Understanding the conservation value of secondary and plantation forests is important for biological conservation. To explore the impact of forest conversion on biodiversity, we compared multiple diversity metrics (taxonomic, phylogenetic, and functional diversity) and community structure of small mammals in the primary, secondary, and plantation forests in Mt. Liangshan, Sichuan Province, China. Three field surveys were conducted in each of the three forest types to characterize local small mammal assemblages from 2017 to 2020. We found that the taxonomic, phylogenetic, and functional diversity of small mammals in the three forest types were similar at the landscape scale, while all diversity metrics were lowest in the plantation forest and highest in the primary forests at the site scale. The community structure analysis showed that habitat filtering was the dominant process driving the assembly of small mammal communities across the three forest types, and there was no statistically significant difference in small mammal community structure among the three forest types. Our results indicated that secondary and plantation forests in the nature reserves, adjacent to the primary forest and exposed to little human disturbance, also can provide important habitats for small mammals.

show abstract

Structure and diversity of small mammal communities of mountain forests in Western Carpathians

Cited by 18 publications

References 21 publications

Abundance of Common Shrew (Sorex Araneus) in Selected Forest Habitats of Moravia (Czech Republic)

Abundance of Common Shrew (Sorex Araneus) in Selected Forest Habitats of Moravia (Czech Republic)

Response of the dominant rodent species to close-to-nature logging practices in a temperate mixed forest

Low impact of forest conversion on biodiversity: Evidence from small mammals in contrasting forests of Mt. Liangshan

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About