The Effects of Sigmodon hispidus on Microtus pennsylvanicus in a Confined Area

Terman, Max R.; Johnson, Donald M.

doi:10.2307/3627035

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Or, as Terman (1974) suggested, expe rienced voles (field caught adults, in this case) have learned to avoid cotton rats. Regardless of the cause for avoidance, the tendency remains in small mam mals, for the larger member of interspecific pairs to be dominant (Grant 1969, Terman and Johnson 1971, Ter man 1974, Ambrose and Meehan 1977, Petersen and Helland 1978, Randall 1978 and for the general inter action to be one of avoidance by subordinate individ uals (Eisenberg 1963, Murie 1971, Turner and Iverson 1973, Ambrose and Meehan 1977, Petersen and Hel land 1978, Randall 1978. Temporal avoidance of cot ton rats by prairie voles permits prairie voles to use the entire habitat rather than the subset of the area they w ould be restricted to if spatial partitioning oc curred.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Sigmodon Hispidus on Spatial and Temporal Activity of Microtus Ochrogaster: Evidence for Competition

Glass¹,

Slade²

1980

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Spatial and temporal activities of cotton rats, Sigmodon hispidus, and prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster, in an old-field habitat in northeast Kansas, USA were studied for 39 mo. During a major portion of the S. hispidus reproductive season the species were spatially segregated but co-occurred the rest of the year. Following a local extinction of cotton rats, prairie voles estab lished a resident population in habitats formerly occupied by cotton rats that was greater than or equal to the vole population in areas which had never been occupied by cotton rats. Comparison of vole population size before and after the loss of cotton rats indicated that cotton rats produced a negative effect on vole population size during the period of spatial segregation but not during the period of spatial co-occurrence. Comparison of vole activity patterns indicated that, with the loss of cotton rats, voles shifted their activity during times when the species had co-occurred but not during periods when they were spatially segregated.Studies of behavioral interactions in a large (4 m x 4 m) arena with varying densities of vertical wires indicated that during single species tests voles and cotton rats preferred the densest areas. Their diel activity patterns were broadly overlapping. In the presence of nonreproductive cotton rats, voles continued to use the same areas as during the control tests but shifted their temporal activity reducing overlap with cotton rats. Interspecific encounters resujted in voles avoiding cotton rats even in the absence of overt aggression. In the presence of reproductive cotton rats, voles shifted their arena usage toward areas least used by cotton rats. Total nocturnal activity by voles was the same as during the control tests but was restricted to hours when cotton rats were least active. Reproductive cotton rats showed higher levels of interspecific aggression than did nonreproductive cotton rats. Voles in the presence of reproductive cotton rats showed increased frequency of serious wounds and deaths, and decreased mass when compared to voles in the presence of nonreproductive cotton rats.We conclude that cotton rats produce a negative effect on prairie vole populations but that the interaction is restricted to the cotton rats' reproductive season. Coexistence of the species appears to rely on the seasonality of the interaction, habitat heterogeneity, and the wider habitat tolerance of prairie voles.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Sigmodon Hispidus on Spatial and Temporal Activity of Microtus Ochrogaster: Evidence for Competition

Glass¹,

Slade²

1980

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Terman and Johnson (1971) noted aggressive behavior between Sigmodon hispidus and Microtus pennsylvanicus when the two were confined together. Sigmodon appeared to be dominant, and killed and ate some juvenile Microtus.…”

Section: Aggressive Behaviormentioning

confidence: 97%

“…I hypothesized that Microtus would reduce use of areas occupied by Sigmodon when cover is sparse but would not reduce use of those areas when cover is dense. Terman and Johnson (1971) suggested that co-utilization would not occur when cover was sparse, and Crombie (1946), Morris (1969), andMacArthur (1972) suggested that dense cover would allow co-utilization of an area.…”

Section: Spatial Distributionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Terman and Johnson (1971) reported that S. hispidus limited the movements of M. pennsylvanicus when the two were in a confined area. The purpose of the present experiment was to determine if Microtus would use areas occupied by Sigmodon when cover is sparse and when it is dense.…”

Section: Spatial Distributionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…If Sigmodon limits the spatial distribution of Microtus (Baker, 1969;Fleharty and Olson, 1969;Terman and Johnson, 1971), this phenomenon should be observable in a laboratory arena. Therefore, I hypothesized that voles would reduce their use of areas occupied by Sigmodon.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Behavioral Interactions between Microtus and Sigmodon: A Model for Competitive Exclusion

Terman

1974

Journal of Mammalogy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An alleged negative interaction between Microtus ochrogaster and Sigmodon hispidus was examined in the laboratory. Sigmodon proved to be the dominant animal, and excluded Microtus from confined areas except when dense cover was provided. Movements of Microtus were reduced by a free-ranging Sigmodon but not by a confined one. Frequency of interspecific contact apparently was responsible for negative interactions. A model that emphasizes frequency of interspecific contact (FIe) explains the probable relationship between Microtus ochrogaster and Sigmodon hispidus; a variation of this model might explain the phenomenon of competitive exclusion in all myomorph rodents.The prairie vole, Microtus ochrogaster, and the hispid cotton rat, Sigmodon hispidus, occur sympatrically near the peripheries of their respective ranges in central Kansas. Microtus ochrogaster has long inhabited the central Great Plains (Hibbard, 1970), whereas Sigmodon hispidus is an invader from the south that first appeared in central Kansas about 40 years ago (Cockrum, 1948). Northward dispersal of S. hispidus onto the Great Plains apparently has coincided with periodic declines in population density of M. ochrogaster; Martin (1956), Frydendall (1969), and Terman (1973 gave examples of this, and suggested that there is a negative interaction between the two species in the field. However, their studies were conducted under natural conditions and lacked precise information derived from systematically manipulated variables. The following hypotheses were suggested by those field results and by the observations and comments of other investigators.If interspecific aggression between Microtus and Sigmodon is the mechanism favoring cotton rats over voles (Baker, 1971;Martin, 1956), then Sigmodon should be aggressive toward Microtus and should be dominant in most interspecific encounters. Therefore, I hypothesized that Sigmodon would actively attack Microtus and would be aggressively dominant in interspecific pairings.If Sigmodon limits the spatial distribution of Microtus (Baker, 1969;Fleharty and Olson, 1969;Terman and Johnson, 1971), this phenomenon should be observable in a laboratory arena. Therefore, I hypothesized that voles would reduce their use of areas occupied by Sigmodon. However, it is possible that the amount of habitat cover (complexity) might affect this relationship (Crombie, 1946; Krebs et ai., 1971;MacArthur, 1972); thus, I hypothesized that dense cover would enable Microtus and Sigmodon to occupy the same area.If the Microtus-Sigmodon interaction lacks interspecific recognition and avoidance (Baker, 1971;Brown, 1966; Calhoun, 1963;Jameson, 1947), cotton rats should affect the· movement of voles only when actual physical contact is involved. Therefore, I hypothesized that movements of voles would not be 705

show abstract

Selection of Refuge Sites by Sympatric Microtus ochrogaster and Sigmodon hispidus

Stokes

1995

Journal of Mammalogy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Effects of Sigmodon hispidus on Microtus pennsylvanicus in a Confined Area

Cited by 4 publications

References 2 publications

The Effect of Sigmodon Hispidus on Spatial and Temporal Activity of Microtus Ochrogaster: Evidence for Competition

The Effect of Sigmodon Hispidus on Spatial and Temporal Activity of Microtus Ochrogaster: Evidence for Competition

Behavioral Interactions between Microtus and Sigmodon: A Model for Competitive Exclusion

Selection of Refuge Sites by Sympatric Microtus ochrogaster and Sigmodon hispidus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About