The response of rodents to scent marks: Four broad hypotheses

Ferkin, Michael H.

doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2014.10.002

Cited by 25 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 139 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our key assumption is that directional persistence is broken by the detection of environmental stimuli. This is consistent, for example, with the behavior of terrestrial mammals that must distinguish between the numerous scent marks they encounter in order for them to facilitate or avoid direct interactions with their scent donors; these behaviors may influence survival and fitness (Ferkin 2015). Scent-mark detection is often accompanied by a pause that can increase the capacity of the sensory systems to process relevant stimuli (Kramer and McLaughlin 2001).…”

Section: Methods Of Analysissupporting

confidence: 56%

Distinguishing between apparent and actual randomness: a preliminary examination with Australian ants

Ferdous

Reynolds

Chen

2018

Behav Ecol Sociobiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The correlated random walk paradigm is the dominant conceptual framework for modeling animal movement patterns. Nonetheless, we do not know whether the randomness is apparent or actual. Apparent randomness could result from individuals reacting to environmental cues and their internal states in accordance with some set of behavioral rules. Here, we show how apparent randomness can result from one simple kind of algorithmic response to environmental cues. This results in an exponential step-length distribution in homogeneous environments and in generalized stretched exponential step-length distributions in more complex fractal environments. We find support for these predictions in the movement patterns of the Australian bull ant Myrmecia midas searching on natural surfaces and on artificial uniform and quasi-fractal surfaces. The bull ants spread their search significantly farther on the quasi-fractal surface than on the uniform surface, showing that search characteristics differed as a function of the substrate on which ants are searching. Further tentative support comes from a re-analysis of Australian desert ants Melophorus bagoti moving on smoothed-over sand and on a more strongly textured surface. Our findings call for more experimental studies on different surfaces to test the surprising predicted linkage between fractal dimension and the exponent in the step-length distribution.Significance statementAnimal search patterns often appear to be irregular and erratic. This behavior is captured by random walk models. Despite their considerable successes, extrapolation and prediction beyond observations remain questionable because the true nature and interpretation of the randomness in these models have until now been elusive. Here, we show how apparent randomness can result from simple algorithmic responses to environmental cues. Distinctive predictions from our theory find support in analyses of the search patterns of two species of Australian ants.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00265-018-2527-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Methods Of Analysissupporting

confidence: 56%

Distinguishing between apparent and actual randomness: a preliminary examination with Australian ants

Ferdous

Reynolds

Chen

2018

Behav Ecol Sociobiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The fact that foxes did not avoid sites with lynx scats suggests that the information they gain may be beneficial, i.e., a fox might need to adjust its behavior to decrease its risk of being killed (Apfelbach et al 2005). Scent marks may not only provide information of the species (Wikenros et al 2015), but also individual characteristics of the animal, such as sex or different individuals (Johnson 1973; Sokolov et al 1996; Ferkin 2015). Such information may help a fox estimate the proximity to, and the risk of, encountering lynx (Kats and Dill 1998).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For many terrestrial mammals scent marks may act as signals that provide information on mates, resources and predation risk (Johnston 1983, 1990; Thiessen and Rice 1976; Roberts 2007), which in turn increases the receiver’s fitness, i.e., survival and reproduction (Apfelbach et al 2005; Ferkin 2015). A particular behavior observed in foxes was over-marking the lynx scat with urine or feces.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mesopredator behavioral response to olfactory signals of an apex predator

Wikenros

Jarnemo

Frisén

et al. 2017

J Ethol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Olfactory signals constitute an important mechanism in interspecific interactions, but little is known regarding their role in communication between predator species. We analyzed the behavioral responses of a mesopredator, the red fox (Vulpes vulpes), to an olfactory cue (scat) of an apex predator, the lynx (Lynx lynx) in Białowieża Primeval Forest, Poland, using video camera traps. Red fox visited sites with scats more often than expected and the duration of their visits was longer at scat sites than at control sites (no scat added). Vigilant behavior, sniffing and scent marking (including over-marking) occurred more often at scat sites compared to control sites, where foxes mainly passed by. Vigilance was most pronounced during the first days of the recordings. Red fox behavior was also influenced by foxes previously visiting scat sites. They sniffed and scent marked (multiple over-marking) more frequently when the lynx scat had been over-marked previously by red fox. Fox visits to lynx scats may be seen as a trade-off between obtaining information on a potential food source (prey killed by lynx) and the potential risk of predation by an apex predator.

show abstract

“…The receiver can use this information to discriminate scents based on individuality or grouping, such as kin-non-kin, neighbor-stranger, conspecific-heterospecific, colony-non-colony, and so on (Halpin, 1986;Johnston & delBarco-Trillo, 2009). The receiver of this chemical information can then choose to avoid or encounter the scent donor based on its recollection of the information it was provided by the scent mark or odor of an individual (Ferkin, 2015(Ferkin, , 2019Roberts, 2007). For example, low ranking cotton rats, Sigmodon hispidus, will avoid areas treated with dominant conspecific scent, possibly to reduce the number and intensity of potentially costly fights to which they are exposed (Summerlin & Wolfe, 1973).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex differences in olfactory social recognition memory in meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Terrestrial mammals, like rodents, use odors, and scent marks to indicate their presence in an area to conspecifics. These odors convey information about the scent donor's genotype, sex, condition, and age. The ability to discriminate among the scent marks of conspecifics and later recollect the identity of the donor is essential for choosing between familiar and unfamiliar mates. We tested the hypothesis that the promiscuous meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus) can recollect the odor of a familiar, opposite‐sex conspecific and distinguish it from that of an unfamiliar, opposite‐sex conspecific. We also hypothesized that because reproductive success is highly skewed among male meadow voles and competition for mates is intense, males will be more likely than females to recollect the odor of a familiar, opposite‐sex conspecific and distinguish it from that of an unfamiliar, opposite‐sex conspecific, for a longer period of time. Using a habituation task, we first exposed the voles, 4 times successively, to the anogenital area scent of an opposite‐sex conspecific. Then, 1 hr, 24 hrs, 72 hrs, or 96 hrs after the fourth exposure, voles were presented with the odor of the donor from the exposure phase (familiar donor) and that of an unfamiliar, opposite‐sex conspecific. Female meadow voles spent similar amounts of time investigating the scent of the familiar male donor and that of an unfamiliar male donor after the 1‐hr and 24‐hr intervals. Male meadow voles, however, spent more time with the scent of an unfamiliar female donor than that of the familiar female donor after the 1‐hr, 24‐hr, and 72‐hr intervals, suggesting that male voles could recollect the scent mark of a familiar female for at least three days. The implications of these sex differences in social memory may reflect the different strategies male and female meadow voles use in the recognition of previous and potential mates. Recognition of an individual's scents may enhance fitness by allowing animals to direct appropriate behaviors toward those individuals.

show abstract

The response of rodents to scent marks: Four broad hypotheses

Cited by 25 publications

References 139 publications

Distinguishing between apparent and actual randomness: a preliminary examination with Australian ants

Distinguishing between apparent and actual randomness: a preliminary examination with Australian ants

Mesopredator behavioral response to olfactory signals of an apex predator

Sex differences in olfactory social recognition memory in meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About