scholarly journals Land use and habitat selection by small mammals in the Tanzanian Greater Serengeti Ecosystem

2021 ◽  
pp. e01606
Author(s):  
Monica T. Shilereyo ◽  
Flora J. Magige ◽  
Joseph O. Ogutu ◽  
Eivin Røskaft
2013 ◽  
Vol 85 (2) ◽  
pp. 727-736 ◽  
Author(s):  
GERUZA L. MELO ◽  
BARBARA MIOTTO ◽  
BRISA PERES ◽  
NILTON C. CACERES

Each animal species selects specific microhabitats for protection, foraging, or micro-climate. To understand the distribution patterns of small mammals on the ground and in the understorey, we investigated the use of microhabitats by small mammals in a deciduous forest of southern Brazil. Ten trap stations with seven capture points were used to sample the following microhabitats: liana, fallen log, ground litter, terrestrial ferns, simple-trunk tree, forked tree, and Piper sp. shrubs. Seven field phases were conducted, each for eight consecutive days, from September 2006 through January 2008. Four species of rodents (Akodon montensis, Sooretamys angouya, Oligoryzomys nigripes and Mus musculus) and two species of marsupials (Didelphis albiventris and Gracilinanus microtarsus) were captured. Captured species presented significant differences on their microhabitat use (ANOVA, p = 0.003), particularly between ground and understorey sites. Akodon montensis selected positively terrestrial ferns and trunks, S. angouya selected lianas, D. albiventris selected fallen trunks and Piper sp., and G. microtarsus choose tree trunks and lianas. We demonstrated that the local small-mammal assemblage does select microhabitats, with different types of associations between species and habitats. Besides, there is a strong evidence of habitat selection in order to diminish predation.


2010 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jayme Augusto Prevedello ◽  
Renato Garcia Rodrigues ◽  
Emygdio Leite de Araujo Monteiro-Filho

1984 ◽  
Vol 62 (8) ◽  
pp. 1540-1547 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas W. Morris

Small mammals were livetrapped and habitat quantified in replicates of six macrohabitats in Alberta and in temporal replicates of four macrohabitats in Ontario, Canada. Similar patterns emerged in both locations. The relative abundances of small mammals depended upon macrohabitat; within macrohabitats, species differed significantly in microhabitat use. The patterns were dynamic and probably the result of habitat preference instead of species interactions. Macrohabitat differences may in part be outcomes of microhabitat selection, but are unlikely to be completely understood without superimposing colonization and extinction probabilities on habitat selection models. Field biologists must recognize both scales of habitat to interpret patterns of species distribution.


2010 ◽  
Vol 2010 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendee N. Holtcamp ◽  
Christopher K. Williams ◽  
William E. Grant

Animals must balance foraging with the need to avoid predators and risky habitats that decrease their fitness, and at the same time they must cope with competitors vying for habitat and resources. We examined how habitat selection and population density of four native small mammals were altered by the presence of red imported fire ants (Solenopsis invicta). When population size was low, hispid cotton rats (Sigmodon hispidus) and pigmy mice (Baiomys taylori) as well as white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus) used the “safe”, low fire ant habitat, as predicted by theories of density-dependent habitat selection. However, as fire ant population sizes expanded, cotton rats appeared to displace pigmy mice into the fire ant-dense grassland drainage while white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus) displaced all the other small mammals from low fire ant forest/brushland habitat.


2012 ◽  
Vol 46 (21-22) ◽  
pp. 1321-1335 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Sponchiado ◽  
G.L. Melo ◽  
N.C. Cáceres

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 910-918 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zsolt Végvári ◽  
Orsolya Valkó ◽  
Balázs Deák ◽  
Péter Török ◽  
Sándor Konyhás ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document