Response of the bank vole Clethrionomys glareaolus (Schreber, 1780) to the odour and presence of heterospecifics as measured by scent marking behaviour and trapping in double traps in an alder forest

• Autorzy: Mróz I.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The paper addresses the following issues: (1) does the bank vole response to odours of other rodent species by urine and faeces marking (2) does this reaction depend on the species, (3) does the amount of odour influence the marking, and (4) the response of bank voles to the presence of heterospecifics, and its comparison with the response of marking the odour deposited by these species. The study was conducted in a Ribo nigri-Alnetum swamp located in the Kampinos National Park, central Poland (52 [degrees] 20'N and 27 [degrees] 25'E). To observe scent marking, white paper sheets (15 x 21 cm) supplied with sponges (1 cm[^3]) soaked in odour of particular rodent species were exposed in the forest along a line ca 1200 m long. Odour donors were countryside species: a) phylogenetically close to the bank vole, such as Microtus agrestis (L.) and M. oeconomus (Pallas), b) sympatric, such as Apodemus flavicollis (Melchior) and A. sylvaticus (Melchior), or occupying a different habitat A. agrarius (Pallas), and allopatric species such as Meriones unguiculatus (Milne-Edwards), Mesocricetus auratus (Waterhouse), and Octodon degus (Bennet). Also sheets with the odour of bank vole and control sheets without odour were exposed. Marking was analysed basing on the number of marked sheets (marking extensity), and on the number of urine and faeces marks on sheets (marking intensity). During the three study years, a high marking extensity was observed for the odours of phylogenetically close species. The odours of sympatric species were marked less frequently and with a higher variability in successive years. The lowest marking extensity was found for geographically alien (allopatric) species. The mean number of marks per sheet did not differ significantly between the species. To examine the effect of odour quantity on marking, a line (ca 630 m long) made up of sheets provided with 1, 3, and 5 sponges with M. oeconomus and C. glareolus odour, and of control sheets was established. The increase in the number of sponges with heterospecific odour had no effect on the extensity and intensity of marking. Significant difference in marking extensity, but not in marking intensity, was found in the case of conspecific odour. The response of bank voles to the presence of heterospecifics was examined based on the number of captures in double-traps with a live individual. In the forest, a line of 30 double-traps placed every 10 m was established, containing single M. oeconomus, A. flavicollis, or C. glareolus. Bank voles were more often captured in traps with conspecifics than with heterospecofics. Thus, bank voles avoid encounters with heterospecifics but they do not avoid marking their odour (marking the heterospecific odour was not lower than marking conspecifics and control). It may suggest that under natural conditions, interspecific communication is largely mediated through olfactory cues.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Clethrionomys glareolus; heterospecifics; olfactory communication; scent marking

PL

komunikacja; nornica ruda; zapach; znaczenie terenu

• Wydawca: Museum and Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Ecology
• Rocznik: 2007
• Tom: Vol. 55, nr 3
• Strony: 559--570
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 33 poz.,Tab., wykr.,

Twórcy

autor

Mróz I.

• Department of Applied Ecology, The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin, Al. Kraśnicka 102, 20-718 Lublin, Poland,

Bibliografia

• Andrzejewski R. 2002 – The home-range concept in rodents revised – Acta Theriol. 47, Suppl. 1: 81–101.
• Andrzejewski R., Babińska-Werka J., Liro A., Owadowska E., Szacki J. 1997 – The attractiveness of conspecific and interspecific odor for bank voles Clethrionomys glareolus – Acta Theriol. 42 (2): 231–234.
• Andrzejewski R., Olszewski J. 1963 – Social behaviour and interspecific relation in Apodemus flavicollis (Melchior, 1834) and Clethrionomys glareolus (Schreber 1780) – Acta Theriol. 7 (10): 155–168.
• Andrzejewski R., Owadowska E. 1994 – Use of odour bait to catch bank voles – Acta Theriol. 39 (2): 221–225.
• Dempster E.R., Perrin M. R. 1990 – Interspecific odour discrimination in four Gerbillurus species – Z. Säugetierkunde, 55: 321–330.
• Doty R. L. 1986 – Odour-guided behaviour in mammals – Experientia, 42: 257–271.
• Drickamer L.C. 1984 – Captures of two species of Peromyscus at live traps baited with male and female odors – J. Mamm. 65 (4): 699–702.
• Drickamer L.C., Mikesic D.G., Shaffer S. 1992 – Use of odour baits in traps to test reaction to intra- and interspecific chemical cues in house mice in outdoor enclosure – J. Chem. Ecol. 18 (12): 2223–2249.
• Dulac C., Torello A.T. 2003 – Molecular detection of pheromones signals in mammals: from genes to behaviour – Nature, 4: 551–562.
• Fasola M., Canova L. 2000 – Asymmetrical competition between the bank vole and wood mouse, a removal experiment – Acta Theriol. 45 (3): 353–365.
• Gliwicz J. 1981 – Competitive interactions within forest rodent community in central Poland – Oikos, 37: 353–362.
• Gouat P., Patris B., Lalande C. 1998 – Conspecific and heterospecific behavioural discrimination of individual odours by moundbuilding mice – C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Sciences de la vie/Life Sciences, 321: 571–575.
• Gurnell J., Little J. 1992 – The influence of trap residual odour on catching woodland rodents – Anim. Behav. 43: 623–632.
• Hansen F.H., Stenseth N.C., Henttonen H., Tast J. 1999 – Interspecific and intraspecific competition as causes of direct and delayed density dependence in a fluctuating vole population – Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 96: 986–991.
• Heth G., Todrank J. 2000 – Individual odours similarities across species parallel phylogenetic relationship in the S. ehrenbergi superspecies of mole-rat – Anim. Behav. 60: 789–795.
• Heth G., Todrank J., Busquet N., Baudoin C. 2001 – Odour-genes covariance and differential investigation of individual odours in the Mus species complex – Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 73: 213–220.
• Jannett F. 1981 – Scent mediation of intraspecific, interspecific and intergeneric agonistic behavior among sympatric species of voles (Microtidae) – Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 8: 293–296.
• Johnston R.E. 2003 – Chemical communication in rodents: from pheromones to individual recognition – Journal of Mammalogy, 84 (4): 1141–1162.
• Johnston R.E., Sorkin E.S., Ferkin, M. H. 1997 – Scent counter marking by male meadow voles: female prefers the top-scent male – Ethology, 103: 443–453.
• Jonge G.De. 1980 – Response to con- and heterospecific male odours by the voles Microtus agrestis, Microtus arvalis and Clethrionomys glareolus with respect to competition to space – Behav. 73: 277–30
• Kalinowska A. 1971 – Trapping of Apodemus flavicollis and Clethrionomys glareolus into a double traps – Acta Theriol. 16 (4): 73–78.
• Krasnov B., Khokhlova I. 1996 – Discrimination of midday jird’s odour by house mice – Anim. Behav. 52: 659–665.
• Krywko E. 2003 – Znakowanie zapachowe rekwizytów przez nornice rudą Clethrionomys glareolus (Schreber, 1780) w warunkach naturalnych [Scent marking by bank voles as a part of environmental conditioning] – Rozprawa doktorska, KUL, Lublin, Manuskrypt – Biblioteka KUL, Lublin.
• Łopucki R. Szymroszczyk P. 2003 – Recognition of interspecific familiar versus unfamiliar odours among bank voles and yellownecked mice – Acta Theriol. 48 (2): 167–176.
• Osipova O.V., Rutovskaya M.V. 2000 – Information transmission in bank voles by odor and acoustic signals (signalling communication) – (In: Bank vole biology: Resent advances in the population of a model species. Eds. G. Bujalska, L. Hanson) – Polish Journal of Ecology, 48, Suppl.: 21–36.
• Owadowska E. 1999 – The range of olfactory familiarity between individuals in a population of bank voles – Acta Theriol. 44 (2): 133–150.
• Rozenfeld F.M., Rasmont R. 1987 – Urine marking in bank voles (Clethrionomys glareolus Schreber 1780, Microtidae, Rodentia) – Annals Soc. R. zool. Belg. 117: 237–245.
• Rozenfeld F.M., Rasmont R. 1991 – Odour cue recognition by dominant male bank voles, Clethrionomys glareolus – Anim. Behav. 41: 839–850.
• Solon J. 2003 – Dynamika roślinności Kampinoskiego Parku narodowego i jego otuliny [The vegetation dynamics of Kampinoski National Park and its buffer zone] – Kampinoski Park Narodowy, I: 413–429.
• Stoddart D.M., Sales G.D. 1985 – The olfactory and acoustic biology of wood mice, yellow-necked mice and bank voles – Symp. Zool. Soc. Lond. 55: 117–139.
• Stoddart D.M., Smith P.A. 1984 – Woodmice (Apodemus sylvaticus) can distinguish conspecific from heterospecific odors in the field – J. chem. Ecol. 10: 923–928.
• Thomas S.A., Wolff J.O. 2002 – Scent marking in voles: a reassessment of over marking, counter marking, and self-advertisement – Ethology, 108: 51–62.
• Wójcik J.M., Wołk K. 1985 – The daily activity rhythm of two competitive rodents: Clethrionomys glareolus and Apodemus flavicollis – Acta Theriol. 30: 241–258.