Loading…
Reproduction, foraging and the negative density-area relationship of a generalist rodent
While many species show positive relationships between population density and habitat patch area, some species consistently show higher densities in smaller patches. Few studies have examined mechanisms that may cause species to have negative density-area relationships. We tested the hypothesis that...
Saved in:
Published in: | Oecologia 2005-07, Vol.144 (3), p.391-398 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c433t-7bc8b2509ca5d13260ed8da963dff3ebab00382ad63ad1969aafc8988e020c73 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c433t-7bc8b2509ca5d13260ed8da963dff3ebab00382ad63ad1969aafc8988e020c73 |
container_end_page | 398 |
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 391 |
container_title | Oecologia |
container_volume | 144 |
creator | Wilder, S.M Meikle, D.B |
description | While many species show positive relationships between population density and habitat patch area, some species consistently show higher densities in smaller patches. Few studies have examined mechanisms that may cause species to have negative density-area relationships. We tested the hypothesis that greater reproduction in edge versus interior habitats and small versus large fragments contributes to higher densities of white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus) in small versus large forest fragments. We also examined vegetation structure and foraging tray utilization to evaluate if greater reproduction was a result of higher food availability. There were greater number of litters and proportion of females producing litters in the edge versus interior of forest fragments, which may have contributed to greater population growth rates and higher densities in edge versus interior and small versus large fragments. Data on vegetation structure and giving-up densities of seeds in artificial patches suggest that food availability may be higher in edge versus interior habitats and small versus large fragments. These results, in an area with few or no long-tailed weasels, provide a distinct contrast to the findings of Morris and Davidson (Ecology 81:2061, 2000) who observed lower reproduction in forest edge habitat as a result of high weasel predation, suggesting that specialist predators may be important in affecting the quality of edge habitat. While we cannot exclude the potential contributions of immigration, emigration, and mortality, our data suggest that greater reproduction in edge versus interior habitat is an important factor contributing to higher densities of P. leucopus in small fragments. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00442-005-0086-4 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68630986</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>20062342</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>20062342</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c433t-7bc8b2509ca5d13260ed8da963dff3ebab00382ad63ad1969aafc8988e020c73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUuLFDEUhYMoTtv6A1yoQdCVpTevSrKUwRcMCDqCu3ArSfVUU51qkyph_r1pqnHAjYvcLM53Dtx7CHnK4C0D0O8KgJS8AVD1mbaR98iGScEbZoW9TzYA3DZGSXtBHpWyB2CSKfWQXDBlLDNcbMjPb_GYp7D4eZjSG9pPGXdD2lFMgc43kaa4w3n4HWmIqQzzbYM5Is1xxJOh3AxHOvUU6S6mmHEcykxrXEzzY_Kgx7HEJ-d_S64_fri-_Nxcff305fL9VeOlEHOjO286rsB6VIEJ3kIMJqBtReh7ETvsAIThGFqBgdnWIvbeWGMicPBabMnrNbZu8WuJZXaHofg4jpjitBTXmlaAreN_INMctNJQwZf_gPtpyanu4AwHoaWu190StkI-T6Xk2LtjHg6Ybx0Dd-rGrd242o07deNk9Tw_By_dIYY7x7mMCrw6A1g8jn3G5Idyx7X1Kkapyj1buX2Zp_xX5wAtF5JX_cWq9zg53OWa8eM7ByaAAZdac_EH2o2pdg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>820374719</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Reproduction, foraging and the negative density-area relationship of a generalist rodent</title><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><source>Springer Link</source><creator>Wilder, S.M ; Meikle, D.B</creator><creatorcontrib>Wilder, S.M ; Meikle, D.B</creatorcontrib><description>While many species show positive relationships between population density and habitat patch area, some species consistently show higher densities in smaller patches. Few studies have examined mechanisms that may cause species to have negative density-area relationships. We tested the hypothesis that greater reproduction in edge versus interior habitats and small versus large fragments contributes to higher densities of white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus) in small versus large forest fragments. We also examined vegetation structure and foraging tray utilization to evaluate if greater reproduction was a result of higher food availability. There were greater number of litters and proportion of females producing litters in the edge versus interior of forest fragments, which may have contributed to greater population growth rates and higher densities in edge versus interior and small versus large fragments. Data on vegetation structure and giving-up densities of seeds in artificial patches suggest that food availability may be higher in edge versus interior habitats and small versus large fragments. These results, in an area with few or no long-tailed weasels, provide a distinct contrast to the findings of Morris and Davidson (Ecology 81:2061, 2000) who observed lower reproduction in forest edge habitat as a result of high weasel predation, suggesting that specialist predators may be important in affecting the quality of edge habitat. While we cannot exclude the potential contributions of immigration, emigration, and mortality, our data suggest that greater reproduction in edge versus interior habitat is an important factor contributing to higher densities of P. leucopus in small fragments.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0029-8549</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-1939</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00442-005-0086-4</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15891823</identifier><identifier>CODEN: OECOBX</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin: Springer</publisher><subject>Analysis of Variance ; Animal and plant ecology ; Animal nesting ; Animal populations ; animal reproduction ; Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Animals ; Biological and medical sciences ; Demography ; Ecosystem ; ecotones ; Edge effects ; Emigration ; Environment ; feeding behavior ; Feeding Behavior - physiology ; Fertility - physiology ; Food availability ; Foraging ; Forest habitats ; Forest litter ; forest-wildlife relations ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General aspects ; Habitat fragmentation ; Habitats ; Mammalia ; Mice ; Ohio ; Peromyscus - physiology ; Peromyscus leucopus ; Population Density ; Population Ecology ; Population growth ; Predators ; Reproduction ; Reproduction - physiology ; Rodents ; Small mammals ; Vegetation ; Vertebrates: general zoology, morphology, phylogeny, systematics, cytogenetics, geographical distribution</subject><ispartof>Oecologia, 2005-07, Vol.144 (3), p.391-398</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg</rights><rights>2005 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag 2005</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c433t-7bc8b2509ca5d13260ed8da963dff3ebab00382ad63ad1969aafc8988e020c73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c433t-7bc8b2509ca5d13260ed8da963dff3ebab00382ad63ad1969aafc8988e020c73</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20062342$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/20062342$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,58238,58471</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=16963855$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15891823$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wilder, S.M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meikle, D.B</creatorcontrib><title>Reproduction, foraging and the negative density-area relationship of a generalist rodent</title><title>Oecologia</title><addtitle>Oecologia</addtitle><description>While many species show positive relationships between population density and habitat patch area, some species consistently show higher densities in smaller patches. Few studies have examined mechanisms that may cause species to have negative density-area relationships. We tested the hypothesis that greater reproduction in edge versus interior habitats and small versus large fragments contributes to higher densities of white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus) in small versus large forest fragments. We also examined vegetation structure and foraging tray utilization to evaluate if greater reproduction was a result of higher food availability. There were greater number of litters and proportion of females producing litters in the edge versus interior of forest fragments, which may have contributed to greater population growth rates and higher densities in edge versus interior and small versus large fragments. Data on vegetation structure and giving-up densities of seeds in artificial patches suggest that food availability may be higher in edge versus interior habitats and small versus large fragments. These results, in an area with few or no long-tailed weasels, provide a distinct contrast to the findings of Morris and Davidson (Ecology 81:2061, 2000) who observed lower reproduction in forest edge habitat as a result of high weasel predation, suggesting that specialist predators may be important in affecting the quality of edge habitat. While we cannot exclude the potential contributions of immigration, emigration, and mortality, our data suggest that greater reproduction in edge versus interior habitat is an important factor contributing to higher densities of P. leucopus in small fragments.</description><subject>Analysis of Variance</subject><subject>Animal and plant ecology</subject><subject>Animal nesting</subject><subject>Animal populations</subject><subject>animal reproduction</subject><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Demography</subject><subject>Ecosystem</subject><subject>ecotones</subject><subject>Edge effects</subject><subject>Emigration</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>feeding behavior</subject><subject>Feeding Behavior - physiology</subject><subject>Fertility - physiology</subject><subject>Food availability</subject><subject>Foraging</subject><subject>Forest habitats</subject><subject>Forest litter</subject><subject>forest-wildlife relations</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Habitat fragmentation</subject><subject>Habitats</subject><subject>Mammalia</subject><subject>Mice</subject><subject>Ohio</subject><subject>Peromyscus - physiology</subject><subject>Peromyscus leucopus</subject><subject>Population Density</subject><subject>Population Ecology</subject><subject>Population growth</subject><subject>Predators</subject><subject>Reproduction</subject><subject>Reproduction - physiology</subject><subject>Rodents</subject><subject>Small mammals</subject><subject>Vegetation</subject><subject>Vertebrates: general zoology, morphology, phylogeny, systematics, cytogenetics, geographical distribution</subject><issn>0029-8549</issn><issn>1432-1939</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkUuLFDEUhYMoTtv6A1yoQdCVpTevSrKUwRcMCDqCu3ArSfVUU51qkyph_r1pqnHAjYvcLM53Dtx7CHnK4C0D0O8KgJS8AVD1mbaR98iGScEbZoW9TzYA3DZGSXtBHpWyB2CSKfWQXDBlLDNcbMjPb_GYp7D4eZjSG9pPGXdD2lFMgc43kaa4w3n4HWmIqQzzbYM5Is1xxJOh3AxHOvUU6S6mmHEcykxrXEzzY_Kgx7HEJ-d_S64_fri-_Nxcff305fL9VeOlEHOjO286rsB6VIEJ3kIMJqBtReh7ETvsAIThGFqBgdnWIvbeWGMicPBabMnrNbZu8WuJZXaHofg4jpjitBTXmlaAreN_INMctNJQwZf_gPtpyanu4AwHoaWu190StkI-T6Xk2LtjHg6Ybx0Dd-rGrd242o07deNk9Tw_By_dIYY7x7mMCrw6A1g8jn3G5Idyx7X1Kkapyj1buX2Zp_xX5wAtF5JX_cWq9zg53OWa8eM7ByaAAZdac_EH2o2pdg</recordid><startdate>20050701</startdate><enddate>20050701</enddate><creator>Wilder, S.M</creator><creator>Meikle, D.B</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20050701</creationdate><title>Reproduction, foraging and the negative density-area relationship of a generalist rodent</title><author>Wilder, S.M ; Meikle, D.B</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c433t-7bc8b2509ca5d13260ed8da963dff3ebab00382ad63ad1969aafc8988e020c73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Analysis of Variance</topic><topic>Animal and plant ecology</topic><topic>Animal nesting</topic><topic>Animal populations</topic><topic>animal reproduction</topic><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Demography</topic><topic>Ecosystem</topic><topic>ecotones</topic><topic>Edge effects</topic><topic>Emigration</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>feeding behavior</topic><topic>Feeding Behavior - physiology</topic><topic>Fertility - physiology</topic><topic>Food availability</topic><topic>Foraging</topic><topic>Forest habitats</topic><topic>Forest litter</topic><topic>forest-wildlife relations</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Habitat fragmentation</topic><topic>Habitats</topic><topic>Mammalia</topic><topic>Mice</topic><topic>Ohio</topic><topic>Peromyscus - physiology</topic><topic>Peromyscus leucopus</topic><topic>Population Density</topic><topic>Population Ecology</topic><topic>Population growth</topic><topic>Predators</topic><topic>Reproduction</topic><topic>Reproduction - physiology</topic><topic>Rodents</topic><topic>Small mammals</topic><topic>Vegetation</topic><topic>Vertebrates: general zoology, morphology, phylogeny, systematics, cytogenetics, geographical distribution</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wilder, S.M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meikle, D.B</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest - Health & Medical Complete保健、医学与药学数据库</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences & Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Oecologia</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wilder, S.M</au><au>Meikle, D.B</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Reproduction, foraging and the negative density-area relationship of a generalist rodent</atitle><jtitle>Oecologia</jtitle><addtitle>Oecologia</addtitle><date>2005-07-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>144</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>391</spage><epage>398</epage><pages>391-398</pages><issn>0029-8549</issn><eissn>1432-1939</eissn><coden>OECOBX</coden><abstract>While many species show positive relationships between population density and habitat patch area, some species consistently show higher densities in smaller patches. Few studies have examined mechanisms that may cause species to have negative density-area relationships. We tested the hypothesis that greater reproduction in edge versus interior habitats and small versus large fragments contributes to higher densities of white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus) in small versus large forest fragments. We also examined vegetation structure and foraging tray utilization to evaluate if greater reproduction was a result of higher food availability. There were greater number of litters and proportion of females producing litters in the edge versus interior of forest fragments, which may have contributed to greater population growth rates and higher densities in edge versus interior and small versus large fragments. Data on vegetation structure and giving-up densities of seeds in artificial patches suggest that food availability may be higher in edge versus interior habitats and small versus large fragments. These results, in an area with few or no long-tailed weasels, provide a distinct contrast to the findings of Morris and Davidson (Ecology 81:2061, 2000) who observed lower reproduction in forest edge habitat as a result of high weasel predation, suggesting that specialist predators may be important in affecting the quality of edge habitat. While we cannot exclude the potential contributions of immigration, emigration, and mortality, our data suggest that greater reproduction in edge versus interior habitat is an important factor contributing to higher densities of P. leucopus in small fragments.</abstract><cop>Berlin</cop><pub>Springer</pub><pmid>15891823</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00442-005-0086-4</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0029-8549 |
ispartof | Oecologia, 2005-07, Vol.144 (3), p.391-398 |
issn | 0029-8549 1432-1939 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68630986 |
source | JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection; Springer Link |
subjects | Analysis of Variance Animal and plant ecology Animal nesting Animal populations animal reproduction Animal, plant and microbial ecology Animals Biological and medical sciences Demography Ecosystem ecotones Edge effects Emigration Environment feeding behavior Feeding Behavior - physiology Fertility - physiology Food availability Foraging Forest habitats Forest litter forest-wildlife relations Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology General aspects Habitat fragmentation Habitats Mammalia Mice Ohio Peromyscus - physiology Peromyscus leucopus Population Density Population Ecology Population growth Predators Reproduction Reproduction - physiology Rodents Small mammals Vegetation Vertebrates: general zoology, morphology, phylogeny, systematics, cytogenetics, geographical distribution |
title | Reproduction, foraging and the negative density-area relationship of a generalist rodent |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T15%3A13%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Reproduction,%20foraging%20and%20the%20negative%20density-area%20relationship%20of%20a%20generalist%20rodent&rft.jtitle=Oecologia&rft.au=Wilder,%20S.M&rft.date=2005-07-01&rft.volume=144&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=391&rft.epage=398&rft.pages=391-398&rft.issn=0029-8549&rft.eissn=1432-1939&rft.coden=OECOBX&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00442-005-0086-4&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E20062342%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c433t-7bc8b2509ca5d13260ed8da963dff3ebab00382ad63ad1969aafc8988e020c73%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=820374719&rft_id=info:pmid/15891823&rft_jstor_id=20062342&rfr_iscdi=true |