Mechanisms of Habitat Selection by the Hispid Cotton Rat (Sigmodon hispidus)

Abstract The Texas coastal prairie is composed of habitat patches characterized by monocots, dicots, or a mixture of both plant types. Radiotelemetry revealed that reproductive female hispid cotton rats (Sigmodon hispidus) preferred mixed habitats and avoided dicot habitats, whereas males did not show a preference. Such habitat selection can be attained by shorter distances moved or increased turning (i.e., area-restricted search). Reproductive females, but not males, moved shorter distances in mixed habitats. However, turns relative to straight-ahead movements for females, but not males, were fewer in mixed habitats than in monocot or dicot habitats suggesting directed foraging rather than area-restricted search. To obtain necessary amounts of nutrients, especially carbohydrates, protein, phosphorus, and calcium, reproductive females ingest both monocots and dicots. Directed movement may facilitate foraging for dicots because these food items occur in clumps in mixed habitats. Because their nutritional needs are less than those of females, males do not exhibit the same patterns of habitat selection. Differential patch occupancy was not explained by overhead plant cover, but more bare ground in dicot habitats may explain avoidance of these habitat types because of increased predation risk.

[1]  G. Cameron,et al.  INTERACTIONS OF COTTON RATS WITH A PATCHY ENVIRONMENT: DIETARY RESPONSES AND HABITAT SELECTION' , 1985 .

[2]  R. Pierotti,et al.  Reproductive Consequences of Dietary Specialization and Switching in an Ecological Generalist , 1987 .

[3]  J. Randolph,et al.  CONSEQUENCES OF DIET CHOICE BY A SMALL GENERALIST HERBIVORE , 2001 .

[4]  G. Barrett,et al.  Effects of landscape spatial structure on movement patterns of the hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus) , 1999, Landscape Ecology.

[5]  L. Fahrig,et al.  Conservation of fragmented populations , 1994 .

[6]  M. Bowers,et al.  Differential Habitat Utilization by Sexes of the Deermouse, Permomyscus Maniculatus , 1979 .

[7]  J. Wolff,et al.  The Role of Habitat Patchiness in the Population Dynamics of Snowshoe Hares , 1980 .

[8]  A. Solow.  A Randomization Test for Independence of Animal Locations , 1989 .

[9]  S. Spencer,et al.  Assessment of space-use patterns in the hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus) , 1985, Oecologia.

[10]  D. C. Andersen.  Search path of a fossorial herbivore, Geomys bursarius , foraging in structurally complex plant communities , 1990 .

[11]  J. Wiens,et al.  Interactions between landscape structure and animal behavior: the roles of heterogeneously distributed resources and food deprivation on movement patterns , 1999, Landscape Ecology.

[12]  M. H. Smith,et al.  Utilization of a habitat mosaic by cotton rats during a population decline , 1992, Landscape Ecology.

[13]  G. Cameron,et al.  Experimentally Induced Habitat Shifts by Hispid Cotton Rats (Sigmodon hispidus): Response to Protein Supplementation , 1996 .

[14]  B. Danielson.  Habitat selection, interspecific interactions and landscape composition , 1992, Evolutionary Ecology.

[15]  D. C. Andersen.  Tunnel-construction methods and foraging path of a fossorial Herbivore, Geomys bursarius , 1988 .

[16]  S. Barnum,et al.  Path Selection by Peromyscus leucopus in the Presence and Absence of Vegetative Cover , 1992 .

[17]  S. L. Lima,et al.  SEARCH STRATEGIES FOR LANDSCAPE‐LEVEL INTERPATCH MOVEMENTS , 1999 .

[18]  R. Sikes,et al.  Guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists for the Use of Wild Mammals in Research , 2007 .

[19]  Gary C. White,et al.  Analysis of Wildlife Radio-Tracking Data , 1990 .

[20]  A. Cockburn,et al.  Microhabitat heterogeneity and population ecology of an herbivorous rodent, Microtus californicus , 1983, Oecologia.

[21]  S. Heinrichs,et al.  Olfactory self-selection of protein-containing foods , 1990, Physiology & Behavior.

[22]  M. Willig,et al.  Food Selection of a Tropical Mammalian Folivore in Relation to Leaf-Nutrient Content , 1991 .

[23]  S. Spencer,et al.  Behavioraldominance and its relationship to habitat patch utilization by the hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus) , 1983, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[24]  G. Cameron,et al.  Dietary Variation in Three Sympatric Rodents on the Texas Coastal Prairie , 1982 .

[25]  M. Brot,et al.  Flavor, not postingestive, cues contribute to the salience of proteins as targets in aversion conditioning. , 1987, Behavioral neuroscience.

[26]  Clyde W. Neu,et al.  A TECHNIQUE FOR ANALYSIS OF UTILIZATION- AVAILABILITY DATA' , 1974 .

[27]  Alan J. A. Stewart,et al.  The Ecological Consequences of Environmental Heterogeneity , 2000 .

[28]  M. Mares,et al.  HABITAT PREFERENCE AND SPATIAL RELATIONS OF SIGMODON HISPIDUS ON A REMNANT PRAIRIE IN WEST-CENTRAL KANSAS , 1973 .

[29]  B. Carnes,et al.  Patterns of habitat utilization in sympatric rodents on the Texas coastal prairie , 1983 .

[30]  Microhabitat Use by Heteromyid Rodents: Effects of Artificial Seed Patches , 1985 .

[31]  R. Ostfeld,et al.  The relationship between habitat heterogeneity, space use, and demography in a population of California voles. , 1985 .

[32]  Jay H. Schnell.  The Limiting Effects of Natural Predation on Experimental Cotton Rat Populations , 1968 .

[33]  Experimental Species Removal: Temporal Activity Patterns of Sigmodon hispidus and Reithrodontomys fulvescens , 1979 .

[34]  O. J. Reichman,et al.  Simulation Models of the Interactions between Herbivore Foraging Strategies, Social Behavior, and Plant Community Dynamics , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[35]  D. M. Leslie,et al.  IMPACT OF FOOD SUPPLEMENTATION AND METHIONINE ON HIGH DENSITIES OF COTTON RATS: SUPPORT OF THE AMINO-ACID-QUALITY HYPOTHESIS? , 2005 .

[36]  J. Randolph,et al.  Dietary Choice of a Generalist Grassland Herbivore, Sigmodon hispidus , 1991 .

[37]  D. M. Leslie,et al.  Neonatal growth and survival of rodents in response to variation in maternal dietary nitrogen: life history strategy vs dietary niche , 2005 .

[38]  T. J. Breen,et al.  Biostatistical Analysis (2nd ed.). , 1986 .

[39]  W. J. Bell.  Searching Behaviour: The Behavioural Ecology of Finding Resources , 1991 .

[40]  William E. Grant,et al.  IMPORTANCE OF VEGETATIVE COVER TO CYCLES OF MICROTUS POPULATIONS , 1976 .

[41]  J. L. Dooley,et al.  Influences of Patch Size and Microhabitat on the Demography of Two Old-Field Rodents , 1996 .

[42]  D. H. Morse,et al.  The Consequences of Foraging for Reproductive Success , 1987 .

[43]  G. Cameron.  Experimental Species Removal: Demographic Responses by Sigmodon hispidus and Reithrodontomys fulvescens , 1977 .

[44]  N. Slade,et al.  Effects of supplemental food on population dynamics of cotton rats, Sigmodon hispidus , 1995 .

[45]  David G. Haskell.  Experiments and a model examining learning in the area-restricted search behavior of ferrets (Mustela putorius furo) , 1997 .

[46]  Burt P. Kotler,et al.  The effects of owl predation on the foraging behavior of heteromyid rodents , 1988, Oecologia.

[47]  D. Morris.  Sexual differences in habitat use by small mammals: evolutionary strategy or reproductive constraint? , 1984, Oecologia.

[48]  S. Pennings,et al.  Selectivity and Growth of the Generalist Herbivore Dolabella Auricularia Feeding Upon Complementary Resources , 1993 .

[49]  P. Krausman,et al.  Clarification of a technique for analysis of utilization-availability data , 1984 .

[50]  J. H. Benedix.  Area-restricted search by the plains pocket gopher (Geomys bursarius) in tallgrass prairie habitat , 1993 .