The response of male meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, to same- and mixed-sex over-marks depends on the reproductive state of the top- and bottom-female scent donors
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] M. Ferkin,et al. Dietary protein content affects the response of meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, to over-marks , 2011, acta ethologica.
[2] M. Ferkin,et al. Responses of meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus , to areas containing over-marks and single scent marks of two opposite-sex conspecifics , 2011 .
[3] M. Ferkin,et al. The presence and number of male competitor's scent marks and female reproductive state affect the response of male meadow voles to female conspecifics' odours , 2011 .
[4] Stan Franklin,et al. Meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, have the capacity to recall the “what”, “where”, and “when” of a single past event , 2007, Animal Cognition.
[5] Andrew A. Pierce,et al. Perspectives on over-marking: is it good to be on top? , 2007, Journal of Ethology.
[6] M. Ferkin,et al. Risk of sperm competition does not influence copulatory behavior in the promiscuous meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus) , 2007, Journal of Ethology.
[7] M. Ferkin. The amount of time that a meadow vole, Microtus pennsylvanicus, self-grooms is affected by its reproductive state and that of the odor donor , 2006, Behavioural Processes.
[8] M. Ferkin,et al. Male meadow voles respond differently to risk and intensity of sperm competition , 2006 .
[9] J. D. Neill,et al. Knobil and Neill's Physiology of reproduction , 2006 .
[10] R. Beynon,et al. Scent wars: the chemobiology of competitive signalling in mice , 2004, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.
[11] M. Ferkin,et al. The Reproductive State of Female Voles Affects their Scent Marking Behavior and the Responses of Male Conspecifics to Such Marks , 2004 .
[12] D. Madison. Space use and social structure in meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus , 1980, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.
[13] R. Johnston. CHEMICAL COMMUNICATION IN RODENTS: FROM PHEROMONES TO INDIVIDUAL RECOGNITION , 2003 .
[14] H. Fisher,et al. Countermarking by male pygmy lorises (Nycticebus pygmaeus): do females use odor cues to select mates with high competitive ability? , 2002, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.
[15] M. Ferkin,et al. The response of meadow voles to an over-mark in which the two donors differ in gonadal hormone status , 2001, Animal Behaviour.
[16] M. Ferkin,et al. Meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus) and prairie voles (M. ochrogaster) differ in their responses to over-marks from opposite- and same-sex conspecifics , 2000 .
[17] T. Birkhead. Promiscuity: An Evolutionary History of Sperm Competition , 2000 .
[18] M. Ferkin,et al. Response of prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster (Rodentia, Arvicolidae), to scent over-marks of two same-sex conspecifics : A test of the scent-masking hypothesis , 1999 .
[19] C. Snowdon,et al. Scent-marking behavior in wild groups of common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus) , 1999, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.
[20] J. Bergeron,et al. Multiple paternity in meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus): investigating the role of the female , 1999, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.
[21] R. Johnston,et al. WHAT KIND OF INFORMATION DO MEADOW VOLES (MICROTUS PENNSYLVANICUS) USE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE TOP AND BOTTOM SCENT OF AN OVER-MARK? , 1999 .
[22] J. Hurst,et al. Scent marks as reliable signals of the competitive ability of mates , 1998, Animal Behaviour.
[23] B. Kirkpatrick,et al. The integrative neurobiology of affiliation. Introduction. , 1997, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
[24] B. Kirkpatrick,et al. Wildlife of the Tibetan Steppes , 2000 .
[25] R. Johnston,et al. Odors Providing Sexual Information in Djungarian Hamsters: Evidence for an Across-Odor Code , 1996, Hormones and Behavior.
[26] R. Johnston,et al. Scent counter marks: selective memory for the top scent by golden hamsters , 1995, Animal Behaviour.
[27] R. Johnston,et al. Effects of pregnancy, lactation and postpartum oestrus on odour signals and the attraction to odours in female meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus , 1995, Animal Behaviour.
[28] R. Johnston,et al. The information in scent over-marks of golden hamsters , 1994, Animal Behaviour.
[29] C. D. Rudd. Sexual behaviour of male and female tammar wallabies (Macropus eugenii) at post‐partum oestrus , 1994 .
[30] Theresa M. Lee,et al. Female meadow voles have a preferred mating pattern predicted by photoperiod, which influences fertility , 1993, Physiology & Behavior.
[31] J. O. Wolff. Why are female small mammals territorial , 1993 .
[32] R. Boonstra,et al. Mating system of the meadow vole, Microtus pennsylvanicus , 1993 .
[33] C. Snowdon,et al. Circulating and excreted hormones during the ovarian cycle in the cotton‐top tamarin, Saguinus oedipus , 1993, American journal of primatology.
[34] E. Jones. Effects of Forage Availability on Home Range and Population Density of Microtus pennsylvanicus , 1990 .
[35] J. Hurst. Urine marking in populations of wild house mice Mus domesticus rutty. I. Communication between males , 1990, Animal Behaviour.
[36] D. Dewsbury,et al. Modes of estrus induction as a factor in studies of the reproductive behavior of rodents , 1990, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.
[37] C. Carter,et al. Patterns of behaviour during postpartum oestrus in prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster , 1990, Animal Behaviour.
[38] D. Macdonald,et al. Social odours in mammals , 1985 .
[39] A. Gilbert. Postpartum and lactational estrus: a comparative analysis in rodentia. , 1984, Journal of comparative psychology.
[40] R. Johnston. 1 – Chemical Signals and Reproductive Behavior , 1983 .
[41] R. Johnston. Olfactory preferences, scent marking, and “proceptivity” in female hamsters , 1979, Hormones and Behavior.
[42] D. Dewsbury,et al. Pregnancy initiation in postpartum estrus in three species of muroid rodents , 1979, Hormones and Behavior.