Literature DB >> 21861181

Food preferences and mound-building behaviour of the mound-building mice Mus spicilegus.

Michaela Hölzl1, Ján Krištofík, Alžbeta Darolová, Herbert Hoi.   

Abstract

Optimal foraging strategies and food choice are influenced by various factors, e.g. availability, size and caloric content of the food type and predation risk. However, food choice criteria may change when food is not eaten immediately but has to be carried to a storage site for later use. For example, handling time in terms of harvesting and transport time should be optimized, particularly when the risk of predation is high. Thus, it is not clear whether food selected by hoarding animals reflects their food preference due to intrinsic features of the food type, e.g. size, caloric or lipid content, or whether the food type selected is a compromise that also considers the handling time required for harvesting and transport. We investigate this question in relation to food hoarding behaviour in mound-building mice. In autumn, mound-building mice Mus spicilegus collect seeds and other plant material and cover it with soil. Such above-ground storage is quite unusual for rodents. Here, we investigated whether there is a relationship between the seed species preferred as building materials and those preferred for food. We conducted a seed preference test using three most collected weed species for mound building. Controlling factors like food availability or predation risk, mice prefer Setaria spp. as food, although Amaranthus spp. and Chenopodium spp. were preferentially harvested and stored. By including the availability of the three species, our experimental results were confirmed, namely, a clear preference for Setaria spp. Also, handling time and seed size revealed to influence plant choice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21861181     DOI: 10.1007/s00114-011-0837-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Naturwissenschaften        ISSN: 0028-1042


  7 in total

1.  What do mice select for in seeds?

Authors:  G I H Kerley; T Erasmus
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Social structure of the mound-building mouse Mus spicilegus revealed by genetic analysis with microsatellites.

Authors:  J C Garza; J Dallas; D Duryadi; S Gerasimov; H Croset; P Boursot
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 6.185

3.  Effects of burrow condition and seed handling time on hoarding strategies of Edward's long-tailed rat (Leopoldamys edwardsi).

Authors:  Gang Chang; Zhishu Xiao; Zhibin Zhang
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2010-07-14       Impact factor: 1.777

4.  Analysis of nutritional components of eight famine foods of the Republic of Niger.

Authors:  L P Sena; D J Vanderjagt; C Rivera; A T Tsin; I Muhamadu; O Mahamadou; M Millson; A Pastuszyn; R H Glew
Journal:  Plant Foods Hum Nutr       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 3.921

Review 5.  The reproductive ecology of the house mouse.

Authors:  F H Bronson
Journal:  Q Rev Biol       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 4.875

6.  Seasonal reproduction and delayed sexual maturity in mound-building mice Mus spicilegus.

Authors:  Patrick Gouat; Christophe Féron; Simone Demouron
Journal:  Reprod Fertil Dev       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.311

7.  Nutritive value of green or yellow foxtail, wild oats, wild buckwheat or redroot pigweed seed as determined with the rat.

Authors:  R L Harrold; D L Craig; J D Nalewaja; B B North
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1980-07       Impact factor: 3.159

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.