Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
D. Simberloff, W. Boecklen (1981)
SANTA ROSALIA RECONSIDERED: SIZE RATIOS AND COMPETITIONEvolution, 35
A. Sih (1980)
Optimal behavior: can foragers balance two conflicting demands?Science, 210 4473
Burt Kotler, R. Holt (1989)
Predation and competition: the interaction of two types of species interactionsOikos, 54
S. Thompson, R. Macmillen, Elaine Burke, C. Taylor (1980)
The energetic cost of bipedal hopping in small mammalsNature, 287
J. Edwards (1983)
Diet shifts in moose due to predator avoidanceOecologia, 60
R. Riffenburgh, K. Brownlee (1961)
Statistical Theory and Methodology in Science and Engineering.Applied statistics, 10
Joel Brown (2004)
Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competitionBehavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 22
R. Holt (1984)
Spatial Heterogeneity, Indirect Interactions, and the Coexistence of Prey SpeciesThe American Naturalist, 124
M. Price (1978)
The Role of Microhabitat in Structuring Desert Rodent CommunitiesEcology, 59
E. Werner, J. Gilliam, D. Hall, G. Mittelbach (1983)
An Experimental Test of the Effects of Predation Risk on Habitat Use in FishEcology, 64
M. Bowers, James Brown (1982)
Body Size and Coexistnce in Desert Rodents: Chance or Community Structure?Ecology, 63
M. Rosenzweig, R. Macarthur (1963)
Graphical Representation and Stability Conditions of Predator-Prey InteractionsThe American Naturalist, 97
M. Ohman, B. Frost, E. Cohen (1983)
Reverse Diel Vertical Migration: An Escape from Invertebrate PredatorsScience, 220
W. Calder (1988)
Size, Function, and Life History
R. Frye, M. Rosenzweig (1980)
Clump size selection: A field test with two species of DipodomysOecologia, 47
M. Rosenzweig, J. Winakur (1969)
Population Ecology of Desert Rodent Communities: Habitats and Environmental ComplexityEcology, 50
M. Price, Nicholas Waser, Thomas Bass (1984)
Effects of Moonlight on Microhabitat Use by Desert RodentsJournal of Mammalogy, 65
Burt Kotler (1984)
Risk of predation and the structure of desert rodent communitiesEcology, 65
Andrew Langford (1983)
Pattern of Nocturnal Activity of Male Dipodomys ordii (Heteromyidae)Southwestern Naturalist, 28
B. Peckarsky, S. Dodson (1980)
DO STONEFLY PREDATORS INFLUENCE BENTHIC DISTRIBUTIONS IN STREAMSEcology, 61
D. Webster (1962)
A Function of the Enlarged Middle-Ear Cavities of the Kangaroo Rat, DipodomysPhysiological Zoology, 35
D. Webster, M. Webster (1971)
Adaptive value of hearing and vision in kangaroo rat predator avoidance.Brain, behavior and evolution, 4 4
H. Pulliam, G. Mills (1977)
THE USE OF SPACE BY WINTERING SPARROWSEcology, 58
L. Dice (1945)
Minimum Intensities of Illumination Under Which Owls Can Find Dead Prey by SightThe American Naturalist, 79
E. Charnov, G. Orians, K. Hyatt (1976)
Ecological Implications of Resource DepressionThe American Naturalist, 110
R. Lockard, D. Owings (1974)
Seasonal variation in moonlight avoidance by bannertail kangaroo rats.Journal of mammalogy, 55 1
R. Frye (1983)
Experimental field evidence of interspecific aggression between two species of kangaroo rat (Dipodomys)Oecologia, 59
K. Bellman, F. Krasne (1983)
Adaptive Complexity of Interactions Between Feeding and Escape in CrayfishScience, 221
James Brown (1973)
Species Diversity of Seed‐Eating Desert Rodents in Sand Dune HabitatsEcology, 54
M. Rosenzweig (1981)
A Theory of Habitat SelectionEcology, 62
James Brown, G. Lieberman (1973)
Resource Utilization and Coexistence of Seed-Eating Desert Rodents in Sand Dune HabitatsEcology, 54
H. Ahrens (1968)
Brownlee, K. A.: Statistical Theory and Methodology in Science and Engineering. John Wiley & Sons, New York 1965, 590 S., 70 Abb., TafelanhangBiometrische Zeitschrift, 10
M. Rosenzweig (1973)
Habitat Selection Experiments with a Pair of Coexisting Heteromyid Rodent SpeciesEcology, 54
S. Lima, T. Valone, T. Caraco (1985)
Foraging-efficiency-predation-risk trade-off in the grey squirrelAnimal Behaviour, 33
S. Thompson (1982)
Microhabitat Utilization and Foraging Behavior of Bipedal and Quadrupedal Hetermoyid RodentsEcology, 63
J. Eisenberg (1963)
The behavior of heteromyid rodents
S. Hurlbert (1984)
Pseudoreplication and the Design of Ecological Field ExperimentsEcological Monographs, 54
J. Clarke (1983)
Moonlight's influence on predator/prey interactions between short-eared owls (Asio flammeus) and deermice (Peromyscus maniculatus)Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 13
A. Sih (1982)
Foraging Strategies and the Avoidance of Predation by an Aquatic Insect, Notonecta HoffmanniEcology, 63
M. Milinski, R. Heller (1978)
Influence of a predator on the optimal foraging behaviour of sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.)Nature, 275
A. Ives, A. Dobson (1987)
Antipredator Behavior and the Population Dynamics of Simple Predator-Prey SystemsThe American Naturalist, 130
Researchers have documented microhabitat partitioning among the heteromyid rodents of the deserts of North America that may result from microhabitat specific predation rates; large/bipedal species predominate in the open/risky microhabitat and small/quadrupedal species predominate in the bush/safer microhabitat. Here, we provide direct experimental evidence on the role of predatory risk in affecting the foraging behavior of three species of heteromyid rodents: Arizona pocket mouse ( Perognathus amplus ; small/quadrupedal), Bailey's pocket mouse ( P. baileyi ; large/quadrupedal), and Merriam's kangaroo rat ( Dipodomys merriami ; large/bipedal). Both kangaroo rats and pocket mice are behaviorally flexible and able to adjust their foraging behavior to nightly changes in predatory risk. Under low levels of perceived predatory risk the kangaroo rat foraged relatively more in the open microhabitat than the two pocket mouse species. In response to the presence of barn owls, however, all three species shifted their habitat use towards the bush microhabitat. In response to direct measures of predatory risk, i.e. the actual presence of owls, all three species reduced foraging and left resource patches at higher giving up densities of seeds. In response to indirect indicators of predatory risk, i.e. illumination, there was a tendency for all three species to reduce foraging. The differences in morphology between pocket mice and kangaroo rats do appear to influence their behavioral responses to predatory risk.
Oecologia – Springer Journals
Published: Aug 1, 1988
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.