4.2 Article

Spatial distribution of meadow jumping mice (Zapus hudsonius) in logged boreal forest of northwestern Canada

Journal

MAMMALIAN BIOLOGY
Volume 76, Issue 6, Pages 678-682

Publisher

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.mambio.2011.08.002

Keywords

Boreal forest management; Edge effects; Logging; Meadow jumping mouse; Rarity; Small mammal assemblages; Yukon; Zapus hudsonius

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Most studies of small mammal responses to habitat alterations focus on dominant species, with a resulting lack of information for rare species. jumping mice (Order Rodentia: Dipodidae) tend to be rare in small mammal trapping studies; thus, little is known of their response to habitat alterations, such as clear-cut logging. We examined the spatial distribution of meadow jumping mice (Zapus hudsonius) captured in 3 upland habitat types (forest interior, forest edge, and logged forest) in the boreal forest of southeastern Yukon, Canada. Meadow jumping mice were the third most common rodent captured, and consistently constituted 19.7% of captures in all of the habitat types. Meadow jumping mice may not be rare in some boreal mammal assemblages. Significantly less animals were captured in the forest interior compared to the forest edge or logged forest (P < 0.05). A preference or avoidance of sharp habitat edges created by logging was not detected. Logged areas may be more preferred over unlogged areas by meadow jumping mice because they provide relatively diverse and abundant food resources and cover. To provide data more useful for biodiversity conservation, we suggest that studies of small mammals in forest ecosystems deploy a variety of trap types and sample at sufficient intensity to provide information on both dominant and rare species. (C) 2011 Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Saugetierkunde. Published by Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available