4.8 Article

Evolutionary and ecological patterns of scatter- and larder-hoarding behaviours in rodents

Journal

ECOLOGY LETTERS
Volume 25, Issue 5, Pages 1202-1214

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ele.13992

Keywords

food hoarding; larder hoarding; Rodentia; scatter hoarding

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [32070447]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [lzujbky-2020-ct02]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study systematically collected data for 183 seed-hoarding rodent species worldwide and found that the evolution of hoarding strategies was not random in phylogeny, with scatter hoarding originating independently multiple times from larder hoarding. The encephalisation quotient, diet type, and latitudinal distribution were identified as important factors influencing food-hoarding strategies.
Scatter- and larder hoarding are the primary strategies of food-hoarding animals and have important implications for plant-animal interactions and plant recruitment. However, their origins and influencing factors have not been fully investigated across a wide range of taxa. Our systematic literature search amassed data for 183 seed-hoarding rodent species worldwide and tested relationships of seed-hoarding behaviours with phylogenetic signal, functional traits and environmental factors. We found that the evolution of hoarding strategies was not random in phylogeny, and scatter hoarding originated independently multiple times from larder hoarding. Rodents with higher encephalisation quotient (relative brain size), omnivorous diet (related to dependence on seeds) and inhabiting lower latitudes were disproportionately likely to scatter hoard. Despite body mass's potential relationship with competition through food defence, it was associated with food-hoarding strategy only in a few families. Our results show the need to study the community and ecological context of food-hoarding behaviours.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available