4.0 Article

Dietary composition of rodents across different habitats in the Ukaguru Mountains, Tanzania

期刊

AFRICAN JOURNAL OF ECOLOGY
卷 60, 期 4, 页码 958-968

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/aje.13042

关键词

diet; eastern Arc Mountains; niche breadth; rodents

类别

资金

  1. African Centre of Excellence of Innovative Rodent Pest Management and Biosensor Technology Development, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the dietary composition of rodents in the Ukaguru Mountains, Tanzania. It found that different species of rodents had slight differences in dietary importance. Compared to rodents in farmland, forest-dwelling rodents showed higher food diversity, which could be attributed to the more heterogeneous and stable nature of forests. The abundance of food resources in both habitats allowed for the coexistence of rodent species.
This study aimed at investigating the dietary composition of rodents in the Ukaguru Mountains, Tanzania. Micro-histological analysis of the stomach contents of rodents collected from various habitats was carried out. In the diet of Mastomys natalensis, Lemniscomys rosalia and Mus triton, seed/grain showed greater importance (>35%, >55% and 60% respectively), whereas for Lophuromys kilonzoi, plant materials were more important (>55%) than other categories. Seed/grains were more important (>20%) in the diet of Praomys delectorum, while plant materials were more important (>45%) in the diet of forest-dwelling L. kilonzoi. Food diversity for rodents in farmland was relatively low compared with forest-dwelling rodents. Our results indicated that the relatively low niche breadth observed in rodents caught in farms could be attributed to the major contribution of seed/grains to their diet while forest-dwelling rodents showed greater food diversity owing to the more heterogeneous and stable nature of forests compared with farms. The abundance of food resources in both habitats would have permitted coexistence of rodent species.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据