Cookies Policy
X
Cookie Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Different antipredator responses by Microcavia australis (Rodentia, Hystricognate, Caviidae) under predation risk

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.

Buy this article

Price:
$30.00+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites

[The antipredator response of rodents may depend on the species of predator and the structure of the vegetation. To investigate these effects, we compared the antipredator response of Microcavia australis to two predator models. We used two populations occurring at sites of the Monte desert that differ in plant structure and availability, and in predation risk. At Ñacuñán plant cover is 54.3%, the major risk of predation is from raptors. At El Leoncito plant cover is 21.9%, the predation risk is similar by raptors and carnivores. In addition we investigated whether olfactory cues for different predators may elicit different antipredator responses in absence of visual cues. This was done by presenting feces of two predators and controls in an experimental set-up. The exposed individuals reduced their activity in response to feces of both predators and not in response to the control, but they did not respond in the same way to each predator (their response to each predator was not the same). The results show that M. australis recognizes different predators through both sight and smell, and that the response may be influenced by vegetation structure., The antipredator response of rodents may depend on the species of predator and the structure of the vegetation. To investigate these effects, we compared the antipredator response of Microcavia australis to two predator models. We used two populations occurring at sites of the Monte desert that differ in plant structure and availability, and in predation risk. At Ñacuñán plant cover is 54.3%, the major risk of predation is from raptors. At El Leoncito plant cover is 21.9%, the predation risk is similar by raptors and carnivores. In addition we investigated whether olfactory cues for different predators may elicit different antipredator responses in absence of visual cues. This was done by presenting feces of two predators and controls in an experimental set-up. The exposed individuals reduced their activity in response to feces of both predators and not in response to the control, but they did not respond in the same way to each predator (their response to each predator was not the same). The results show that M. australis recognizes different predators through both sight and smell, and that the response may be influenced by vegetation structure.]

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/156853908783929115
2008-06-01
2015-04-28

Affiliations: 1: Unidad de Zoología y Ecología, GIB, IADIZA-CONICET, Casilla de Correo 507, 5500 Mendoza, Argentina; 2: Dendrocronología-IANIGLA-CRICYT, 5500 Mendoza, Argentina; 3: Parque Nacional El Leoncito, Barreal San Juan, Argentina; 4: Instituto y Museo de Ciencias Naturales, 5500 Mendoza, Argentina

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to email alerts
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Name:*
    Email:*
    Your details
    Name:*
    Email:*
    Department:*
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
     
     
     
    Other:
     
    Behaviour — Recommend this title to your library

    Thank you

    Your recommendation has been sent to your librarian.

  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation