Because closely related species are likely to be ecologically similar owing to common ancestry, they should show some degree of differentiation in order to coexist. We studied 2 morphologically similar congeneric species, the golden-brown mouse lemur (Microcebus ravelobensis) and the gray mouse lemur (M. murinus). These species are found in partial sympatry in the dry deciduous forest in northwestern Madagascar. We investigated whether 1) feeding niche differentiation and/or 2) a reduction in locomotor activity during periods of food shortage, which might reflect an energy saving strategy, can explain the coexistence of these 2 lemur species. To obtain feeding and behavioral data, we conducted focal observations of 11 female Microcebus murinus and 9 female M. ravelobensis during 11 months from 2007 to 2008 and collected fecal samples for 6 mo. We monitored the phenology of 272 plant specimens and trapped arthropods to determine food availability. Results Int J Primatol (2011) 32:566-586 revealed interspecific differences in 1) relative proportion of consumed food resources, resulting in a merely partial dietary overlap, and in 2) relative importance of seasonally varying food resources throughout the year. In addition, females of Microcebus murinus showed a reduction in locomotor activity during the early dry season, which might reflect an energy-saving strategy and might further reduce potential competition with M. ravelobensis over limited food resources. To conclude, a combination of interspecific feeding niche differentiation and differences in locomotor activity appears to facilitate the coexistence of Microcebus murinus and M. ravelobensis.

The use of leaf nests has been documented in several mouse lemur species over the last few decades, including the golden-brown mouse lemur. Nest construction, however, has only rarely been observed and detailed descriptions of this process are lacking so far. We aim to determine the relative importance of leaf nests as shelters for the golden-brown mouse lemur, and to test predictions concerning the role of thermoregulation, safety (i.e., protection of infants), and of interspecific competition with the sympatric gray mouse lemurs in regulating nest use. Finally, we intend to clarify whether and how Microcebus ravelobensis constructs the nests, and we provide physical descriptions of seven leaf nests. Nocturnal focal observations were carried out from May 2007 to January 2008 on 18 females, and sleeping sites were regularly monitored during a six-month period. Data were collected from two study sites, one with exclusive presence of M. ravelobensis, and one with co-existence of the two mouse lemur species. Sixty-five out of 379 identified daily sleeping sites were leaf nests. These represented a total of 35 different leaf nests, used by 15 out of 18 females. The relative leaf nest use differed between sites during five out of six months, but without a consistent pattern. Interspecific competition can therefore not explain leaf nest use. Leaf nest use differed seasonally and may be partly explained by thermoregulatory advantages in the site with lower minimum temperatures. Nest use was furthermore higher than expected in both sites during the rearing season that indicates the role of nests in infant protection. For the first time, we could confirm that golden-brown mouse lemurs build leaf nests themselves. Nest building lasted between 46 and 68 min, which shows that this task is time consuming and therefore probably costly.