Dispersal of common dormiceMuscardinus avellanarius in a habitat mosaic

Movement patterns and genetic diversity of wild and reintroduced common dormice, Muscardinus avellanarius

“…This short movement behaviour has important implications for the conservation of the species, where it can increase considerably the vulnerability of populations to extinction. However, the detection of some immigrants at both population sites and documented report of a long distance moved by marked juveniles (i.e., more than 1 km) (Büchner, 2008;Juškaitis, 2008;Juškaitis and Büchner, 2010) would appear to have increased genetic diversity, and as such, genetic monitoring may be used to identify new dormouse populations. Since there is evidence of sex-biased movement and that reintroduced dormice retain their natural movement behaviour, in the future, it would be useful for managers of reintroduction efforts to consider the spatial aspects and the sex ratio of released animals.…”

“…Moreover, the possibility of immigrant dormice at both sites is intriguing given this species' conservation status. Evidence of dormice inhabiting parts of the surrounding area at Bontuchel (Jones, 2007) that could serve as potential source patches, implies that dormice occasionally move further than 1 km, and across inhospitable agricultural habitat (although likely using hedgerows as corridors) (Büchner, 2008;Juškaitis, 2008). Potential immigrants at Wych raise the possibility of neighbouring dormice populations, and indeed, these immigrants may have augmented the genetic diversity of the reintroduced Wych population.…”

“…Generally, reintroduced populations of M. avellanarius have appeared viable, with records of breeding and marked animals spreading into adjacent habitats (Mitchell-Jones and White, 2009). The latter observation is interesting as observations from tagged animals indicate that adult M. avellanarius are relatively sedentary -typically moving less than 500 m during their lifetime (Morris, 2004;Büchner, 2008;Juškaitis, 2008). Of course, these estimates of movement may suffer from the potential limitations associated with directly tracking animals (see e.g., Koenig et al, 1996;Broquet and Petit, 2009).…”

“…Of course, these estimates of movement may suffer from the potential limitations associated with directly tracking animals (see e.g., Koenig et al, 1996;Broquet and Petit, 2009). Many researchers have used direct methods (e.g., capture-mark-recapture, radio-telemetry) to study movement and dispersal in common dormice (see e.g., Bright and Morris, 1992;Juškaitis, 2005;Büchner, 2008;reviews in Juškaitis, 2008;Juškaitis and Büchner, 2010), but no one has yet evaluated movement patterns and subsequent spatial genetic structure using genetic methods for the species. Moreover, with regard to observations of breeding in reintroduced populations, a molecular genetic characterisation is required to assess the wider success of a reintroduction programme (see Grenier et al, 2007).…”

Nest box use by woodland dormice (Graphiurus murinus): the influence of life cycle and nest box placement

“…Due to their small size (adult body weight ranges from 15 to 200 g) and nocturnal and hole-nesting habits, dormice are notoriously difficult to study in their natural habitat without the help of live traps, radio transmitters, and nest boxes. The latter have been used by zoologists to collect information on aspects as diverse as geographical distribution (e.g., Andera 1994;Juškaitis 1994), population structure and dynamics (e.g., Burgess et al 2003;Juškaitis 2003;Kryštufek et al 2003), reproductive cycle and breeding patterns (e.g., Juškaitis 1997a; Buechner et al 2003), spatial behavior (Juškaitis 1997b;Buechner 2008), or physiology (Juškaitis 2005). Wooden nest boxes are also used extensively in countrywide monitoring programs (Bright et al 2006).…”