2020
DOI: 10.1007/s13364-020-00476-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evidence for different bottom-up mechanisms in wood mouse (Apodemus sylvaticus) and bank vole (Myodes glareolus) population fluctuations in Southern Norway

Abstract: Animals that feed on forest tree seeds, such as Apodemus mice, increase in number after a mast year. At high latitudes, there is a similar delayed response by Myodes voles to high seed crops of bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus), but here the mechanism is hypothesised to be increased forage quality, caused by a trade-off between reproduction and defence in the plants. Both Apodemus mice and Myodes voles eat berries, but only the latter feed on bilberry plants. Hence, only Myodes voles are predicted to respond to b… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In both Agder and Varaldskogen, there was a rather high berry index in 1997 and 2001, but in 1998, voles were abundant only in Agder, and in 2002 only in Varaldskogen. The suggested negative factor for small rodents in Agder in 2002 was low temperatures prior to the first snowfall (Selås, 2020), whereas at Varaldskogen the ground was already well covered with snow prior to the cold spell.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…In both Agder and Varaldskogen, there was a rather high berry index in 1997 and 2001, but in 1998, voles were abundant only in Agder, and in 2002 only in Varaldskogen. The suggested negative factor for small rodents in Agder in 2002 was low temperatures prior to the first snowfall (Selås, 2020), whereas at Varaldskogen the ground was already well covered with snow prior to the cold spell.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is no doubt that predators affect prey abundance, but in our view, their contribution is most likely to enhance or dampen population cycles, depending on type of predator (specialist or generalist) and the availability of alternative prey. Temporal asynchrony in the fluctuation pattern of sympatric rodent species is not unusual (Framstad, 2020; Hörnfeldt, 1994; Krebs, Boonstra, Gilbert, Kenney, & Boutin, 2019; Selås, 2020), a pattern not in accordance with the specialist predation hypothesis. Also the fact that rodent cycles exist in the absence of small mustelids (Graham & Lambin, 2002; Krebs et al, 2002; Menyushina, Ehrich, Henden, Ims, & Ovsyanikov, 2012) refutes predation as a universal explanation (Oli, 2019).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations