Geographical distribution and habitat occurrence of the Water Shrew (Neomys fodiens) in the Weald of South‐East England

Abstract

A survey of 96 sites in a range of riparian habitats in the catchments of five rivers during June–August 1998 used the bait tube method to investigate the geographical distribution and habitat occurrence of Water Shrews (Neomys fodiens) in the Weald of South‐East England. Water Shrews were found at 42% of sites, and were widely distributed in all river catchments except the Mole. They occurred in many riparian habitats, including rivers, streams, canals and ditches, with a range of physical and biotic characteristics. There were no signs of habitat avoidance in response to human disturbance but Water Shrews were absent from the river catchment with lowest water quality. Logistic regression analysis was used to model the effect of habitat variables on the presence of Water Shrews, with current speed, water depth, bank incline and bank‐side vegetation identified as important variables. Fast‐flowing shallow waters had a significant positive effect on their presence, whereas scarce herbaceous vegetation and a bank of low incline had a significant negative effect. These habitat variables appear to be reliable indicators of the probability of finding Water Shrews at a particular site, and have implications for habitat management and conservation.

Comparison of diet and prey selectivity of the Pyrenean desman and the Eurasian water shrew using next-generation sequencing methods

“…swiftly-flowing streams with numerous shelters (e.g. cavities) on the riverbeds (Greenwood et al, 2002;Keckel et al, 2014). N. fodiens is also known as an opportunistic feeder consuming both aquatic (e.g., crustaceans, insect larvae) and terrestrial (e.g, coleopterans, gastropods, spiders, earthworms) prey (Castién and Gosálbez, 1999;Churchfield, 1985;Churchfield and Rychlik, 2006;Haberl, 2002).…”

“…N. fodiens is also known as an opportunistic feeder consuming both aquatic (e.g., crustaceans, insect larvae) and terrestrial (e.g, coleopterans, gastropods, spiders, earthworms) prey (Castién and Gosálbez, 1999;Churchfield, 1985;Churchfield and Rychlik, 2006;Haberl, 2002). Moreover, N. fodiens exhibits a similar polyphasic activity pattern as G. pyrenaicus (Melero et al, 2014), with activity phases varying across seasons (Churchfield, 1984;Greenwood et al, 2002;Keckel et al, 2014;Rychlik, 2000). Despite important similarities in their habitat, resource preferences and life style, few studies have focused on the trophic overlap between N. fodiens and G. pyrenaicus to date.…”

Advances in the conservation of British mammals, 1954–2004: 50 years of progress with The Mammal Society

“…A preliminary survey of water shrews Neomys fodiens (Churchfield, Barber & Quinn, 2000; Greenwood, Churchfield & Hickey, 2002) developed methodology and indicated the species’ regional status and distribution, and suggested optimal habitats. It became a national Mammal Society survey in 2003 (Shearer, 2003a) established for 2 years with funding from the Environment Agency and the Endangered British Mammals Fund.…”

An integrated monitoring programme for terrestrial mammals in Britain

“…However, Longworth trapping has proved extremely successful for monitoring a variety of small mammals (Flowerdew et al ., 2004), including hitherto under‐recorded species such as the yellow‐necked mouse (Marsh, Poulton & Harris, 2001), and so we have opted for this approach wherever possible. There are problems catching species such as pygmy shrew, and possibly water shrew, and here hair‐tubes and/or faecal‐tubes (Churchfield, Barber & Quinn, 2000; Greenwood, Churchfield & Hickey, 2002) are likely to be more appropriate monitoring techniques. Furthermore, whilst hair‐tubes may be suitable for species such as wood mouse (Baker et al ., 2003), there are a number of inherent problems for other species, e.g.…”