Natural bait additives improve trapping success of common voles, Microtus arvalis

Schlötelburg, Annika; Jakob, Gerhard; Bellingrath-Kimura, Sonoko D.; Jacob, Jens

doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2018.08.013

Cited by 7 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Field studies are required to confirm trapability when the multitude of abiotic and biotic factors present in the agricultural landscape are allowed to affect the behavior of voles. The trapping of rodents can be influenced by interspecific interactions, intraspecific communication, trap density, trap layout, baiting, season, and microhabitat . Additionally, it is possible that voles avoid traps because of odor marks left by predators.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In autumn 2018, the trapability of tub‐traps and standby‐boxes (Andermatt Biocontrol AG, Grossdietwil, Switzerland) for voles was tested in two seminatural enclosures at the Julius Kühn‐Institute in Münster, Germany (51.974923 N, 7.566350 E). Each rectangular, rodent‐proof and predator‐proof enclosure (3 × 4 m) was sown with a local grass mix; for further detail, see Schlötelburg et al . Voles ( n = 28) were trapped on grasslands around Münster, individually marked with a passive integrated transponder (PIT) tag (Lux‐IDent, Lanškroun, Czech Republic), and kept individually in standard cages for at least 3 weeks before release into an enclosure.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…). Every trap contained alfalfa‐wheat‐maltol pellets (15 g), which are particularly attractive to common voles . Traps were checked every 2 h until 8:00 PM.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Every trap contained alfalfa-wheat-maltol pellets (15 g), which are particularly attractive to common voles. 17 Traps were checked every 2 h until 8:00 PM. Trapped voles were returned to the cage after their PIT numbers were recorded.…”

Section: Trapability Of Common Voles (Enclosure Trials)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Self‐service traps inspected by avian and terrestrial predators as a management option for rodents

Schlötelburg

Plekat

Bellingrath-Kimura

et al. 2019

Pest Management Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Worldwide, serval rodent species are major pests in agricultural landscapes. A vole‐specific tub‐trap combining trapping and natural predators was developed to minimize the migration of rodents into agricultural crops. The trap was tested in enclosures in terms of its trapability of common voles (Microtus arvalis Pallas) and in the field regarding predator access and removal of voles, both in comparison to a commercially available self‐service trap (standby‐box). RESULTS The trapability of voles was equal for tub‐traps and standby‐boxes. The removal of voles occurred four times more often from tub‐traps by a wider variety of predators (e.g. smaller terrestrial predators, birds of prey). Visits by predators were most likely if study sites were not surrounded by artificial surfaces (70% visit probability by terrestrial predators) or if they were in areas that were more than 25% (semi)natural (95% visit probability by avian predators). Furthermore, visits by avian predators increased with time and a learning effect could be demonstrated for magpies (Pica pica L.). From the first to the fifth day, the visit probability of magpies quadrupled. CONCLUSIONS Visits by predators decreased with increasing cover of artificial surfaces or decreasing cover of (semi)natural areas, proving the importance of (semi)natural areas in the agricultural landscape. Long‐term trials with different baiting techniques and in landscapes characterized by organic farming should be conducted to ensure the regular removal of voles. The use of tub‐traps that are frequently visited by predators could support crop protection, which might limit the use of rodenticide and the associated exposure risk of non‐target wildlife. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…). Every trap contained alfalfa‐wheat‐maltol pellets (15 g), which are particularly attractive to common voles . Traps were checked every 2 h until 8:00 PM.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Trapability Of Common Voles (Enclosure Trials)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Self‐service traps inspected by avian and terrestrial predators as a management option for rodents

Schlötelburg

Plekat

Bellingrath-Kimura

et al. 2019

Pest Management Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to Barnett (1963), baits must have complex flavours to attract commensal rats. Oils could increase bait acceptance and palatability (Meehan, 1984;Jackson et al, 2016), but the capture rates seemed to be limited by their odour (Schlötelburg et al, 2018). Barnett (1963) stated that most wild rats would sample everything within a range to avoid unfamiliar food which could contribute to bait avoidance.…”

Section: Bait Preferencementioning

confidence: 99%

Commensal Small Mammal Species and Bait Preferences in Urban Areas of Penang Island

Amni

Ravindran

Saufi

et al. 2019

MJS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Physical trapping is an important first step in controlling pest populations and species identification; and bait preferences are crucial information for effective management. This study was conducted to explore species diversity and bait preferences of commensal species in urban areas on Penang Island. Live trapping was carried out in eight sampling sites on Penang Island in commercial and residential areas. Eight different type of baits were used; apple and peanut butter (APB), white bread and peanut butter (BPB), salted fish (SF), salted fish and peanut butter (SFPB), white bread and fish extract (BFE), fried chicken leftover (FCL), vegetables and peanut butter (VPB) and sausages (S). The most successful bait was the high protein bait, fried chicken leftover (FCL), with a capture success rate of 35.56%. We also analysed the bait preferences for the different species of small mammals captured in our study. Five species of small mammals were captured in our study sites: Rattus norvegicus, Rattus rattus, Mus musculus, Bandicota bengalensis and Suncus murinus. Norway rats, R. norvegicus was the most trapped species in commercial areas whereas lesser bandicoot rats, B. bengalensis was the most captured species in residential areas.

show abstract

Technical assessment of mechanical and electronic traps to facilitate future improvements in trap efficacy and humaneness

Walther,

Bohot,

Ennen

et al. 2024

Pest Management Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUNDSnap traps and electronic traps are the main devices for non‐chemical management of rodent pests. Traps should be efficient and should not cause unnecessary suffering of animals. Harmonised, systematic test methods are required to make sure that mechanical forces or electrical parameters are optimal to achieve swift unconsciousness and death. This study aimed to describe technical trap properties that can be used to facilitate future improvements in trap efficacy and humaneness.METHODSWe constructed a device to assess spring energy, triggering force, impulse and clamping force and developed an arrangement to assess effective voltage, current, effective current and effective energy taking effect on rodent bodies in electronic traps ‐ all without the use of animals. Descriptive data of trap characteristics were collated.RESULTSAll factors showed variability among snap trap models and trigger types, and there was considerable overlap between mouse and rat traps. For most trap models, there was no difference among new snap traps and traps that had been trigged 20 times. Effective current and effective energy decreased with lower voltage input, but the traps indicated weak battery by LED lights, and one model switched of automatically when voltage was insufficient.CONCLUSIONWith the device and the electronic arrangement, the majority of snap trap models and electronic traps available on the market can be assessed in a standardised and repeatable way. Matching the data generated in this study with data on time for trapped target animals to reach irreversible unconsciousness and experiences from pest control practitioners should allow relating properties of traps to efficacy and animal welfare issues. This can support further development and optimisation of traps for non‐chemical rodent pest control.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

show abstract

Natural bait additives improve trapping success of common voles, Microtus arvalis

Cited by 7 publications

References 39 publications

Self‐service traps inspected by avian and terrestrial predators as a management option for rodents

Self‐service traps inspected by avian and terrestrial predators as a management option for rodents

Commensal Small Mammal Species and Bait Preferences in Urban Areas of Penang Island

Technical assessment of mechanical and electronic traps to facilitate future improvements in trap efficacy and humaneness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About