Repellents to Reduce Cable Gnawing by Wild Norway Rats

Shumake, Stephen A.; Sterner, R. A. Y. T.; Gaddis, Stanley E.

doi:10.2307/3803211

Cited by 18 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In more recent time, additional problems have been associated with commensal rodents. For instance, rodents can destroy power and ICT cables, and damage insulation and other building materials (Shumake et al 2000). This not only results in direct costs to the infrastructure, but may also impede work and result in dangerous situations when people are relying on sensitive life-saving equipment (e.g., in hospitals).…”

Section: Setting the Scenementioning

confidence: 99%

Anticoagulant Rodenticides and Wildlife: Introduction

Brink

Elliott

Shore

et al. 2017

Emerging Topics in Ecotoxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Setting the Scenementioning

confidence: 99%

Anticoagulant Rodenticides and Wildlife: Introduction

Brink

Elliott

Shore

et al. 2017

Emerging Topics in Ecotoxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In this case, we recommend using an antenna gauge of more than 0.3 mm and that at least the base of the antenna be protected by dental acrylic. If possible, the antenna cable should additionally be treated with a repellent but the efficiency of this protection depends on the manner in which the repellent is applied (Shumake et al 1999(Shumake et al ,2000 and still needs to be tested for whip antennae.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mortality of radio‐tracked wild rats in relation to transmitter weight and resilience of transmitters in relation to their design

Theuerkauf¹,

Rouys²,

Chatreau³

2007

Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We assessed mortality of rats in relation to transmitter weight and tested several types of rat transmitters in order to provide recommendations for their design. We used 21 collars with radio-or dummy transmitters, made of either epoxy or dental acrylic, with external or internal (inside the collar) antennae, on 20 rats (Rattus rattus and R. exulans) in rainforests of New Caledonia. We found that rats chewed and destroyed most external whip antennae and transmitters made of epoxy. Rats, especially males during the reproductive season, with transmitters that weighed 4.7-7.1% of their body weight, had a higher mortality than those with transmitters that weighed 2.1-4.0% of their body weight. We recommend keeping transmitter weight down to about 4% of body weight, constructing transmitters exclusively of dental acrylic and using internal antennae if their heavier weight and lower range do not cause problems for the study.

show abstract

“…Many experiments with laboratory rodents have revealed the irritant properties of capsaicin (Hilker et al 1967;Rozin et al 1979;Prescott 1999;Shumake et al 2000;Simmons et al 2001), but a deeper exploration of the literature yields at least four reasons to suspect rodents and other mammals may frequently consume chili fruits in the Weld. First, Weld studies on the application of capsaicin to reduce damage to crops and electrical wiring by rodents and other mammals often conclude that capsaicin either has no eVect or an eVect that quickly disappears over time (Swihart and Conover 1991;Andelt et al 1994;Wagner and Nolte 2000;Bosland 2001;Santilli et al 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

A field test of the directed deterrence hypothesis in two species of wild chili

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The directed deterrence hypothesis posits that secondary metabolites in ripe fruit function to deter fruit consumption by vertebrates that do not disperse seeds, while not impacting consumption by those that do. We tested this hypothesis in two species of wild chilies (Capsicum spp.). Both produce fruits that contain capsaicinoids, the compounds responsible for the pungency of chilies. Previous work suggests seed-dispersing birds but not seed-destroying rodents consume chili fruits, presumably because rodents are deterred by capsaicin. However, fruit removal from chili plants by rodents and other mammals has not been previously explored. Because laboratory rodents can develop a preference for capsaicin, it is quite possible that wild rodents are natural consumers of chili fruits. We monitored the fate of 125 marked fruits of Capsicum chacoense and 291 fruits of Capsicum annuum. For both species, essentially all fruit removal occurred during the day, when rodents are inactive. Video monitoring revealed fruit removal only by birds, mostly by species known to disperse chili seeds in viable condition. Furthermore, these species are from taxonomic groups that tend to specialize on lipid-rich fruits. Both species of chili produce fruits that are unusually high in lipids (35% in C. chacoense, 24% in C. annuum). These results support the directed deterrence hypothesis and suggest that fruiting plants distinguish between seed predators and seed dispersers by producing fruits that repel the former and attract the latter.

show abstract

Repellents to Reduce Cable Gnawing by Wild Norway Rats

Cited by 18 publications

References 6 publications

Anticoagulant Rodenticides and Wildlife: Introduction

Anticoagulant Rodenticides and Wildlife: Introduction

Mortality of radio‐tracked wild rats in relation to transmitter weight and resilience of transmitters in relation to their design

A field test of the directed deterrence hypothesis in two species of wild chili

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About