What’s Up with House Mice? A Review

Abstract

The house mouse is probably the most widespread invasive mammalian species, being ubiquitous worldwide. In commensal situations, they are known mainly for property damage, for consumption and contamination of stored foods, as a noise/sanitation/odor nuisance, and as a vector of some diseases. In some field settings, they also cause considerable damage to field crops and to natural resources, such as when introduced to islands. We rely heavily upon sanitation, rodent-proofing, capture devices, and rodenticides to control populations and reduce damage. However, a number of situations exist whereby these traditional methods are not adequate or appropriate: crop damage during "mouse plagues" in Australia, livestock feed consumption and contamination and disease hazards in poultry and animal facilities in the U.S., and natural resource damage on small islands. In this review, challenges and some potential solutions to house mouse management are presented, including genetic resistance to anticoagulants, the effectiveness of baits given abundant food resources, the re-invasion problem and need for perimeter strategies, efforts with fertility control, and the need for effective multi-capture trap devices. In difficult situations, an IPM strategy that incorporates a combination of methods closely integrated with land uses and management practices is necessary.

Non-Trapping, Non-Invasive, Rapid Surveillance Sampling Using Tracking Tunnels, Trail Cameras, and eDNA to Determine Presence of Pest Predator Species

“…House mice had not been previously discovered at ENF or NWR despite attempts of live-trapping using Tomahawk traps at both locations and using tracking plates, which is similar to tracking tunnels but without the tunnel, in the ENF (Engeman et al 2006). The presence of house mice along ENF Highway 191 gradient, and their absence at other interior forest habitats in the ENF that were sampled (Shiels and Ramírez de Arellano 2018), may be due to their highly commensal behavior (Witmer and Jojola 2006), small home ranges (Shiels 2010), and likely points of introduction (i.e., via cargo transported up the highway). Alternatively, invasive rats were found at all elevations and habitats sampled in the ENF (Shiels and Ramírez de Arellano 2018), have much larger home ranges than house mice (Shiels 2010), and have been documented in the ENF for over 60 years (Weinbren et al 1970).…”

Effect of pre-feeding and sodium fluoroacetate (1080) concentration on bait acceptance by house mice

“…Witmer and Jojola (2006) estimated a requirement of 10-20% of bodyweight per day; and Clapperton (2006) estimated that mice need to eat approximately 17% of their bodyweight per day to maintain mass. Given these relatively high daily intake requirements, a significant decrease in food intake over 2 days represents a significant metabolic cost, thus it seems important for mice to discern toxic from non-toxic food as quickly as possible.…”

“…Pre-feeding is often used as a strategy to counter neophobic responses towards an unfamiliar food type in a familiar environment, or increase the likelihood of animals searching for and eating bait once they recognise it as palatable. Although mice are considered opportunistic and neophilic feeders in comparison with rats (Lund 1988;Witmer and Jojola 2006), there have been few studies of the effects of prefeeding on their acceptance of toxic bait.…”

Invasive Rat Research and Management on Tropical Islands: A Case Study in the Iles Eparses

“…A mouse population might increase rapidly after the elimination of rats (Caut et al 2007). Mice have particularly irruptive dynamics and could very quickly reach the carrying capacity of their environment (Witmer and Jojola 2006). However, mouse impacts on the Iles Eparses, especially on seabirds and reptiles, remain negligible compared to those of rats.…”