DOCSLIB.ORG

Raptor Predation on Pocket Gopher Populations by the Use of Hunting Perches

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Raptor Predation on Pocket Gopher Populations by the Use of Hunting Perches Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 1972-08-01 Raptor predation on pocket gopher populations by the use of hunting perches Robert C. Christensen Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Life Sciences Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Christensen, Robert C., "Raptor predation on pocket gopher populations by the use of hunting perches" (1972). Theses and Dissertations. 7658. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/7658 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. /:"/ ./ RAPTORPREDATION ON POCKET GOPHER POPULATIONS BYTHE USE OF HUNTINGPERCHES A Thesis Presented to the Department of Zoology Brigham Young University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science by Robert c. Christensen August 1972 11 This thesis by Robert C, Christensen is accepted in its present form by the Department of Zoology of Brigham Young University as satis­ fying the thesis requirement for the degree of Master of Science, :;_� �f., /f?z_ ?/Date Typed by Ann L, Spears 111 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Grateful acknowledgment is made for the valuable suggestions and help given by the chairman of my advisory committee, Dr, Joseph R. Murphy, and for his aid in acquiring research funds from the National Audubon Society. Deep appreciation is also made for the suggestions and advice of the other members of my committee, Dr. H. Duane Smith and Dr, Odell Julander, I wish to express my thanks tow. Frank Savage of the Uinta National Forest and Jim Kiml::al of the Wasatch National Forest for their help and concern in the initiation and carry-through of this research problem, I am grateful for the field assistance received from my three younger brothers and for the valuable assistance of my wife, Kathy, in both field work and manuscript preparation, The Department of Zoology, Brigham Young University, supplied laboratory space and equipment, iv TABIEOF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTSe t a e I t • e e e a e • e I e e I I ■ I e I I I e 111 LIST OF TABIES t e I I t t t I I I t I I I t I I I I I e I I t e I V LIST OF FIGURESt I I I I t I 8 I I t t e I • • • • • • • • • • • • vi INTRODUCTION• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 REVIEWOF LITERATURE• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 4 DESCRIPTIONOF STUDYAREA • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 8 Location • • , • , , • , • • • • • • • • • • • • • , , , , 8 Topography , , • , • , • • • , , • , , • • , , , • • , , , 12 Clima.te , , , , , , • , , , , , , , • , , , • , , • , , , , 14 Vegetation , , , , , , , , • , • • , , , • , • • • • • • • 15 Animal Influents • , , • , •• , , , •• , , •••••• , 18 Grazing and HumanUtilization •• , , •• , • • • • • • • • 22 METHODSAND PROCEDURES·., , , , , • • • • • , • , • , • , , • , • , 24 RESULTS• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • JO Raptor Nests , , • , , , • , , • • , • • , • , , , , • • • JO Seasonal Variation in Raptor Numbers and Occurrence, • • • Jl Raptor Interaction •••• , , , • , , , • , , , -. , • • • J4 Raptor Utilization of Perches and Telephone Peles. , •• , 35 Raptor Utilization of Tree Perches , , •• , , • , • • • • 41 Prey Analysis • • • • , , , • , , , • , , • , • , • • , , • 42 Summaryof Prey Species Occurrence , , • , • , , , •• , , 45 Trapping Results • , , , • , •• , , •• , , , ••• , • , 47 Gopher Population Analysis • , ••• , , , • , • , • • • , 50 DISCUSSIONAND CONCLUSIONSt I I ■ I I t t I t a · I I I t I I t I I 5? SUMMARY••• • • I a I ■ t t I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 76 LITERATURECITED , • • • , , , , • • • • • • , , • • • • • • • • • ?9 V LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1, Vegetative analysis of Sink Hollow study area. • • • • • • • 16 2, Cumulative monthly signs of large raptor utilization of hunt- ing perches and telephone poles in Sink Hollow, 1970 and 1971 ■ I I • • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I a 37 3• Comparison of prey occurrence under perches and telephone poles in Strawberry Valley, 1970 & 1971 • , •••• , • • 46 4, Semimonthly composition of prey individuals in pellets and prey remains found under the perches and telephone poles in Sink Hollow, 1970. , , ••• , • , , •• , , • • • • • 48 5. Semimonthly composition of prey individuals in pellets and prey remains found under the perches and telephone poles in Sink Hollow, 1971 • , , •• • • , , , , • ••• • • • • 49 6. Number of animals trapped per 300 trap-nights per acre • • • 52 7. Comparison of number of new gopher mounds per 0,10 acre for 1970 and 1971 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 54 8. Regression analysis of the relationship of distance from hunting perches to number of new gopher mounds ••• , • , 55 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figures Page 1. Map showing location of study areas in Wasatch County, Utah • • , , , , • • • • • • , , • • , • , , • • • • I I I 9 2. Map of Sink Hollow study area showing location of hunting perches, telephone lines, and Long-eared Owl nest , , , • 10 J, Map of Big Flat area showing location of hunting perch •• , 11 4. Aerial photograph of the Sink Hollow study area ••••• , • l) 5. Aerial photograph of the Big Flat study area , •• , , , , • l) 6. Camera detecting device set up by perch no, 1 with perch no, 2 and ma.in telephone line in l::a.ckground , •• , , , • 26 7, Assorted ra.ptor pellets found under perches and telephone poles • • • • • • • • • • • • , • • • • • • • • • , , , , .26 8, Assorted skulls and osseous remains found under perches and telephone poles ••••••• • • ••• , •••• , , • , 27 9. Dissected ra.ptor pellets showing fur and osseous remains , • 27 10, Occurrence of ra.ptor species in Sink Hollow area, 1970 & 1971 I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '.32 11, Swainson's Ha.wkon hunting perch • • , • • • • , • • • • • , 39 12, Semimonthly occurrence of prey individuals in pellet and prey remains for 1970 and 1971 • • • , , • • • , • • • • , 50 lJ, Percent frequency, percent composition, and total numbers of gophers found in prey analysis, 1970 • • • • • • • , • 51 14, Percent frequency, percent composition, and total numbers of gophers found in prey analysis, 1971 • , • • • , • • • 51 15, Gopher winter casts on Big Flat, June 7, 1971 • • • • • • • • 53 INTRODUCTION The Northern Pocket Gopher (Thomomystalpoides) is commonon open range lands at high altitudes, and range management personnel have long been confronted with the problem of controlling gopher pop- ulations. Although some studies indicate that pocket gophers have little or no injurious effects on range in good condition, other stud- ies show that large populations of these animals can seriously damage seeded ranges and ranges in poor condition (Colorado State University Exp, Stat., 1960). Julander, Low, and Morris (1969) indicate that in areas where gophers have reached populations of 27-39 gophers per acre, forage removal by gophers may be from 4.75 to 7 pounds of fresh weight vegetation per acre per day. This converts to 435-670 pounds of air- dry plant material per acre per year. On depleted ranges this repre- sents a large percentage of the total annual growth. Hansen (1965) re- ported that in 1961 gophers numbered 52 per acre on Black Mesa, Colo- rado, Such a high density of gophers could have drastic effects on range soils and vegetation. Considerable research has been done by government agencies on various methods of controlling pocket gophers. Dixon (1922) and the Colorado State University Experiment Station (1960) outlined some of these methods. Indirect controls involve such practices as (1) the use of herbicides (2,4-D), (2) water manipulation (flood-irrigation), (3) crop rotation, and (4) the encouragement and protection of the 2 gopher's natural predators. Direct methods of control consist of (1) the use of poison 1:aits (hand-1:aiting, probing methods, mechanical dis- pensing, and mechanical burrow-building), (2) control trapping (good for small areas only), and (3) fumigating. The primary methods that have been used on a large scale 1:asis are those involving toxic baits. It is not known what adverse effects these substances may have on the environment. Even with their use, effective economical means of con- trolling pocket gophers on range lands still remain a problem (Kimbal, Poulson, and Savage, 1970). In 1968 it was noted by Uinta National Forest personnel that in a.n area of high gopher activity where a telephone line traversed Strawberry Valley, Wasatch County,· Utah, there was a distinct absence of gopher mounds around the base of each telephone pole. Closer ex- amination of the area under the poles revealed the presence of rodent hair and bones as well as fecal droppings of ra.ptorial birds. On Octo- ber 18, 1968~ a. 12 foot pole with a six foot cross-beam was erected in an area of high gopher activity. One hundred thirty-one active mounds were counted in a radius of 35 feet around the pole. One year later on October 15, 1969, there were no active gopher mounds within a 37 foot radius of the pole, although gopher activity had not decreased over the total area. Indications were that ra.ptors had effectively used the pole as a hunting perch, and in so4oing had reduced the num- ber of gophers in the immediate locality of the pole. (Kimbal, et al., 1970). Raptorial birds often use telephone poles, tree branches, and fence posts
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2013 Draft Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan
    DRAFT Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan Derek W. Stinson Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Program 600 Capitol Way N Olympia, Washington January 2013 In 1990, the Washington Wildlife Commission adopted procedures for listing and de-listing species as endangered, threatened, or sensitive and for writing recovery and management plans for listed species (WAC 232-12-297, Appendix A). The procedures, developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies, require preparation of recovery plans for species listed as threatened or endangered. Recovery, as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is the process by which the decline of an endangered or threatened species is arrested or reversed, and threats to its survival are neutralized, so that its long-term survival in nature can be ensured. This is the Draft Washington State Status Update and Recovery Plan for the Mazama Pocket Gopher. It summarizes what is known of the historical and current distribution and abundance of the Mazama pocket gopher in Washington and describes factors affecting known populations and its habitat. It prescribes strategies to recover the species, such as protecting populations and existing habitat, evaluating and restoring habitat, and initiating research and cooperative programs. Target population objectives and other criteria for down-listing to state Sensitive are identified. As part of the State’s listing and recovery procedures, the draft recovery plan is available for a 90-day public comment period. Please submit written comments on this report by 19 April 2013 via e-mail to: [email protected], or by mail to: Endangered Species Section Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98501-1091 This report should be cited as: Stinson, D.
    [Show full text]
  • Tc & Forward & Owls-I-IX
    USDA Forest Service 1997 General Technical Report NC-190 Biology and Conservation of Owls of the Northern Hemisphere Second International Symposium February 5-9, 1997 Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Editors: James R. Duncan, Zoologist, Manitoba Conservation Data Centre Wildlife Branch, Manitoba Department of Natural Resources Box 24, 200 Saulteaux Crescent Winnipeg, MB CANADA R3J 3W3 <[email protected]> David H. Johnson, Wildlife Ecologist Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA, USA 98501-1091 <[email protected]> Thomas H. Nicholls, retired formerly Project Leader and Research Plant Pathologist and Wildlife Biologist USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station 1992 Folwell Avenue St. Paul, MN, USA 55108-6148 <[email protected]> I 2nd Owl Symposium SPONSORS: (Listing of all symposium and publication sponsors, e.g., those donating $$) 1987 International Owl Symposium Fund; Jack Israel Schrieber Memorial Trust c/o Zoological Society of Manitoba; Lady Grayl Fund; Manitoba Hydro; Manitoba Natural Resources; Manitoba Naturalists Society; Manitoba Critical Wildlife Habitat Program; Metro Propane Ltd.; Pine Falls Paper Company; Raptor Research Foundation; Raptor Education Group, Inc.; Raptor Research Center of Boise State University, Boise, Idaho; Repap Manitoba; Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada; USDI Bureau of Land Management; USDI Fish and Wildlife Service; USDA Forest Service, including the North Central Forest Experiment Station; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; The Wildlife Society - Washington Chapter; Wildlife Habitat Canada; Robert Bateman; Lawrence Blus; Nancy Claflin; Richard Clark; James Duncan; Bob Gehlert; Marge Gibson; Mary Houston; Stuart Houston; Edgar Jones; Katherine McKeever; Robert Nero; Glenn Proudfoot; Catherine Rich; Spencer Sealy; Mark Sobchuk; Tom Sproat; Peter Stacey; and Catherine Thexton.
    [Show full text]
  • Controlling Pocket Gopher Damage to Conifer Seedlings D.S
    FOREST PROTECTION EC 1255 • Revised May 2003 $2.50 Controlling Pocket Gopher Damage to Conifer Seedlings D.S. deCalesta, K. Asman, and N. Allen Contents ocket gophers (or just plain Gopher habits and habitat.............. 1 P “gophers”) damage conifer seed- Control program ........................... 2 lings on thousands of Identifying the pest ......................2 acres in Washington, Assessing the need for treatment ...3 Idaho, and Oregon Damage control techniques ...........3 annually. They invade clearcuts and Applying controls .......................... 7 clip (cut off) roots or Figure 1.—Typical Oregon pocket gopher. Christmas tree plantations .............7 girdle (remove bark from) the bases of conifer seedlings and saplings, causing significant economic losses. Forest plantations ........................ 7 This publication will help you design a program to reduce or eliminate Summary .................................... 8 gopher damage to seedlings and saplings in your forest plantation or Christmas tree farm. Sources of supply ......................... 8 First, we describe pocket gophers, their habits, and habitats. Then we For further information .................. 8 discuss procedures for controlling pocket gopher damages—control techniques, their effectiveness and hazard(s) to the environment, and their use under a variety of tree-growing situations. Gopher habits and habitat Three species of pocket gopher can damage conifer seedlings. The two smaller ones, the northern pocket gopher and the Mazama pocket gopher, are 5 to 9 inches long and brown with some white beneath the chin and belly. The northern gopher is found east of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington and in Idaho; the Mazama lives in Oregon and Washington west of the Cascades. David S. deCalesta, former Exten- The Camas pocket gopher is similar looking, but larger (10 to 12 inches) sion wildlife specialist, and Kim than the two others.
    [Show full text]
  • Tyto Longimembris) in Southern Taiwan
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251774474 Initial Investigation on the Diet of Eastern Grass Owl (Tyto longimembris) in Southern Taiwan ARTICLE in TAIWANIA · JANUARY 2007 CITATIONS READS 2 79 3 AUTHORS, INCLUDING: Hui-Yun Tseng 8 PUBLICATIONS 6 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Available from: Hui-Yun Tseng Retrieved on: 14 January 2016 Taiwania, 52(1): 100-105, 2007 Initial Investigation on the Diet of Eastern Grass Owl (Tyto longimembris) in Southern Taiwan Wen-Loung Lin(1), Yin Wang(1) and Hui-Yun Tseng(2,3) (Manuscript received 4 October, 2006; accepted 26 December, 2006) ABSTRACT: This investigation, undertaken in the two regions of Nanshi and Yujing in Tainan County over the period of 2001 to 2003, included three nests belonging to the Eastern Grass Owl (Tyto longimembris). From these, we collected a total of 157 owl pellets. Analysis and examination of the pellets revealed 329 prey items. More in-depth investigation determined that 95.1% of the Eastern Grass Owl pellets collected consisted of mammal remains, while the remaining 4.9% were made up of bird remains. Of the various types of mammals consumed, rats made up the highest proportion, with a total of 285 rats, accounting for 86.6%. This was followed by 27 shrews and moles, accounting for 8.2%. Hares and birds were seldom caught and consumed. The findings suggested that rats are the main food source of the Eastern Grass Owl, with the Spinus Country-rat (Rattus losea) comprising the majority with 136 counted (41.3%), followed by the Formosan Mouse (Mus caroli) with 96 counted (29.2%).
    [Show full text]
  • Sand Hills Pocket Gopher Geomys Lutescens
    Wyoming Species Account Sand Hills Pocket Gopher Geomys lutescens REGULATORY STATUS USFWS: No special status USFS R2: No special status USFS R4: No special status Wyoming BLM: No special status State of Wyoming: Nongame Wildlife CONSERVATION RANKS USFWS: No special status WGFD: NSS3 (Bb), Tier II WYNDD: G3, S1S3 Wyoming Contribution: HIGH IUCN: Least Concern STATUS AND RANK COMMENTS Sand Hills Pocket Gopher (Geomys lutescens) is assigned a range of state conservation ranks by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database due to uncertainty concerning its abundance in Wyoming and lack of information on population trends in the state. Also, note that the Global rank (G3) is provisional at this time – NatureServe (Arlington, Virginia) has not yet formalized a Global rank for this species. NATURAL HISTORY Taxonomy: Sand Hills Pocket Gopher was formerly considered a subspecies of Plains Pocket Gopher (G. bursarius) and given the sub-specific designation G. b. lutescens 1. It is now considered a full species based on a combination of genetic information and morphology 2 . Though two subspecies of G. lutescens have been suggested, none are widely recognized 3. It is suspected to hybridize with G. bursarius in some localities 4. Description: Like all pocket gophers, Sand Hills Pocket Gopher is adapted to fossorial life with large foreclaws, a heavy skull, strong jaw muscles, and relatively inconspicuous ears and eyes. It is similar in general appearance to the formerly synonymous G. bursarius, which has a sparsely- haired tail and relatively short pelage that can vary substantially in color from buff to black 5. However, G. lutescens is somewhat smaller and lighter in pelage color than G.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Cape Provincial Gazette Vol 15 No
    ·.:.:-:-:-:-:.::p.=~==~ ::;:;:;:;:::::t}:::::::;:;:::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::::;:::;:;:.-:-:.:-:.::::::::::::::::::::::::::-:::-:-:-:-: ..........•............:- ;.:.:.;.;.;.•.;. ::::;:;::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;;:::::. '.' ::: .... , ..:. ::::::::::::::::::::~:~~~~::::r~~~~\~:~ i~ftfj~i!!!J~?!I~~~~I;Ii!!!J!t@tiit):fiftiIit\t~r\t ', : :.;.:.:.:.:.: ::;:;:::::;:::::::::::;:::::::::.::::;:::::::;:::::::::;:;:::;:;:;:;:: :.:.:.: :.:. ::~:}:::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::tf~:::::::::::::::: ;:::;:::;:::;:;:;:::::::::;:;:::::: ::::::;::;:;:;:;=;:;:;:;:;:::;:;:;::::::::;:.: :.;.:.:.;.;.:.;.:.:-:.;.: :::;:' """"~'"W" ;~!~!"IIIIIII ::::::::::;:::::;:;:;:::;:::;:;:;:;:;:::::..;:;:;:::;: 1111.iiiiiiiiiiii!fillimiDw"""'8m\r~i~ii~:i:] :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:':.:.:.::::::::::::::{::::::::::::;:: ;.;:;:;:;:t;:;~:~;j~Ij~j~)~( ......................: ;.: :.:.:.;.:.;.;.;.;.:.:.:.;.;.:.;.;.;.;.:.;.;.:.;.;.:.; :.:.;.:.: ':;:::::::::::-:.::::::;:::::;;::::::::::::: EXTRAORDINARY • BUITENGEWONE Provincial Gazette iGazethi YePhondo Kasete ya Profensi Provinsiale Koerant Vol. 15 KIMBERLEY, 19 DECEMBER 2008 DESEMBER No. 1258 PROVINCE OF THE NORTHERN CAPE 2 No. 1258 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 19 DECEMBER 2008 CONTENTS • INHOUD Page Gazette No. No. No. GENERAL NOTICE· ALGEMENE KENNISGEWING 105 Northern Cape Nature Conservation Bill, 2009: For public comment . 3 1258 105 Noord-Kaap Natuurbewaringswetontwerp, 2009: Vir openbare kommentaar . 3 1258 PROVINSIE NOORD-KAAP BUITENGEWONE PROVINSIALE KOERANT, 19 DESEMBER 2008 No.1258 3 GENERAL NOTICE NOTICE
    [Show full text]
  • The Naked Mole-Rat As an Animal Model in Biomedical Research: Current Perspectives
    Open Access Animal Physiology Dovepress open access to scientific and medical research Open Access Full Text Article REVIEW The naked mole-rat as an animal model in biomedical research: current perspectives Laura-Nadine Schuhmacher Abstract: The naked mole-rat (NMR) is a subterranean rodent that has gained significant Zoé Husson attention from the biomedical research community in recent years as molecular mechanisms Ewan St. John Smith underlying its unusual biology start to be unraveled. With very low external mortality, NMRs have an unusually long lifespan while showing no signs of aging, such as neuro- Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK degeneration or cancer. Furthermore, living underground in large colonies (100 to 300 animals), results in comparatively high carbon dioxide and low oxygen levels, from which NMRs have evolved extreme resistance to both hypoxia and hypercapnia. In this paper we have summarized the latest developments in NMR research and its impact on biomedical research, with the aim of providing a sound background that will inform and inspire further For personal use only. investigations. Keywords: naked mole-rat, longevity, cancer, hypoxia, nociception, pain Introduction The naked mole-rat (NMR) (Heterocephalus glaber) is a subterranean mammal, which has recently gained interest from scientists across a variety of research fields. Unlike the majority of mammals, NMRs are poikilothermic and eusocial, ie, are cold-blooded and have a single breeding female within a colony.1 In addition to these features, which have limited biomedical translatability, NMRs have also evolved several physiological adaptations to habituate to their extreme environmental conditions, which have led researchers to study this mammal with the hypothesis Open Access Animal Physiology downloaded from https://www.dovepress.com/ by 131.111.184.102 on 07-Sep-2017 that by understanding the extreme biology of NMRs, more will be understood about normal mammalian physiology.
    [Show full text]
  • Raptors in the East African Tropics and Western Indian Ocean Islands: State of Ecological Knowledge and Conservation Status
    j. RaptorRes. 32(1):28-39 ¸ 1998 The Raptor ResearchFoundation, Inc. RAPTORS IN THE EAST AFRICAN TROPICS AND WESTERN INDIAN OCEAN ISLANDS: STATE OF ECOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE AND CONSERVATION STATUS MUNIR VIRANI 1 AND RICHARD T. WATSON ThePeregrine Fund, Inc., 566 WestFlying Hawk Lane, Boise,1D 83709 U.S.A. ABSTRACT.--Fromour reviewof articlespublished on diurnal and nocturnal birds of prey occurringin Africa and the western Indian Ocean islands,we found most of the information on their breeding biology comesfrom subtropicalsouthern Africa. The number of published papers from the eastAfrican tropics declined after 1980 while those from subtropicalsouthern Africa increased.Based on our KnoM- edge Rating Scale (KRS), only 6.3% of breeding raptorsin the eastAfrican tropicsand 13.6% of the raptorsof the Indian Ocean islandscan be consideredWell Known,while the majority,60.8% in main- land east Africa and 72.7% in the Indian Ocean islands, are rated Unknown. Human-caused habitat alteration resultingfrom overgrazingby livestockand impactsof cultivationare the main threatsfacing raptors in the east African tropics, while clearing of foreststhrough slash-and-burnmethods is most important in the Indian Ocean islands.We describeconservation recommendations, list priorityspecies for study,and list areasof ecologicalunderstanding that need to be improved. I•y WORDS: Conservation;east Africa; ecology; western Indian Ocean;islands; priorities; raptors; research. Aves rapacesen los tropicos del este de Africa yen islasal oeste del Oc•ano Indico: estado del cono- cimiento eco16gicoy de su conservacitn RESUMEN.--Denuestra recopilacitn de articulospublicados sobre aves rapaces diurnas y nocturnasque se encuentran en Africa yen las islasal oeste del Octano Indico, encontramosque la mayoriade la informaci6n sobre aves rapacesresidentes se origina en la regi6n subtropical del sur de Africa.
    [Show full text]
  • Universidad Veracruzana
    UNIVERSIDAD VERACRUZANA Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas y Agropecuarias Región Orizaba-Córdoba “IMPLEMENTACIÓN DE L AS TÉCNICAS DE BARRIDO Y OPEN-HOLE PARA LA EVALUACIÓN DE LA E F E C T I V I D A D BIOLÓGICA DE UN ANTICOAGULANTE EN EL CONTROL DE T UZAS EN EL CULTIVO DE CAÑA DE AZÚCAR, E N EL INGENIO CENTRAL MOTZORON GO, S.A. DE C.V.” T ESIS Que para obt ener el Grado de: MAESTRO EN MANE JO Y EXPLOTACIÓN DE LOS AGROS ISTEMAS DE LA CAÑA DE AZÚCAR P r e s e n t a : ING. AGR. RAFAEL A NTONIO VERDEJO LARA Peñuela, Mun icipio de Amatlán de los Reyes, Ver. Septiembre, 2013 INDICE ÍNDICE DE CUADROS iv ÍNDICE DE FIGURAS v RESUMEN vi ABSTRACT viii 1. INTRODUCCIÓN 1 2. MARCO DE REFERENCIA 3 2.1. Generalidades de la Familia Geomyidae 3 2.2. Principales Géneros 6 2.2.1. Género Thomomys 6 2.2.2. Género Geomys (Rafinesque, 1817) 7 2.2.3. Género Orthogeomys (Merriam, 1895) 7 2.2.4. Género Zygogeomys 8 2.2.5. Género Pappogeomys 8 2.2.6. Género Cratogeomys 9 2.3. Clasificación taxonómica de Orthogeomys hispidus 9 2.4. Historia Natural de Orthogeomys hispidus 10 2.4.1. Descripción de la especie 10 2.4.2. Distribución 13 2.4.3. Reproducción 13 2.4.4. Supervivencia y mortalidad 16 2.4.5. Población 17 2.4.6. Comportamiento 17 2.4.7. Uso de hábitat 18 2.4.8. Dieta y hábitos alimentarios 18 2.5. Las tuzas como plagas 19 2.6.
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Movement by Burrowing Mammals: a Review Comparing Excavation Size and Rate to Body Mass of Excavators
    Soil movement by burrowing mammals: a review comparing excavation size and rate to body mass of excavators Natalie S Haussmann Department of Geography, Geoinformatics and Meteorology, University of Pretoria, South Africa Corresponding author: Natalie S Haussmann, Department of Geography, Geoinformatics and Meteorology, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20, Hatfield, South Africa. Email: [email protected] Tel: +27 (21) 420 4049 Abstract Mammal burrowing plays an important role in soil translocation and habitat creation in many environments. As a consequence, many burrowing mammals have at some point been studied in an ecosystem engineering context. From a geomorphological point of view, one of the focus areas of burrowing mammal research is on the amount of soil that is excavated and the rate at which this happens. As such, reviews exist on the volumes and rates of sediment removal by burrowing mammals in specific environments or for specific groups of species. Here a standardised comparison of mammal burrowing across a broad range of burrowing mammal species and environments is provided, focussing on both burrow volume and excavation rate. Through an ISI Web of Science-based literature search, articles presenting estimates of burrow volumes and/or excavation rate were identified. Relationships between species body size and burrow volume/excavation rate were explored and the influence of sociality and method of burrow volume estimation was assessed. The results show that, although bigger species construct 1 bigger burrows, it is the smaller species that remove more sediment per unit time at larger, site- level spatial scales. Burrow volume estimates are, however, independent of species sociality (solitary vs group-living) and method of burrow volume estimation (excavation-based vs mound- based).
    [Show full text]
  • Kangaroo Rat and Pocket Mouse
    Shrew Family Order Rodentia (Soricoidae) masked shrew vagrant shrew water shrew Sorex cinereus Sorex vagrans Sorex palustris grassland streambank streambank Mouse, Vole, Rats, and Muskrat (Cricetidae) meadow vole long-tailed vole heather vole Microtus pennsylvanicu Microtus longicaudus Phenacomys intermedius grassland streambank streambank/grassland/mountain Gapper’s red-backed vole deer mouse Western harvest mouse Clethrionomys gapperi Peromycus maniculatus Reithrodontomys megalotis mountain mountain/streambank grassland bushy-tailed woodrat Neotoma cinerea mountain rock mouse Northern grasshopper mouse Peromyscus difficilis Onychomys leucogaster mountain grassland Jumping Mouse Kangaroo Rat and Family Pocket Mouse silky pocket mouse (Zapodidae) (Heteromyidae) Perognathus flavus desert Western jumping mouse Ord’s kangaroo rat Apache pocket mouse Zapus princeps Dipodomys ordii Perognathus apache streambank desert mountain 1:1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 inches 1 - Rodents Tracks are actual size. Pocket Gopher Porcupine Family Order Rodentia Family (Erethizonidae) (Geomyidae) Beaver Family (Castoridae) porcupine Erethizon dorsatum mountains/grasslands scale 1:3 beaver Castor canadensis streams/lakes/wetlands Northern pocket gopher scale 1:3 Thomomys talpoides grasslands scale 1:1 1:3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 inches Squirrel Family (Sciuridae) least chipmunk Colorado chipmunk chicaree Eutamias minimus Eutamias quadrivittatus Tamiasciurus douglassi mountain/grassland mountain forest Abert’s squirrel Sciurus aberti kaibabensis mountain/forest rock ground squirrel golden-mantled ground Spermophilus variegatus squirrel mountain Spermophilus lateralis streambank yellow-bellied marmot Gunnison’s prairie dog thirteen-lined ground squirrel Marmota flaviventris Cynomys gunnisoni Spermophilus tridecemlineatus mountain/rockslide grassland grassland 1:1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 inches 2 - Rodents Rodentia tracks vary in size. Sciuridae tracks are actual size.
    [Show full text]
  • A Thesis School of Graduate Studies Addis Ababa University in Partial
    A BTUJlY ON SOlIS EGOLOGICJIL ASP.o;CTS Ob' THE GIAWJ: HOI)l~ ... R~'.'r T.'\CHYOnYC~E's HACnOCEPHALUS (nUPPEI,L,184z). IN lYILic HOUNTJ\INS, ETHIOPIA A Thesis Presented to School of Graduate Studies Addis Ababa University In Partial Fulfillment of tho Requirement for the Degree Muater of Sci onCe in Biology By Shimelis Beyene June 1986 i endemic to Ethiopia, waG 13i~u'li2d in two ohservutio!l llre~s at Bale Mountains National I'&lk i]l south eastern Ethiopia~ The burrow system 8Y.:cavated revBaled extensive underground tunnels, material consisting exclusively of grasses knitted into a hollow ball. One to several blind tlmnels ;iere found filled with foods to res and faec BE>. rJ~he underground tunnel SYR tems \'Jere marked by soil moundG, Garth plugs, foraging holes and haypiles resembled those of pocket gophers. Mole-rats spent an ave~Rge of about 70 minlltes a day on the surface, mainly foraL:inp; tut £1.1so observing ana. digging Q The time spent on the surface by mole-rats at high altitude was significantly greater thc1.n that spent by mole-rats .:;l.t low al ti tude. This difference appea.red to be related to the difference in vegetation cover. The populatiDn d(.nc;i ty of mole-rats 'lias estimated to be about 6000 mole-rats per kr/ at Sanetti and 570 mole-rats per 2 km at Badeae 0 l'his difference in population donai ty ;\'a8 probably due to differences in [;oil and vegetation types, it CompGtion with dom;)stic live stock at lovler al ti tudes might have also contributed.
    [Show full text]