DOCSLIB.ORG

Dominates Cheek Pouch Contents of the Great Basin Pocket Mouse (Perognathus Parvus) Authors: Kristen A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dominates Cheek Pouch Contents of the Great Basin Pocket Mouse (Perognathus Parvus) Authors: Kristen A Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) Dominates Cheek Pouch Contents of the Great Basin Pocket Mouse (Perognathus Parvus) Authors: Kristen A. Richardson, Stephen D. West, and Robert A. Gitzen Source: Western North American Naturalist, 73(2) : 158-167 Published By: Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum, Brigham Young University URL: https://doi.org/10.3398/064.073.0205 BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Complete website, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/terms-of-use. Usage of BioOne Complete content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Western-North-American-Naturalist on 20 May 2019 Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-use Access provided by Auburn University Western North American Naturalist 73(2), © 2013, pp. 158–167 CHEATGRASS (BROMUS TECTORUM) DOMINATES CHEEK POUCH CONTENTS OF THE GREAT BASIN POCKET MOUSE (PEROGNATHUS PARVUS) Kristen A. Richardson1,3, Stephen D. West1, and Robert A. Gitzen2 ABSTRACT.—Most of the native shrubsteppe habitat in the northern Columbia Basin of eastern Washington has been invaded by cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) or converted to agricultural lands. Therefore, ecological patterns and dynamics on native shrubsteppe and reestablished grasslands are of high conservation interest. We analyzed the cheek pouch con- tents of Great Basin pocket mice (Perognathus parvus) from 48 study sites in this region to quantify seed collection by this species and to determine the influence of habitat type on cheek pouch seed contents. In all 3 habitat types—newly established Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) lands, older CRP lands, and shrubsteppe—B. tectorum constituted the majority of seeds collected from the cheek pouches. Mean generic richness of collected seeds was higher in shrub- steppe than in new CRP habitats. On average, females collected a greater number of seed genera than males did, and pocket mice collected more seed genera as the autumn season progressed. Exotic B. tectorum has become the most fre- quently collected autumn food resource for pocket mice in the northern Columbia Basin. RESUMEN.—La mayor parte del hábitat de la estepa de arbustos nativos de Columbia Basin del norte, ubicada al este de Washington, ha sido invadida por bromo velloso (Bromus tectorum) o se ha convertido en terrenos agrícolas. Por lo tanto, los patrones ecológicos y la dinámica de la estepa de arbustos nativos, y los pastizales que se restablecieron, despiertan un gran interés por su estado de conservación. Analizamos los contenidos de las cavidades laterales de las mejillas del ratón de bolsas de la Gran Cuenca (Perognathus parvus) en 48 lugares de esta región para cuantificar las semillas que acumuló esta especie y determinar la influencia del tipo de hábitat en el contenido de semillas en estas cavidades. En los tres tipos de hábitats, el nuevo Programa para la Conservación de Reservas (Conservation Reserve Program [CRP]), el anterior CRP y las extensiones de estepas de arbustos, la mayor parte de las semillas que se encon- traron en las cavidades laterales fueron B. tectorum. La riqueza genérica promedio de las semillas acumuladas fue supe- rior en la estepa de arbustos que en los hábitats del nuevo CRP. En promedio, las hembras acumularon más variedad de géneros de semillas que los machos, y el ratón de bolsas acumuló más géneros de semillas a medida que avanzaba el otoño. Bromus tectorum es el alimento que el ratón de bolsas más acumula en el otoño, en Columbia Basin del norte. In the Columbia Basin of western North habitat availability for many shrubsteppe wild - America, anthropogenic activities have frag- life species (Vander Haegen et al. 2000). The mented, degraded, or destroyed most native degradation of remaining shrubsteppe patches shrubsteppe communities. In eastern Wash- increases the risk of a large-scale ecosystem ington State, 60% of the historic shrubsteppe collapse (Knick et al. 2003). habitat has been lost, primarily from conver- Although the majority of shrubsteppe habi- sion to intensive agricultural uses (Dobler et tats were converted to active agriculture, large al. 1996, Jacobsen and Snyder 2000, Vander areas of these converted lands have been re - Haegen et al. 2000, Knick et al. 2003). Most moved from intensive agricultural rotations remnant shrubsteppe patches are fragments through enrollment in the U.S. Conservation within a matrix of agricultural lands (Dobler et Reserve Program (CRP; USDA 2006). Con - al. 1996, Vander Haegen et al. 2000). Once- servation Reserve Program lands are planted diverse shrubsteppe communities are now of - to native and exotic bunchgrasses and native ten dominated by weedy forbs and annual shrubs, potentially restoring some habitat value grasses (e.g., Bromus tectorum [exotic cheat- for shrubsteppe species during the time frame— grass]; Quinn 2004), leading to increased fire years to decades—that each site is enrolled. frequency and further loss of native communi- Along with information on wildlife species oc - ties (Baker 2006). This conversion and deg - currence and abundance on CRP and remnant radation has caused substantial reductions in shrubsteppe lands (Vander Haegen et al. 2004), 1School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Box 352100, Seattle, WA 98195-2100. 2School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, 3301 Forestry and Wildlife Building, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849. 3Present address: U.S. Forest Service, Okanogan–Wenatchee National Forest, 215 Melody Lane, Wenatchee, WA 98801. E-mail: [email protected] 158 Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Western-North-American-Naturalist on 20 May 2019 Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-use Access provided by Auburn University 2013] CHEATGRASS IN CHEEK POUCHES OF PEROGNATHUS PARVUS 159 examination of finer-scale processes (e.g., food male mice than female mice because the habits) provides additional ecological and man - males’ larger home ranges may expose them to agement-relevant insights into assessing how a wider variety of seeds. To improve our con- native fauna may respond to habitats gener- text for interpreting seed-collection data, we ated under the CRP program. compared seed species and genera collected One of the most widespread native small by the pocket mice to the average cover of mammals in shrubsteppe and CRP habitats of vegetation on the sites. the Columbia Basin is the Great Basin pocket mouse (Perognathus parvus; O’Farrell et al. METHODS 1975), a granivorous heteromyid rodent that Study Area has fur-lined cheek pouches used primarily for carrying food for storage (Scheffer 1938). In - Eight groups of study sites (blocks) were tact seeds can be collected from pouches of sampled for small mammals in Adams, Grant, captured pocket mice and readily identified Douglas, and Lincoln counties of the northern (Johnson 1974). Because the pocket mouse Columbia Basin of eastern Washington. Each relies on food caches within burrows from late block contained six 25-ha sites, with each site November to early March (Bailey 1936, Schef- in 1 of 6 habitat conditions: newly established fer 1938) and must store large amounts of CRP lands, old CRP lands, and native shrub- seeds for use in the burrow to sustain its steppe habitat, within either an agricultural or reproductive requirements (O’Farrell 1975), shrubsteppe-dominated landscape. New CRP the quality and quantity of food cached is criti- lands were former agricultural fields planted cal to the survival of this species. Understand- after 1995 with a mix of native and exotic ing how different habitat conditions affect the species; old CRP lands were removed from pocket mouse’s food collection could influence agricultural production prior to 1996 (mostly how lands are managed and restored to pro- in the late 1980s) and planted with nonnative mote the continued existence of this species bunchgrasses. Shrubsteppe sites were com- and other small mammals. However, there is posed of an overstory of big sagebrush currently limited information on pocket mouse (Artemisia tridentata) and an understory of food collection across different habitat condi- bunchgrasses and forbs (Schroeder and Van- tions, with no studies conducted on the spe - der Haegen 2006). cies’ food collection in the northern Columbia Field Sampling Basin of eastern Washington. To quantify and assess patterns of seed Pocket mice were trapped during autumns collection by pocket mice in this region, we of 2003 and 2004. Each year, 2 parallel pairs of analyzed the composition of cheek pouch con- 300-m transects were established per site, tents of pocket mice captured on newly es - with different pairs sampled in 2003 than in tablished CRP, older CRP, and shrubsteppe 2004, for a total of 4 transect pairs per site lands, with these habitat types replicated within across both years. Each transect consisted of agricultural and shrubsteppe landscape con- 31 trap stations spaced at 10-m intervals. Two texts. Our objectives were to identify all seeds Museum Special snap traps, baited with rolled and materials contained in the cheek pouches; oats and peanut butter, were placed at each compare generic richness of seeds collected station. Transects on a site were trapped for across the different habitat types and land- 4 consecutive nights each year during late scape contexts; and assess the influence of September to early November, with a sam- factors such as body condition, sex, and fall pling effort of 496 trap-nights per site per trap date on seed composition.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mammals of the California Desert
    MAMMALS OF THE CALIFORNIA DESERT William F. Laudenslayer, Jr. Karen Boyer Buckingham Theodore A. Rado INTRODUCTION I ,+! The desert lands of southern California (Figure 1) support a rich variety of wildlife, of which mammals comprise an important element. Of the 19 living orders of mammals known in the world i- *- loday, nine are represented in the California desert15. Ninety-seven mammal species are known to t ':i he in this area. The southwestern United States has a larger number of mammal subspecies than my other continental area of comparable size (Hall 1981). This high degree of subspeciation, which f I;, ; leads to the development of new species, seems to be due to the great variation in topography, , , elevation, temperature, soils, and isolation caused by natural barriers. The order Rodentia may be k., 2:' , considered the most successful of the mammalian taxa in the desert; it is represented by 48 species Lc - occupying a wide variety of habitats. Bats comprise the second largest contingent of species. Of the 97 mammal species, 48 are found throughout the desert; the remaining 49 occur peripherally, with many restricted to the bordering mountain ranges or the Colorado River Valley. Four of the 97 I ?$ are non-native, having been introduced into the California desert. These are the Virginia opossum, ' >% Rocky Mountain mule deer, horse, and burro. Table 1 lists the desert mammals and their range 1 ;>?-axurrence as well as their current status of endangerment as determined by the U.S. fish and $' Wildlife Service (USWS 1989, 1990) and the California Department of Fish and Game (Calif.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Ruby Lake Natillntllwildlife Refuge
    I 49. 44/2: R 82/3/993 P RLE Wildlife Ruby lake NatillntllWildlife Refuge ZIMMERMAN LIBRARY UNIV. OF NEW MEXteo FEB 1 0 1994 U.S. Regional Depos1to A Refuge for Nesting and Migrating Waterfowl and Other Wildlife The Habitat Ruby Lake National Wildlife Refuge was established in The refuge, at an elevation of 6,000 feet, consists of an 1938. It encompasses 37,632 acres at the south end of extensive bulrush marsh interspersed with pockets of Ruby Valley. This land was once covered by a 200 foot open water. Fish are abundant. Islands scattered deep, 300,800-acre lake known as Franklin Lake. Today throughout provide good nesting habitat for many bird 12,000 acres of marsh remain on the refuge. Just north of species. the refuge, a 15,000-acre seasonal wetland is now referred to as Franklin Lake. Over 200 springs flow into the marsh along its west border _...)/ creating riparian habitat which is used by many songbirds, To Elko �� and Welle snipe, rail and small mammals. They also provide a water FRANKLIN source for larger mammals. With slight increases in LAKE elevation, wet meadows gradate into grasslands and sagebrush-rabbitbrush habitat. Pinon pines and juniper cover the slopes of the Ruby Mountains that rise to 11,000 feet along the west side of the refuge. Canyons provide habitat for a variety of wildlife. Rock cliffs provide raptors with nesting and perching sites. A mountainside of dead trees, home for ROAD cavity dwelling birds, was the result of a 1979 wildfire. BRESSMAN CABIN LOOP MAIN BOAT LANDING -4,__,,� ·�I! I N � 0 3 Miles 0 2 4 Kilometer� RANCH dead pinon tree General Key BIRDS bam ,wallow � Season 6 The following bird list includes 207 species observed on Sp - Spring (March through May) or near the refuge.
    [Show full text]
  • USGS DDS-43, Status of Terrestrial Vertebrates
    DAVID M. GRABER National Biological Service Sequoia and Kings Canyon Field Station Three Rivers, California 25 Status of Terrestrial Vertebrates ABSTRACT The terrestrial vertebrate wildlife of the Sierra Nevada is represented INTRODUCTION by about 401 regularly occurring species, including three local extir- There are approximately 401 species of terrestrial vertebrates pations in the 20th century. The mountain range includes about two- that use the Sierra Nevada now or in recent times according thirds of the bird and mammal species and about half the reptiles to the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System and amphibians in the State of California. This is principally because (CWHR) (California Department of Fish and Game 1994) (ap- of its great extent, and because its foothill woodlands and chaparral, pendix 25.1). Of these, thirteen are essentially restricted to mid-elevation forests, and alpine vegetation reflect, in structure and the Sierra in California (one of these is an alien; i.e. not native function if not species, habitats found elsewhere in the State. About to the Sierra Nevada); 278 (eight aliens) include the Sierra in 17% of the Sierran vertebrate species are considered at risk by state their principal range; and another 110 (six aliens) use the Si- or federal agencies; this figure is only slightly more than half the spe- erra as a minor portion of their range. Included in the 401 are cies at risk for the state as a whole. This relative security is a function 232 species of birds; 112 species of mammals; thirty-two spe- of the smaller proportion of Sierran habitats that have been exten- cies of reptiles; and twenty-five species of amphibians (ap- sively modified.
    [Show full text]
  • Rationales for Animal Species Considered for Species of Conservation Concern, Sequoia National Forest
    Rationales for Animal Species Considered for Species of Conservation Concern Sequoia National Forest Prepared by: Wildlife Biologists and Biologist Planner Regional Office, Sequoia National Forest and Washington Office Enterprise Program For: Sequoia National Forest June 2019 In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Species List Mourning Dove Zenaida Macroura
    Wildlife Species List Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura Order: Strigiformes (Nocturnal Flesh Eaters) Northeast Nevada – Units 106 Family: Tytonidae (Barn Owls) Barn Owl Tyto alba (Subalpine Coniferous, P-J, Sagebrush Family: Strigidae (Owls) Steppe, Salt Desert Scrub Habitat, Some Flammulated Owl Otus flammeolus Western Screech-Owl Otus kennicottii Limited Riparian) Great Horned Owl Bubo virginianus Northern Pygmy-Owl Glaucidium gnoma Burrowing Owl Athene cunicularia Long-eared Owl Asio otus Birds Northern Saw-whet Owl Aegolius acadicus Order: Ciconiiformes (Long-leg Waders, etc) Order: Caprimulgiformes (Night Jars) Family: Cathartidae (New World Vultures) Family: Caprimulgidae (Goatsuckers) Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor California Condor Gymnogyps californianus(L.E.) Common Poorwill Phalaenoptilus nuttallii Order: Falconiformes (Diurnal Flesh Eaters) Order: Apodiformes (Small Fast Fliers) Family: Accipitridae (Hawks, Eagles, Osprey) Family: Apodidae (Swifts) Bald Eagle Haliaetus leucocephalus White-throated Swift Aeronautes saxatalis Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus Family: Trochilidae (Hummingbirds) Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus Black-chinned Hummingbird Archilochus alexandri Cooper’s Hawk Accipiter cooperii Broad-tailed Hummingbird Selasphorus platycercus Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis Red-shouldered Hawk Buteo lineatus Broad-winged Hawk Buteo platypterus Order: Piciformes (Cavity Builders) Swainson's Hawk Buteo swainsoni Family: Picidae (Woodpeckers) Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis Lewis’
    [Show full text]
  • MAMMALS of GREAT BASIN NATIONAL PARK Final Report
    MAMMALS OF GREAT BASIN NATIONAL PARK Final report Great Basin CESU task agreement JBR07020002 Cooperative agreement HBR07010001 Permit # GRBA-2002-SCI-0003 Accession # GRBA-308 by Eric A. Rickart, Ph.D. - Curator of Vertebrates and Shannen L. Robson, M.S. - Project coordinator Utah Museum of Natural History, University of Utah, 1390 E Presidents Circle, Salt Lake City, UT 84112 January 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………………... 3 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………………. 4 STUDY AREA………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4 METHODS Historical records……………………………………………………………………..……… 4 Review of published records …………………………………………………...... 5 Review of museum collections……………………………………………….…… 5 Review of unpublished sources…………………………………………….......... 6 Review of prehistoric (Quaternary) records……………………………..………. 6 Field surveys for small and medium-sized mammals (excluding bats)…………..……. 6 Inventory techniques and equipment……………………………………..……… 6 2000 Preliminary Survey…………………………………………………..………. 7 2002-2003 Survey methodology…………………………………………..……… 7 Grid trapping…………………………………………….…..…………….. 8 Directed trapping………………………………..………………………... 8 Opportunistic data collection………………………………..…………………….. 9 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Results of search for historical records…………………………………..……………….. 9 Results of 2000, 2002-2004 field surveys…………………………………..…………….. 9 Summary of effort………………………………………………………..…………. 9 Comparison of grid trapping and directed trapping……………………............. 10 Patterns of relative abundance and species richness…………………..………
    [Show full text]
  • Bioregions: an Ecological and Evolutionary Perspective and a Proposal for California
    CALIFORNIAFISH ANDGAME Calif. Fish and Game (80)3:97-l24 1994 BIOREGIONS: AN ECOLOGICAL AND EVOLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVE AND A PROPOSAL FOR CALIFORNIA HARTWELL H. WELSH, JR. USDA Forest Service Redwood Sciences Laboratory 1700 Bayview Dr. Arcata, CA. 95521 Bioregions are natural assemblages of plants and animals with discernible but dynamic boundaries existing simultaneously along both spatial and temporal trajectories.I argue that the designation of bioregions should be based on the study of biogeography and must adhere to the tenets of this discipline; they are not spatial designations of political convenience. Bioregions are defined by physiographic and climatic limits that define the natural communities of organisms in space and time through interactions with the physiological and behavioral capabilities of these organisms. Plants are less vagile than animals and therefore lend themselves better to describing such natural communities. Despite the fluctuation of biotic communities in both time and space, and the anthropogenic bias inherent in defining their composition, such natural assemblages do exist on the landscape and they are of scientific interest and have useful management applications. I propose sixteen bioregions for thestateof California and include definitions of geographic boundaries, dominant plant communities, and lists of vertebrate species typical of these bioregions. INTRODUCTION My purpose in describing a set of biotic provinces for California is two-fold: (1) to establish such sub-divisions with a firm biological basis, grounded in the biogeographic literature; and (2) to provide a biogeographic framework for the conservation of California’s faunaI resources and natural biodiversity, while facilitating wise use of its natural resources. My particular emphasis is on vertebrate wildlife resources, and these proposed bioregions were initially-developed to provide the basis for a bioregional revision of California’s statewide Wildlife Habitat Relationships System (WHR) (Airola 1988) in order to improve the system’s accuracy and utility.
    [Show full text]
  • The Analysis and Use of Methodologies for the Study of the Diets of Long-Eared Owls from Three Environments in North Central Oregon
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 1985 The analysis and use of methodologies for the study of the diets of long-eared owls from three environments in north central Oregon John M. Barss Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Biology Commons, Nutrition Commons, and the Ornithology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Barss, John M., "The analysis and use of methodologies for the study of the diets of long-eared owls from three environments in north central Oregon" (1985). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 3437. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.5320 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF John M. Barss for the Master of Science in Biology presented May 15, 1985. Title: The Analysis and Use of Methodologies for the Study of the Diets of Long-eared Owls From Three Environments in North-central Oregon. APPROVED BY MEMBERS OF THE THESIS COMMITTEE: Richard B. Forbes Robert O. Tinnin Part I of this study presents a procedure for standardization of pellet analysis methodologies which improves estimation of prey biomass and determines the number of pellets needed to estimate prey diversity indices. The procedure was developed to provide a simple, easily replicated methodology for the study of pellets which also retains maximal data recorded from pellet analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Springs
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Fish Springs National Wildlife Refuge Wildlife List A Wildlife Oasis Fish Springs National Wildlife Refuge since 1960, and includes 12 species (NWR) was established in 1959 under of reptiles, 2 amphibians, 4 fish, the authority of the Migratory Bird 44 species of mammals (at least Conservation Act as a refuge and 24 of these breed on the Refuge), breeding ground for migratory birds. and 298 species of birds (at least This Refuge is one of over 550 refuges 70 of these breed on the Refuge). This blue goose, in the National Wildlife Refuge designed by J.N. System – a network of public lands The checklist will be changed as “Ding” Darling, set aside specifically for wildlife. Refuge staff observe and report is the symbol The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service new sightings. The status of the listed of the National manages these lands to conserve species, particularly many of the bird Wildlife Refuge wildlife and their habitats for people species listed as rare or accidental, System. today and for generations to come. will be verified or revised with increasing observations. The Refuge provides nearly 18,000 acres of uniquely varied habitats Species abundance varies annually, that support a diversity of wildlife sometimes tremendously, due to in an otherwise arid landscape. changes in wetland water levels, A 10,000-acre portion of the Refuge fluctuations in available food, and consisting of wet meadow and marsh natural cycles. Many of the less habitats is fed by natural artesian common migrant songbird species spring flow. This area is managed by actually may be present only for Refuge staff using an impoundment a period of a week or so during system.
    [Show full text]
  • Olive-Backed Pocket Mouse Perognathus Fasciatus
    Wyoming Species Account Olive-backed Pocket Mouse Perognathus fasciatus REGULATORY STATUS USFWS: No special status USFS R2: No special status UWFS R4: No special status Wyoming BLM: No special status State of Wyoming: Nongame Wildlife CONSERVATION RANKS USFWS: No special status WGFD: NSS4 (Cb), Tier III WYNDD: G5, S3S5 Wyoming contribution: LOW IUCN: Least Concern STATUS AND RANK COMMENTS Olive-backed Pocket Mouse (Perognathus fasciatus) is assigned a range of state conservation ranks by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database (WYNDD) due to uncertainty concerning the abundance, population trends, amount of occupied habitat, and extent of extrinsic stressors in Wyoming. NATURAL HISTORY Taxonomy: Olive-backed Pocket Mouse is a member of the family Heteromyidae, which includes the pocket mice and kangaroo rats 1. There are two recognized subspecies of P. fasciatus, both of which are found in Wyoming: P. f. callistus occupies southwestern Wyoming, while P. f. fasciatus is found in the eastern two-thirds of the state 2, 3. There is no apparent barrier between the distributions of these two subspecies, suggesting the potential for introgression. A recent genetic analysis confirms that P. fasciatus is distinct from other, geographically proximate Perognathus species, but does not further resolve subspecific designations 4. Description: Olive-backed Pocket Mouse, like other pocket mice, is a small-bodied rodent with a relatively long tail and visible, external, fur-lined cheek pouches. Dorsal pelage of Olive-backed Pocket Mouse is generally olivaceous, being darker in the northeast portion of its range (i.e., P. f. fasciatus) and more buffy in the southwest (i.e., P. f.
    [Show full text]
  • Psw Gtr037 03Mammals Part1.Pdf
    Species List M001 Opossum M025 Brazilian Free-tailed Bat M049 Mountain Pocket Gopher Didelphis virginiana Tadarida brasiliensis Thomomys monticola M002 Mount Lyell Shrew M026 Pika M050 Little Pocket Mouse Sorex lyelli Ochotona princeps Perognathus longimembris M003 Vagrant Shrew M027 Brush Rabbit M051 Great Basin Pocket Mouse Sorex vagrans Sylvilagus bachmani Perognathus parvus M004 Dusky Shrew M028 Desert Cottontail M052 Yellow-eared Pocket Mouse Sorex monticolus Sylvilagus audubonii Perognathus xanthonotus M005 Ornate Shrew M029 Snowshoe Hare M053 California Pocket Mouse Sorex ornatus Lepus americanus Perognathus californicus M006 Water Shrew M030 White-tailed Jackrabbit M054 Heermann's Kangaroo Rat Sorex palustris Lepus townsendii Dipodomys heermanni M007 Trowbridge's Shrew M031 Black-tailed Jackrabbit M055 California Kangaroo Rat Sorex trowbridgii Lepus californicus Dipodomys californicus M008 Shrew-mole M032 Mountain Beaver M056 Beaver Neurotrichus gibbsii Aplodontia rufa Castor canadensis M009 Broad-footed Mole M033 Alpine Chipmunk M057 Western Harvest Mouse Scapanus latimanus Eutamias alpinus Reithrodontomys megalotis M010 Little Brown Myotis M034 Least Chipmunk M058 California Mouse Myotis lucifugus Eutamias minimus Peromyscus californicus M011 Yuma Myotis M035 Yellow Pine Chipmunk M059 Deer Mouse Myotis yumanensis Eutamias amoenus Peromyscus maniculatus M012 Long-eared Myotis M036 Allen's Chipmunk M060 Brush Mouse Myotis evotis Eutamias senex Peromyscus boylii M013 Fringed Myotis M037 Sonoma Chipmunk M061 Piñon Mouse Myotis thysanodes
    [Show full text]
  • Food-Niche Relationships Between Great Horned Owls and Common
    January1984] ShortCommunications 175 new buffer systems,or better staining regimes may formed in the Cornell Laboratoryfor Ecologicaland reveal the expression of enzymes not seen in our Evolutionary Genetics. study. Rather, the total score for each tissue over all the taxa we examined is more informative. There- LITERATURE CITED fore, a quantitative comparisonwas made by assign- ARISE, J. C., J. c. PATTON, & C. F. AQUADRO. !980. ing a ! to all tissueswith faint expressionand a 2 to Evolutionary geneticsof birds: comparativemo- those with good expressionand then totalling these lecular evolution in New World warblers and numbers for all enzymes in each tissue(see bottom rodents. J. Hered. 7!: 303-3!0. of Table !). Again, feather pulp was more informa- tive than blood but less informative than internal BAKER,M. C. !981. A musclebiopsy procedurefor use in electrophoreticstudies of birds. Auk 98: organs. 392-393. There are only two serious limitations to using BARROWCLOUGH,G. F., & K. W. CORBIN. !978. Ge- feather pulp for electrophoreticanalysis. First, the netic variation and differentiation in the Paru- birds must either be molting when sampled or be lidae. Auk 95: 691-702. subjectedto plucking to stimulate feather regrowth HARRIS, I-I., & D. A. HOPKINSON. 1976. Handbook of and then recapturedat a later date. Second,in small enzyme electrophoresisin human genetics.New birds such as Bobolinks, warblers (Parulidae), or York, American Elsevier. chickadees(Parus spp.), only tiny amounts of tissue MAY, g., J. E. WRIGHT, & M. STONEKING. !979. Joint can be obtained from the flight and tail feathers,ne- segregation of biochemical loci in Salmonidae: cessitatingthe useof two or more feathers.Mengden resultsfrom experimentswith Salvelinusand re- and Stock (!976) point out, however, that small quan- view of the literature on other species.J.
    [Show full text]