DOCSLIB.ORG

Version 2019-05-21 Dark Kangaroo Mouse (Microdipodops

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Version 2019-05-21 Dark Kangaroo Mouse (Microdipodops Version 2019-05-21 Dark Kangaroo Mouse (Microdipodops megacephalus) Species Status Statement. Distribution The dark kangaroo mouse is an inhabitant of the Great Basin desert. The mouse’s distribution is primarily restricted to Nevada and Utah, but also includes small areas of California, Idaho, and Oregon (Auger and Black 2006, Hafner and Upham 2011). Dark kangaroo mice within Utah have been alternatively classified as two endemic subspecies (Microdipodops megacephalus leucotis and M. megacacephalus paululus) (Oliver 2018), or one of three or four genetically distinct units (Hafner and Upham 2011, Light 2013, Andersen et al. 2013). Table 1. Utah counties currently occupied by this species. Dark Kangaroo Mouse BEAVER IRON JUAB MILLARD TOOELE Abundance and Trends When first described in the 1800’s the dark kangaroo mouse was considered locally common. Research in Utah over the last two decades failed to locate dark kangaroo mice at most historically documented locations (Auger and Black 2006, Haug 2010, Phillips 2018). The Utah findings mirror rangewide concern of small, fragmented, and declining populations (Hafner and Upham 2011, Andersen et al. 2013). Statement of Habitat Needs and Threats to the Species. Habitat Needs Dark kangaroo mouse habitat generally consists of sandy, semi-desert shrubland with sparse vegetative cover. In Utah, most localities are in stabilized dunes along the margins of historical Lake Bonneville. Appropriate habitat is naturally fragmented and isolated. Threats to the Species Invasive plants, specifically cheatgrass, and the resulting changes in fire cycle and vegetative cover are the greatest threat to dark kangaroo mice. Utah studies found that as cheatgrass Version 2019-05-21 increases, small mammal diversity decreases, with the dark kangaroo mouse among the first species disappearing (Haug 2010, Freeman et al. 2014, Phillips 2018). Remotely sensed data indicate that monocultures of cheatgrass dominate at least 40,000 square kilometers (nearly 10%) of the Great Basin. Additionally, cheatgrass is a major understory component across a larger area and 200,000 additional square kilometers are vulnerable to invasion. Activities such as off-trail OHV use, renewable energy, and infrastructure development that can serve to disturb or fragment habitat, or lead to invasive plant introduction, are also threats. Table 2. Summary of a statewide-scale threat assessment and prioritization completed in 2013 (Utah WAP 2015; Salafsky et al. 2008). Note that these threat rankings do not apply at the scale of local populations; a threat ranked medium at the overall, statewide level may be the most important threat to a local population. The threat assessment provides more information not presented here, including lower ranked threats, crucial data gaps, and definitions for all the threats and data gaps. Dark Kangaroo Mouse High Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Medium OHV Motorized Recreation Problematic Animal Species – Native Rationale for Designation. Several studies have found that as cheatgrass invades the Great Basin, rodent diversity and abundance decreases. The dark kangaroo mouse appears to be among the most sensitive to these changes and there is great concern for this species and other habitat specialist rodent species in the Great Basin. Additionally, alterations in the community structure of small mammals may have cascading implications for both plant and predator communities. The remaining population centers of dark kangaroo mice in Utah appear to be widely scattered and unconnected by movement corridors, leaving the current populations vulnerable to extirpation. Conservation actions will focus on locating extant populations, and protecting those areas against fire and invasive grasses. Economic Impacts of Sensitive Species Designation. Table 3. Brief description of the threat as it presents to all wildlife and habitats statewide. Includes some discussion of sources, potential ways to engage those sources to manage the threat, and some risks and opportunities of engagement. Version 2019-05-21 Threat (all taxa) Economic & Social Assessment Inappropriate This is a complicated problem with significant technical, social, fiscal, and legal Fire Frequency components. Concerns range from "lack of fire" at one extreme, to "too much fire" and Intensity at the other. Planning, best management practices, and significant regulations already exist to manage this threat. Consultation is available to help avoid, minimize, or mitigate further impacts. Incentives and partnerships exist to help landowners manage watersheds to improve the frequency and intensity of fire and fire surrogates. Economic impacts to manage this threat range from moderate to immense. Economic impacts of failure to manage this threat are worse. Positive social effects would likely be dispersed and substantial, while negative ones would likely be localized and intense. Actions taken to mitigate this threat have high potential to prevent or reverse Endangered Species Act listings. Invasive Plant This threat to wildlife includes both upland, wetland/riparian, and aquatic plant Species – Non- species. Main effects include alteration of stream channel morphology, alteration of native fire cycles, elimination of open water habitat, and excessive consumption of water. Preventing new arrivals, and the spread of existing populations, is essential. Confining or reducing existing populations is often difficult. Non-native invasive plant species also crowd out desirable native vegetation by competing for space, nutrients, sunlight, or soil moisture. Prevention is the best and cheapest strategy, treatment is expensive and difficult. Economic impacts of invasive wildlife species can be enormous, and can completely alter the ecological succession of a given vegetation association. Social effects can also be very large, as invasive species are to a significant extent a social problem. Education can help change people's behavior; regulation has a role but alone it is insufficient. Incentives and partnerships are available to help landowners manage invasive plants. Actions taken to prevent, reverse, or mitigate this threat have very high potential to prevent or reverse Endangered Species Act listings. OHV Motorized This threat to wildife refers to cumulative impacts of recreational activities which Recreation can contribute to habitat degradation (erosion, water quality, etc) and facilitate other threats (spread of invasives, disease/pathogens, etc). Planning, best management practices, and some regulations already exist to manage this threat. Economic impacts to manage this threat range from minimal to moderate. Positive social effects would likely be dispersed, while negative ones would likely be localized and potentially keenly felt. Actions taken to mitigate this threat have moderate potential to prevent or reverse Endangered Species Act listings. Version 2019-05-21 Small Isolated This refers to species with naturally limited distributions, or species whose Populations distributions have been severely truncated by human agency. Not to be confused with widely-distributed species, or species with widely-ranging individuals. Substantial efforts are currently made to either protect or restore (as appropriate) many of these species, which are among the most frequently petitioned for listing. Economic and social effects are difficult to characterize generically, as they will vary widely by species and project proposal. In general though, reversing declines and preventing further declines will be less expensive and disruptive than failure to do so. Actions taken to mitigate this threat have very high potential to prevent or reverse Endangered Species Act listings. Literature Cited. Andersen, J.J., D.S. Portnoy, J.C. Hafner, and J.E. Light. 2013. Populations at risk: conservation genetics of kangaroo mice (Microdipodops) of the Great Basin Desert. Ecology and Evolution 3:2497-2513. Auger, J., and H.L. Black. 2006. ESMF Report for Project #3305. Department of Plant and Animal Sciences, Brigham Young University. Provo, Utah, USA. Freeman, E.D., T.R. Sharp, R.T. Larsen, R.N. Knight, S.J. Slater, and B.R. McMillan. 2014. Negative Effects of an Exotic Grass Invasion on Small-Mammal Communities. Plos One 9:1-7. Hafner, J.C, and N.S. Upham. 2011. Phylogeography of the dark kangaroo mouse, Microdipodops megacephalus: cryptic lineages and dispersal routes in North America’s Great Basin. Journal of Biogeography 38:1077-1097. Haug, A.S. 2010. Diversity and relative abundance of the dark kangaroo mouse,Microdipodops megacephalus, in communities of nocturnal granivorous rodents in western North America. M.S. Thesis, Brigham Young University. Provo, Utah, USA. Light, J.E., J.C. Hafner, N.S. Upham, and E. Reddington. 2013. Conservation Genetics of Kangaroo Mice, Genus Microdipodops. Journal of Mammalian Evolution 20:129-146. Oliver, G.V. 2018. Mammal subspecies endemic to Utah; an overview and conservational prioritization. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. 51 pp. Phillips, S.E. 2018. Composition of the community of small mammals in the Great Basin Desert. M.S. Thesis. Brigham Young University. Provo, Utah, USA. .
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]
  • Version 2020-04-20 Dark Kangaroo Mouse (Microdipodops
    Version 2020-04-20 Dark Kangaroo Mouse (Microdipodops megacephalus) Species Status Statement. Distribution Dark kangaroo mouse is an inhabitant of the Great Basin Desert. Most of its distribution lies in Nevada and Utah, but it also occurs in small areas of California, Idaho, and Oregon (Auger and Black 2006, Hafner and Upham 2011). Within Utah, individual specimens of this species have been classified in two ways. They have either been attributed to one of two state-endemic subspecies (Microdipodops megacephalus leucotis and M. megacacephalus paululus) (Oliver 2018), or they have been attributed to one of three or four genetically distinct units (Hafner and Upham 2011, Light 2013, Andersen et al. 2013). Table 1. Utah counties currently occupied by this species. Dark Kangaroo Mouse BEAVER IRON JUAB MILLARD TOOELE Abundance and Trends When first described in the 1800’s, dark kangaroo mouse was considered locally common. Research in Utah over the last two decades failed to locate any individuals at most historically documented locations (Auger and Black 2006, Haug 2010, Phillips 2018). The Utah findings mirror rangewide concern of small, fragmented, and declining populations (Hafner and Upham 2011, Andersen et al. 2013). Statement of Habitat Needs and Threats to the Species. Habitat Needs Dark kangaroo mouse habitat generally consists of sandy shrubland with sparse vegetative cover. In Utah, most localities are in stabilized dunes along the margins of historical Lake Bonneville. Appropriate habitat is naturally fragmented and isolated. Threats to the Species Version 2020-04-20 Invasive plants, specifically cheatgrass, and the resulting changes in vegetative cover and fire cycle are the greatest threat to dark kangaroo mouse.
    [Show full text]
  • Studies on the Ecology and Epizoology of the Native Fauna of the Great Salt Lake Desert
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional Elusive Documents Depository) 6-30-1960 Studies on the Ecology and Epizoology of the Native Fauna of the Great Salt Lake Desert University of Utah Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/elusive_docs Recommended Citation University of Utah, "Studies on the Ecology and Epizoology of the Native Fauna of the Great Salt Lake Desert" (1960). Elusive Documents. Paper 117. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/elusive_docs/117 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional Depository) at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Elusive Documents by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Studies on the Euology and Epizoology of the Native Fauna of the Great Salt Lake Desert~ REPORT PERIOD January 1 to December 31, 1959 ANNUAL SUMMARY PROGRESS REPORT of the EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR and STAFF Ecology and Epizoology Series N o. 44, June 30, 1960 Ecological and Epizoological Research University of Utah *Supported by U.S. Army Chemical Corps Contr act No. DA·42·007·403·CML-427, with the University of U tah S'IUDIES CN 'IHE ECOLOGY AND EPIZOOLOGY OF THE NA TIVE FAUNA of the GREAT SALT lAKE DESERT* REPORT PERICD January 1 to December 31, 1959 ANNUAL SUMMARY PROGRESS REPORT of the EXECUTIVE DIREC'roR and STAFF Ecology and Epizoology Series .No. 44, June 30, 1960 Ecological and Epizoological Research University of Utah *Supported by U. S . Army Chemical Corps Contract No.
    [Show full text]
  • Coping with Chaos: Unpredictable Food Supplies Intensify Torpor Use in an Arid-Zone Marsupial, the Fat-Tailed Dunnart (Sminthopsis Crassicaudata)
    University of Wollongong Research Online Faculty of Science - Papers (Archive) Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health 2010 Coping with chaos: unpredictable food supplies intensify torpor use in an arid-zone marsupial, the fat-tailed dunnart (Sminthopsis crassicaudata) Adam J. Munn University of Sydney, [email protected] Pippa Kern University of Sydney Bronwyn M. McAllan University of Sydney Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/scipapers Part of the Life Sciences Commons, Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons, and the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Munn, Adam J.; Kern, Pippa; and McAllan, Bronwyn M.: Coping with chaos: unpredictable food supplies intensify torpor use in an arid-zone marsupial, the fat-tailed dunnart (Sminthopsis crassicaudata) 2010. https://ro.uow.edu.au/scipapers/5074 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Coping with chaos: unpredictable food supplies intensify torpor use in an arid- zone marsupial, the fat-tailed dunnart (Sminthopsis crassicaudata) Abstract The severity, duration and amplitude of extreme weather events are forecast to intensify with current climate trends, over both long (e.g. seasonal) and short (e.g. daily) time-scales. As such, the predictability of food supplies for many small endotherms is likely to become increasingly important. Numerous small mammals and birds combat food shortages using torpor, a controlled reduction in metabolic rate and body temperature that helps lower their daily energy requirements. As such, torpor often has been cited as a key feature allowing some small endotherms to survive highly unpredictable climates, such as tropics or dry deserts, but mensurative demonstrations of this are lacking.
    [Show full text]
  • New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse; Final Rule, 81 Fed
    Case 1:18-cv-01138-JB-JFR Document 43 Filed 10/13/20 Page 1 of 241 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO NORTHERN NEW MEXICO STOCKMAN’S ASSOCIATION and OTERO COUNTY CATTLEMAN’S ASSOCIATION, Plaintiffs, vs. No. CIV 18-1138 JB\JFR UNITED STATES FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE and GREG SHEEHAN, Principal Deputy Director & Acting Director of the United States Fish & Wildlife Service, in his official capacity, Defendants, and CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY and WILDEARTH GUARDIANS, Intervenors. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the Plaintiffs’ Opening Brief in Support of Petition for Review, filed August 8, 2019 (Doc. 26)(“Petition”); (ii) Petitioners’ Brief on Remedy, filed December 6, 2019 (Doc. 40)(“P. Remedy Brief”); (iii) Federal Respondents’ Brief on Remedy, filed December 6, 2019 (Doc. 41)(“D. Remedy Brief”); and (iv) Respondent- Intervenors’ Brief on Remedy, filed December 6, 2019 (Doc. 42)(“I. Remedy Brief”). The Court held a hearing on October 31, 2019. The primary issues are: (i) whether Plaintiffs Northern NM Stockman’s Association (“Northern NM Stockman’s Association”) and Otero Cattleman’s Association (“Otero Cattleman’s Association”)(collectively, “the Stockman’s Associations”) suffer economic injury to establish associational standing under Article III of the Constitution of the United States of America to challenge the decision made by Defendants United States Fish & Wildlife Service and its Principal Deputy director and acting director, Greg Sheehan (collectively, “Fish & Wildlife”), to designate land on which members of the Stockman’s Associations graze cattle as critical habitat designation1 (“the designation”) for the New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse (“Jumping Mouse”); (ii) whether Fish & Wildlife’s use of the “incremental effects” 1The Endangered Species Act requires Fish & Wildlife to designate “critical habitat” for all species that Fish & Wildlife lists as threatened or endangered.
    [Show full text]
  • SW Great Basin Mini-Trip Report Vladimir Dinets in Late May 2015 I Took Steve Linsley on a Mini-Tour of the SW Part of the Great Basin
    SW Great Basin mini-trip report Vladimir Dinets In late May 2015 I took Steve Linsley on a mini-tour of the SW part of the Great Basin. Steve is an experienced mammal watcher, so he was looking for uncommon species rather than a high species count. The trip proved to be a pleasant, relaxing experience: we would set traps in the evening, spotlight until after midnight, get up at dawn, pick up the traps, sleep until the hotel checkout time, then drive to another location and get another nap in the afternoon. We ended up seeing only about 30 species, but got a few that are generally difficult to see in the area. The moon was near full, but it didn’t seem to have much effect. If you’d like me to take you on a similar trip, the cost is $950-1200 pp, depending on the number of participants (4 max). A few days earlier I did a scouting trip to Mono Lake and Tonopah area, and found that, unlike in lowland California, the rodent numbers were generally high. Three hours of night driving between Coaldale and Mono Lake produced a dispersing juvenile Botta’s pocket gopher, Ord’s kangaroo rat, long-tailed pocket mouse, a few deer mice, and a possible Merriam’s shrew. Twenty traps set in sagebrush desert S of Mono Lake for half a night got three deer mice, two little pocket mice, two Great Basin pocket mice, and one Panamint kangaroo rat. I also noted some snowshoe hare tracks along the road to Saddlebag Lake near Tioga Pass.
    [Show full text]
  • 2005 WAP Information K-1
    APPENDIX K 2005 WILDLIFE ACTION PLAN INFORMATION 2005 WAP Development and Review Process Public Involvement and Partnerships A series of public scoping meetings were held throughout the state in February, 2003. Presentations were made in Reno, Las Vegas, and Elko to introduce Nevadans to the concept and opportunity of the WAP. Over 100 invitations were sent out to agencies, NGOs, and, hunting, fishing, and environmental groups. Attendance to these initial presentations was very light, but the themes that emerged from the discussions were very useful in guiding the WAP development strategy. Attendees were supportive of an inclusive, collaborative approach to developing the Strategy, they advocated the integration of existing and ongoing planning efforts into the WAP, and they advocated the sharing and consolidation of data into comprehensive databases. The next step in collaborative planning for the WAP was taken in August, 2003 when NDOW commissioned a working group of active individuals from the conservation community to work on alternative funding for the Wildlife Diversity program. This working group met several times in the next two years and provided input and guidance into the process. WAP Development Team members attended a Rural Planning Conference on January 20, 2005, to introduce the Strategy to county planners and solicit their attendance and participation in the upcoming round of open houses across the state. Following the development of a series of draft analytical products, the WAP Development Team took the draft analysis on the road for a seven-city tour of Nevada to receive a second round of input. The meetings were held in open-house format in Reno, Carson City, Las Vegas, Tonopah, Ely, Elko, and Winnemucca between March 16 and 31, 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • List of 28 Orders, 129 Families, 598 Genera and 1121 Species in Mammal Images Library 31 December 2013
    What the American Society of Mammalogists has in the images library LIST OF 28 ORDERS, 129 FAMILIES, 598 GENERA AND 1121 SPECIES IN MAMMAL IMAGES LIBRARY 31 DECEMBER 2013 AFROSORICIDA (5 genera, 5 species) – golden moles and tenrecs CHRYSOCHLORIDAE - golden moles Chrysospalax villosus - Rough-haired Golden Mole TENRECIDAE - tenrecs 1. Echinops telfairi - Lesser Hedgehog Tenrec 2. Hemicentetes semispinosus – Lowland Streaked Tenrec 3. Microgale dobsoni - Dobson’s Shrew Tenrec 4. Tenrec ecaudatus – Tailless Tenrec ARTIODACTYLA (83 genera, 142 species) – paraxonic (mostly even-toed) ungulates ANTILOCAPRIDAE - pronghorns Antilocapra americana - Pronghorn BOVIDAE (46 genera) - cattle, sheep, goats, and antelopes 1. Addax nasomaculatus - Addax 2. Aepyceros melampus - Impala 3. Alcelaphus buselaphus - Hartebeest 4. Alcelaphus caama – Red Hartebeest 5. Ammotragus lervia - Barbary Sheep 6. Antidorcas marsupialis - Springbok 7. Antilope cervicapra – Blackbuck 8. Beatragus hunter – Hunter’s Hartebeest 9. Bison bison - American Bison 10. Bison bonasus - European Bison 11. Bos frontalis - Gaur 12. Bos javanicus - Banteng 13. Bos taurus -Auroch 14. Boselaphus tragocamelus - Nilgai 15. Bubalus bubalis - Water Buffalo 16. Bubalus depressicornis - Anoa 17. Bubalus quarlesi - Mountain Anoa 18. Budorcas taxicolor - Takin 19. Capra caucasica - Tur 20. Capra falconeri - Markhor 21. Capra hircus - Goat 22. Capra nubiana – Nubian Ibex 23. Capra pyrenaica – Spanish Ibex 24. Capricornis crispus – Japanese Serow 25. Cephalophus jentinki - Jentink's Duiker 26. Cephalophus natalensis – Red Duiker 1 What the American Society of Mammalogists has in the images library 27. Cephalophus niger – Black Duiker 28. Cephalophus rufilatus – Red-flanked Duiker 29. Cephalophus silvicultor - Yellow-backed Duiker 30. Cephalophus zebra - Zebra Duiker 31. Connochaetes gnou - Black Wildebeest 32. Connochaetes taurinus - Blue Wildebeest 33. Damaliscus korrigum – Topi 34.
    [Show full text]
  • Additional Records of the Dark Kangaroo Mouse (Microdipodops Megacephalus Nasutus), with a New Maximum Altitude
    Great Basin Naturalist Volume 41 Number 3 Article 10 9-30-1981 Additional records of the dark kangaroo mouse (Microdipodops megacephalus nasutus), with a new maximum altitude Harold J. Egoscue Grantsville, Utah Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Egoscue, Harold J. (1981) "Additional records of the dark kangaroo mouse (Microdipodops megacephalus nasutus), with a new maximum altitude," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 41 : No. 3 , Article 10. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol41/iss3/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. ADDITIONAL RECORDS OF THE DARK KANGAROO MOUSE {MICRODIPODOPS MEGACEPHALUS NASUTUS), WITH A NEW MAXIMUM ALTITUDE Harold J. Egoscue' Abstract.— Three specimens of Micwdipodops megacephahts nasutiis were captured in the Wassuk Mountains of western Mineral County, Nevada, which provide a second place of occurrence for the subspecies and a new altitu- dinal record of 2455 m for the genus. This is the first time this species has been found in the pinyon-juniper belt. Records of Micwdipodops megacephalus and deer mouse, Peromyscus maniculatus nasutus Hall have not been published since sonoriensis. The association of Lagurus and the taxon was named (Hall 1941) from six Microdipodops is unusual; E. R. Hall (pers. specimens collected at Fletcher, Mineral comm.) informed me that he had never County, Nevada. caught these species together.
    [Show full text]
  • Dark Kangaroo Mouse Microdipodops Megacephalus
    Dark Kangaroo Mouse Microdipodops megacephalus Mammalia — Rodentia — Heteromyidae CONSERVATION STATUS / CLASSIFICATION Rangewide: Secure (G5) Statewide: Critically imperiled (S1) ESA: No status USFS: Region 1: No status; Region 4: No status BLM: Peripheral (Type 4) IDFG: Unprotected wildlife BASIS FOR INCLUSION Lack of essential information pertaining to Idaho; habitat threats. TAXONOMY The subspecies M. megacephalus atrirelictus occurs in Idaho and is endemic to the state. DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE This species occurs in Nevada, Utah, California, and Idaho. In Idaho the species occurs only in extreme southwest Owyhee County (Hafner 1985). POPULATION TREND No trend data are available for Idaho. HABITAT AND ECOLOGY This species is associated with gravelly or fine textured soils (Hafner 1985), frequently in vegetated dunes. Throughout the range, habitat consists of sparsely vegetated sites; characteristic vegetation includes sagebrush, black greasewood, shadscale, horsebrush, and rabbitbrush. This species eats primarily seeds, but insects are also frequently consumed. Individuals hibernate for approximately 5 months in burrows. ISSUES The distribution and current status of populations in Idaho are incompletely understood. Habitat loss is the primary threat to this species. Invasive weeds and changes in plant composition and vegetative structure as a result of livestock or recreational use have the potential to negatively affect populations. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS Surveys are needed to determine the current status of the population in southwest Owyhee County. Prospective surveys are also needed in suitable habitat across southern Idaho, particularly in southern Twin Falls County, to determine if the species occurs elsewhere. Habitat protection at occupied sites may be necessary. Dark Kangaroo Mouse Microdipodops megacephalus Ecological Section Predicted Distribution Point Locations Map created on September 21, 2005 and prepared by Idaho Conservation Data Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Kangaroo Rats
    Adaptations for the hot and dry… In low latitude deserts, daily air temperature may reach 40 – 50 oC, and surface temperatures may reach 60 – 70 oC! Mammals now faced with reverse heat gradient. More difficult to maintain Tb below Ta than to regulate heat loss when Tb above Ta. Primary mechanism used by mammals to dump heat is evaporative cooling. When Ta > Tb, must evaporate water to dissipate heat to environment, no passive flow possible. (580 kcal per liter water) Some mammals sweat (primates, some ungulates), but fairly limited or absent in most. Carnivores and some ungulates pant. Evap. water loss from respiratory passages. Some mammals resort to saliva spreading. Problem if water limited! Most mammals die if lose >10-20% of body water. Deserts are an especially challenging environment both because of heat and low availability of water. High Ta often associated Dehydration causes blood with scarcity of water. to thicken, no longer effectively circulates Dry air doesn’t contain through capillaries, can’t enough humidity to form transport heat effectively, clouds or hold in heat at causes Tb to shoot up. night, Ta fluctuates more than in humid environments. Tb above 43oC can induce brain damage. (109oF) Low moisture often means low productivity = low food. Death comes quicker by hyperthermia than by hypothermia. small mammals in hot deserts: kangaroo rats as an example 1) nocturnal activity (may be more cold- stressed than heat!) 2) uses burrows, relatively stable thermal environment plus blocks entrances during day to keep in humidity 3) relies on pre-formed water in food, and metabolically produced water; cached seeds absorb some water from humidity in burrow A 50-g kangaroo rat out in the mid-day sun in a hot desert would 4) super efficient kidneys (urine 5X need to evaporate water more concentrated than that of equivalent to 13% of its body humans, crystalizes on contact with mass each hour to maintain air!) normal Tb.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Mammal Sampling Date: 02/29/2016
    Title: TOS Protocol and Procedure: Small Mammal Sampling Date: 02/29/2016 NEON Doc. #: NEON.DOC.000481 Author: K. Thibault Revision: H TOS PROTOCOL AND PROCEDURE: SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING PREPARED BY ORGANIZATION DATE Katherine M. Thibault FSU 12/03/2015 Kim Tsao FSU 10/25/2015 Yuri Springer FSU 01/15/2015 Liz Knapp HR 12/31/2013 APPROVALS ORGANIZATION APPROVAL DATE Andrea Thorpe SCI 02/26/2016 Mike Stewart SYS 02/17/2016 RELEASED BY ORGANIZATION RELEASE DATE Judy Salazar CM 02/29/2016 See configuration management system for approval history. 2016 NEON Inc. All rights reserved. The National Ecological Observatory Network is a project solely funded by the National Science Foundation and managed under cooperative agreement by NEON, Inc. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Title: TOS Protocol and Procedure: Small Mammal Sampling Date: 02/29/2016 NEON Doc. #: NEON.DOC.000481 Author: K. Thibault Revision: H Change Record REVISION DATE ECO # DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE A_DRAFT 07/11/2012 ECO-00469 Draft release B_DRAFT 01/24/2014 ECO-01181 Draft release. Will finalize in next rev. Production release, template change, and other changes as C 03/31/2014 ECO-01671 detailed in Appendix C. Merged with rodent-borne pathogen sampling protocol. Updated Appendix D with site-specific information. D 04/10/2014 ECO-01792 Updated References. Added Appendix D, Bleed Grid Designation. E 12/05/2014 ECO-02530 Migration to new protocol template Decreased sampling bout duration for diversity grids from three nights to one.
    [Show full text]