Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
International Journal of Zoology
Volume 2011, Article ID 159462, 6 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/159462
Research Article

Habitat Selection and Mating Success in a Mustelid

UMR CNRS 6552 ETHOS, Université de Rennes 1, 35042 Rennes, France

Received 4 December 2010; Revised 20 February 2011; Accepted 4 March 2011

Academic Editor: Hynek Burda

Copyright © 2011 Thierry Lodé. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. R. E. Ricklefs, Ecology, W.H. Freeman, New York, NY, USA, 1990.
  2. C. J. Krebs, Ecology, The Experimental Analysis of Distribution and Abundance, Harper Collins College, Glenview, Ill, USA, 4th edition, 1994.
  3. J. A. F. Diniz-Filho, L. M. Bini, M. Á. Rodríguez, T. F. L. V. B. Rangel, and B. A. Hawkins, “Seeing the forest for the trees: partitioning ecological and phylogenetic components of Bergmann's rule in European Carnivora,” Ecography, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 598–608, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. M. L. Rosenzweig, “Habitat selection and population interactions: the search for mechanism,” American Naturalist, vol. 137, pp. S5–S28, 1991. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. Z. Abramsky, M. L. Rosenzweig, and A. Subach, “Measuring the benefit of habitat selection,” Behavioral Ecology, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 497–502, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. D. W. Morris, “Scales and costs of habitat selection in heterogeneous landscapes,” Evolutionary Ecology, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 412–432, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. M. L. Rosenzweig, Species Diversity in Time and Space, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1996.
  8. T. E. Martin, “Are microhabitat preferences of coexisting species under selection and adaptive?” Ecology, vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 656–670, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. D. R. Rubenstein, “Territory quality drives intraspecific patterns of extrapair paternity,” Behavioral Ecology, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 1058–1064, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. P. V. Switzer, “Past reproductive success affects future habitat selection,” Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 307–312, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. J. J. Jaenike and R. D. Holt, “Genetic variation for habitat preference: evidence and explanations,” American Naturalist, vol. 137, pp. S67–S90, 1991. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. P. D. McLoughlin, R. L. Case, R. J. Gau, H. D. Cluff, R. Mulders, and F. Messier, “Hierarchical habitat selection by barren-ground grizzly bears in the central Canadian Arctic,” Oecologia, vol. 132, no. 1, pp. 102–108, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. T. F. Haensly, J. A. Crawford, and S. M. Meyers, “Relationships of habitat structure to nest success of ring-necked pheasants,” Journal of Wildlife Management, vol. 51, pp. 421–425, 1987. View at Google Scholar
  14. F. R. Noss, H. B. Quigley, M. G. Hornocker, T. Merrill, and P. C. Paquet, “Conservation biology and carnivore conservation in the Rocky Mountains,” Conservation Biology, vol. 10, pp. 949–963, 1996. View at Google Scholar
  15. L. J. Petit and D. R. Petit, “Factors governing habitat selection by prothonotary warblers: field tests of the fretwell-lucas models 1,” Ecological Monographs, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 367–387, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. L. W. Bruinzeel, “Intermittent breeding as a cost of site fidelity,” Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 551–556, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. J. Da Silva, D. W. Macdonald, and P. G. H. Evans, “Net costs of group living in a solitary forager, the Eurasian badger (Meles meles),” Behavioral Ecology, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 151–158, 1994. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. B. Keane, P. M. Waser, S. R. Creel, N. M. Creel, L. F. Elliott, and D. J. Minchella, “Subordinate reproduction in dwarf mongooses,” Animal Behaviour, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 65–75, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. M. A. Cant, “Social control of reproduction in banded mongooses,” Animal Behaviour, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 147–158, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  20. T. H. Clutton-Brock, “Mammalian mating systems,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B., vol. 236, no. 1285, pp. 339–372, 1989. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. E. J. Comiskey, O. L. Bass Jr., L. J. Gross, R. T. McBride, and R. Salinas, “Panthers and forests in South Florida: an ecological perspective,” Conservation Ecology, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 18, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. R. A. Powell, “Mustelid spacing patterns, variations on a theme by Mustela,” Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, vol. 50, pp. 153–165, 1979. View at Google Scholar
  23. M. G. Hornocker, J. P. Messick, and W. E. Melquist, “Spatial strategies in three species of Mustelidae,” Acta Zoologica Fennica, vol. 174, pp. 185–188, 1983. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. T. Lodé, “Conspecific tolerance and sexual segregation in the use of space and habitats in the European polecat,” Acta Theriologica, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 171–176, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. P. Genovesi, I. Sinibaidi, and L. Boitani, “Spacing patterns and territoriality of the stone marten,” Canadian Journal of Zoology, vol. 75, no. 12, pp. 1966–1971, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. S. D. Gehrt and E. K. Fritzell, “Behavioural aspects of the raccoon mating system: determinants of consortship success,” Animal Behaviour, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 593–601, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  27. T. Lodé, “Mating system and genetic variance in a polygynous mustelid, the European polecat,” Genes and Genetic Systems, vol. 76, no. 4, pp. 221–227, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. T. B. Poole, “Detailed analysis of fighting in polecats using cine film,” Journal of Zoology, vol. 173, pp. 396–393, 1974. View at Google Scholar
  29. T. Lodé, “Activity pattern of polecats Mustela putorius L. in relation to food habits and prey activity,” Ethology, vol. 100, no. 4, pp. 295–308, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. E. H. Simpson, “Measurement of diversity,” Nature, vol. 163, no. 4148, p. 688, 1949. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. T. G. Whitham, “The theory of habitat selection, examined and extended using Pemphigus aphids,” American Naturalist, vol. 115, pp. 449–466, 1980. View at Google Scholar
  32. S. Kurki, A. Nikula, P. Helle, and H. Lindén, “Abundances of red fox and pine marten in relation to the composition of boreal forest landscapes,” Journal of Animal Ecology, vol. 67, no. 6, pp. 874–886, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. M. Camp and L. B. Best, “Nest density and nesting success of birds in roadsides adjacent to rowcrop fields,” American Midland Naturalist, vol. 131, no. 2, pp. 347–358, 1994. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. J. J. Kolbe and F. J. Janzen, “Impact of nest-site selection on nest success and nest temperature in natural and disturbed habitats,” Ecology, vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 269–281, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. Y. Haila, A. O. Nicholls, I. K. Hanski, and S. Raivio, “Stochasticity in bird habitat selection: year-to-year changes in territory locations in a boreal forest bird assemblage,” Oikos, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 536–552, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. L. S. Durbin, “Habitat selection by five otters Lutra lutra in rivers of northern Scotland,” Journal of Zoology, vol. 245, no. 1, pp. 85–92, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. B. W. Compton, J. M. Rhymer, and M. McCollough, “Habitat selection by wood turtles (Clemmys insculpta): an application of paired logistic regression,” Ecology, vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 833–843, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. A. Bifolchi and T. Lodé, “Efficiency of conservation shortcuts, a test with European otter as umbrella species for biodiversity preservation,” Biological Conservation, vol. 126, pp. 523–527, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  39. E. Virgós and J. G. Casanovas, “Distribution patterns of the Stone marten (Martes foina Erxleben, 1777) in Mediterranean mountains of central Spain,” Zeitschrift fur Saugetierkunde, vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 193–199, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. J. Zabala, I. Zuberogoitia, I. Garin, and J. Aihartza, “Landscape features in the habitat selection of European mink (Mustela lutreola) in south-western Europe,” Journal of Zoology, vol. 260, no. 4, pp. 415–421, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. A. L. Lyons, W. L. Gaines, and C. Servheen, “Black bear resource selection in the northeast Cascades, Washington,” Biological Conservation, vol. 113, no. 1, pp. 55–62, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. W. D. Spencer, R. H. Barrette, and W. J. Zielinski, “Marten habitat preferences in the northern Sierra Nevada,” Journal of Wildlife Management, vol. 47, pp. 1181–1186, 1983. View at Google Scholar
  43. A. Zalewski and W. Jedrzejewski, “Spatial organisation and dynamics of the pine marten Martes martespopulation in Bial owiezÿa Forest E Poland compared with other European woodlands,” Ecography, vol. 29, pp. 31–43, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  44. W. Jedrzejewski, K. Schmidt, J. Theuerkauf, B. Jedrzejewska, and R. Kowalczyk, “Territory size of wolves Canis lupus, linking local Bialowiezÿa Primeval Forest, Poland and Holarctic-scale patterns,” Ecography, vol. 30, pp. 66–76, 2007. View at Google Scholar
  45. T. Lodé, “Trophic status and feeding habits of the European Polecat Mustela putorius L. 1758,” Mammal Review, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 177–184, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. T. Lodé, “Functional response and area-restricted search in a predator: seasonal exploitation of anurans by the European polecat, Mustela putorius,” Austral Ecology, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 223–231, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. T. Lodé, “Genetic divergence without spatial isolation in polecat Mustela putorius populations,” Journal of Evolutionary Biology, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 228–236, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. S. Larivière and F. Messier, “Spatial organization of a prairie striped skunk population during the waterfowl nesting season,” Journal of Wildlife Management, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 199–204, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. R. B. Wielgus and F. L. Bunnell, “Tests of hypotheses for sexual segregation in grizzly bears,” Journal of Wildlife Management, vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 552–560, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. T. Oksanen, L. Oksanen, and M. Norberg, “Habitat use of small mustelids in north Fennoscandian tundra: a test of the hypothesis of patchy exploitation ecosystems,” Ecography, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 237–244, 1992. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus