Biotope preferences in groups of closely related species: a case study of Sylvaemus (Mammalia)

Oksana Markovska https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2573-4524

V. N. Karazin National University of Kharkiv (Kharkiv, Ukraine)

doi: https://doi.org/10.53452/gb2513

Cite as

Markovska, O. 2023. Biotope preferences in groups of closely related species: a case study of Sylvaemus (Mammalia).GEO&BIO, 25: 166–175. [In English, with Ukrainian summary]

pdf:  pdf

Abstract

The trapping of small mammals was carried out in 2017 to 2023 in the territory of the Kharkiv Oblast, Ukraine. In total, 19 biotopes were studied: different types of oak forest, dry and floodplain meadows, riparian vegetation, areas of the steppe, field protection forest strips, fields, as well as various ecotones. The trapping of small mammals was carried out using the standard trap-line method on 93 trap lines. With a trapping effort of 17 310 trap-nights, 1295 individuals of small mammals were caught, 689 of which belonged to the genus Sylvaemus. Three species of mice of the genus Sylvaemus were found in the territory of Kharkiv Oblast during the study period: Sylvaemus uralensis, Sylvaemus sylvaticus, and Sylvaemus tauricus. According to the relative abundance, wood mice can be arranged in the following order: uralensis > sylvaticus > tauricus. The cyclicity of annual fluctuations in relative abundance is not noticeable. The similarity of the abundance fluctuation in S. sylvaticus and S. tauricus was revealed, taking into account that these are competing species. S. uralensis and S. sylvaticus lead the top three dominant species in the overall dominance structure of small mammals. The highest relative abundance of wood mice during the study period was recorded on dry meadows, on the border of riparian vegetation with fields and floodplain meadows, on the border of field protective forest strips with fields, and in dry maple-linden-oak forest. S. uralensis belongs to the eurytopic species, is found in almost all studied biotopes, avoids oak forests, occurs on the edges of forests, dominates in abundance in open biotopes, in particular in the steppe, on dry meadows, riparian vegetation, and field protection forest strips. S. sylvaticus is also prone to eurytopy, it is recorded in significant abundance in both open and forest biotopes, mostly prefers riparian vegetation, field protection forest strips, dry coniferous forest, fresh maple-linden-oak forest and forest edges. S. tauricus is found mostly in forest biotopes, in particular in various types of oak forest and on forest edges, it prefers field protection forest strips with an old stand of oak, linden, and robinia. All three species of mice of the genus Sylvaemus are common species.

Key words: Sylvaemus, relative abundance, biotope preference, long-term monitoring, abundance category.

Correspondence to

Oksana Markovska; V. N. Karazin National University of Kharkiv, 4 Svobody Square, Kharkiv, 61022 Ukraine; Email: ksenia.markovskaia@gmail.com

Article info

Submitted: 03.12.2023. Revised: 28.12.2023. Accepted: 30.12.2023

Reference

Amori, G., R. Hutterer, B. Krystufek, N. Yigit, G. Mitsain, L. J. Palomo. 2016. Apodemus flavicollis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: e.T1892A115058023.

Balasanyan, V., E. Yavruyan, B. Somerova, A. Abramjan, E. Landova, P. Munclinger, D. Frynta. 2018. High diversity of mtDNA haplotypes confirms syntopic occurrence of two field mouse species Apodemus uralensis and A. witherbyi (Muridae: Apodemus) in Armenia. Russian Journal of Genetics, 54 (6): 687–697. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1022795418060030

Barciova, L., M. Macholan. 2006. Morphometric study of two species of wood mice Apodemus sylvaticus and A. flavicollis (Rodentia: Muridae): traditional and geometric morphometric approach. Acta Theriologica, 51 (1): 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03192651

Canady, A., L. Mosansky, M. Hybelova, P. Pavelkova. 2014. Morphometric variability of Apodemus uralensis in Slovakia (Rodentia: Muridae). Lynx, n. s. (Praha), 45: 5–14.

Canady, A., L. Mosansky. 2015. Craniometric data of Apodemus sylvaticus in Slovakia. Biologia, 70 (7): 974–981. https://doi.org/10.1515/biolog-2015-0105

Frynta, D., P. Mikulova, V. Vohralik. 2006. Skull shape in the genus Apodemus: phylogenetic conservatism and/or adaptation to local conditions. Acta Theriologica, 51 (2): 139–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03192665

Hoofer, S. R., S. Gaschak, Y. Dunina-Barkovskaya, J. Makluk, H. N. Meeks, J. K. Wickliffe, R. J. Baker. 2007. New information for systematics, taxonomy, and phylogeography of the rodent genus Apodemus (Sylvaemus) in Ukraine. Journal of Mammalogy, 88 (2): 330–342. https://doi.org/10.1644/06-MAMM-A-218R1.1

Jojic, V., V. Bugarski-Stanojevic, J. Blagojevic, M. Vujosevic. 2014. Discrimination of the sibling species Apodemus flavicollis and A. sylvaticus (Rodentia, Muridae). Zoologischer Anzeiger, 253: 261–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcz.2014.02.002

Knitlova, M., I. Horacek. 2017. Late Pleistocene-Holocene paleobiogeography of the genus Apodemus in Central Europe. PLOS One, 12 (3): 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173668

Krystufek, B., V. Vohralík. 2007. Distribution of field mice (Apodemus) in Anatolia. Zoology in the Middle East, 42: 25–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/09397140.2007.10638243

Kucheruk, V. V. 1952. Quantitative registration of the most important species of harmful rodents and shrews / Methods of accounting for the number and geographical distribution of terrestrial vertebrates. USSR Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 9–46. [In Russian]

Kuncova, P., D. Frynta. 2009. Interspecific morphometric variation in the postcranial skeleton in the genus Apodemus. Belgian Journal of Zoology, 139 (2): 133–146.

Lesinski, G., J. Gryz, D. Krauze-Gryz, P. Stolarz. 2020. Population increase and synurbization of the yellow-necked mouse Apodemus flavicollis in some wooded areas of Warsaw agglomeration, Poland, in the years 1983–2018. Urban Ecosystems, 24: 481–489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-020-01046-7

Marsh, A. C. W., S. Harris. 2000. Partitioning of woodland habitat resources by two sympatric species of Apodemus: lessons for the conservation of the yellow-necked mouse (A. flavicollis) in Britain. Biological Conservation, 92: 275–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00071-3

Michaux, J. R., R. Libois, M. G. Filippucci. 2005. So close and so different: comparative phylogeography of two small mammal species, the yellow-necked fieldmouse (Apodemus flavicollis) and the woodmouse (Apodemus sylvaticus) in the Western Palearctic region. Heredity, 94: 52–63. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.hdy.6800561

Naglov, V. A. 1989. Distribution and population density of Sylvaemus sylvaticus (Rodentia, Muridae) in the Kharkov oblast. Vestnik zoologii, 4: 87–89. [In Russian]

Naglov, V. A., G. E. Tkach. 2002. The structure of rodent communities in the agrocenoses of the forest-steppe and steppe zones of the Kharkiv region. Visnyk Luhansk DPU іmenі Taras Shevchenko, 1: 76–79. [In Russian]

Niethammer, J. 1969. Zur frage der introgression bei den walmäusen Apodemus sylvaticus und A. flavicollis (Mammalia, Rodentia). Zeitschrift für Zoologische Systematik und Evolutionsforschung, 7: 77–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0469.1969.tb00850.x

Numerov, A. D., A. S. Klimov, E. I. Trufanova. 2010. Field studies of terrestrial vertebrates. Voronezhsky State University, Voronezh, 1–301. [In Russian]

Popov, V. V. 1993. Discriminant criteria and comparative study on morphology and habitat selection of Apodemus sylvaticus (Linnaeus, 1758) and Apodemus flavicollis (Melchior, 1834) (Mammalia, Rodentia, Muridae) in Bulgaria. Acta Zoologica Bulgarica, 46: 100–111.

Shar, S., N. Batsaikhan, D. Dolch, S. L. Gardner, O. Kullmer, [et al.]. 2015. First report of the herb field mouse Apodemus uralensis (Pallas, 1811) from Mongolia. Mongolian Journal of Biological Sciences, 13 (1-2): 35–42. https://doi.org/10.22353/mjbs.2015.13.05

Schlitter, D., E. Straeten, G. Amori, R. Hutterer, B. Kryіtufek, N. Yigit, G. Mitsain. 2016. Apodemus sylvaticus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: e.T1904A115059104.

Vukicevic-Radic, O., R. Matic, D. Kataranovski, S. Stamenkovic. 2006. Spatial organization and home range of Apodemus flavicollis and A. agrarius on mt. Avala, Serbia. Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 52 (1): 81–96.

Wilson, D. E., D. M. Reeder. 2005. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference, 3rd ed. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1–2142.

Yalden, D. W. 1971. A population of the yellow-necked mouse, Apodemus flavicollis. Journal of Zoology, 164: 244–250. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1971.tb01310.x

Yalden, D. W., R. F. Shore. 1991. Yellow-necked mice Apodemus flavicollis at Woodchester Park, 1968–1989. Journal of Zoology, 224: 329–332. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1991.tb04811.x

Zagorodniuk, I. 2002. Field key to small mammals of Ukraine. Proceedings of the Theriological School, 5: 1–60. [In Ukrainian]

Zagorodniuk, I., O. Kiseliuk, I. Polishchuk, I. Zenina. 2002. Point estimates of the abundance of populations and the minimum scheme of recording mammals. Visnyk of L’viv University, Biology Series, 30: 8–17. [In Ukrainian]

Zagorodniuk, I. 2006. Mammals of eastern provinces of Ukraine: composition and historical changes of the fauna. Proceedings of the Theriological School, 7: 216–259. [In Ukrainian]

Zagorodniuk, I., V. Naglov. 2017. The index of habitat preference in ecological studies of species and of the structure of communities. Novitates Theriologicae, 10: 176–182. [In Ukrainian]