Skip to main content
Log in

Breeding suppression between two unrelated and initially unfamiliar females occurs with or without social tolerance in common voles (Microtus arvalis)

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal of Ethology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Female common voles can breed in small groups or in isolation. Given the option, will isolated females opt for communal breeding with unrelated females and a probable low reproductive bias, or will they remain isolated, forgoing the advantages of group living? This laboratory work examined the response of two unrelated females to a foreign male in order to determine their social and breeding strategies. Before encountering a male, 70% of the females lived communally and 30% were solitary with a dominance hierarchy. In the presence of the male, only 33% of the females were still associated and lived with the male in a communal nest. In the other triads, only the oldest female lived with the male and she dominated the younger female. Although all animals were then experimentally separated to avoid late abortion due to social stress or infanticide, in 89% of the dyads only one female littered. This breeding suppression happened in hierarchic dyads but also in tolerant ones. This laboratory study on the social influence on reproduction showed that breeding suppression can occur in unrelated female common voles even when they are not closely grouped. It suggests that cooperative breeding between unrelated females should remain rare.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agrell J (1995) A shift in female social organization independent of relatedness: an experimental study on the field vole (Microtus agrestis). Behav Ecol 6:182–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron G, Pottier J (1977) Determination of activity patterns of Clethrionomys gapperi in an artificial tunnel system. Nat Can 104:341–351

    Google Scholar 

  • Berdoy M, Smith P, Macdonald DW (1995) Stability of social status in wild rats: age and the role of settled dominance. Behaviour 132:193–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenberg D (1986) Telemetrische und endoskopische Untersuchungen zur Soziologie, zur Aktivität und zum Massenwechsel der Feldmaus, Microtus arvalis (Pall.). Z Angew Zool 73:337–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Bondrup-Nielsen S, Karlsson F (1985) Movements and spatial patterns in populations of Clethrionomys species: a review. Ann Zool Fenn 22:385–392

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyce CCK, Boyce JL III (1988a) Population biology of Microtus arvalis. III. Regulation of numbers and breeding dispersion of females. J Anim Ecol 57:737–754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyce CCK, Boyce JL III (1988b) Population biology of Microtus arvalis. I. Lifetime reproductive success of solitary and grouped breeding females. J Anim Ecol 57:711–722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bronson FH, Macmillan B (1983) Hormonal responses to primer pheromones. In: Vandenbergh JG (ed) Pheromones and reproduction in mammals. Academic Press, New York, pp 175–197

    Google Scholar 

  • Bubernick DJ, Wright SL, Brown RE (1993) The significance of father’s presence for offspring survival in the monogamous California mouse, Peromyscus californicus. Anim Behav 46:539–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobly A (2001) Movement patterns of male common voles (Microtus arvalis) in a network of Y junctions: role of distant visual cues and scent marks. Can J Zool 79:2228–2238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobly A (2005) Scent marking by common voles Microtus arvalis in presence of a same-sex neighbour. Acta Theriol 50:343–356

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobly A, Rozenfeld FM (2000) Burrowing by common voles (Microtus arvalis) in various social environments. Behaviour 137:1443–1462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobson FS, Jacquot C, Baudoin C (2000) An experimental test of kin association in the house mouse. Can J Zool 78:1806–1812

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebensperger LA, Hurtado MJ, Valdivia L (2006) Lactating females do not discriminate between their own young and unrelated pups in the communally breeding rodent, Octodon degus. Ethology 112:921–929

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferkin MH (1988) The effect of familiarity on social interactions in meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus: a laboratory and field study. Anim Behav 36:1816–1822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerlach G, Bartmann S (2002) Reproductive skew, costs, and benefits of cooperative breeding in female wood mice (Apodemus sylvaticus). Behav Ecol 13:408–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton IM (2004) A commitment model of reproductive inhibition in cooperatively breeding groups. Behav Ecol 15:585–591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes LD (2000) To nest communally or not to nest communally: a review of rodent communal nesting and nursing. Anim Behav 59:677–688

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heise S, Rozenfeld FM (1999) Reproduction and urine marking in laboratory groups of female common voles. J Chem Ecol 25:1671–1685

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone RA, Cant M (1999) Reproductive skew and indiscriminate infanticide. Anim Behav 57:243–249

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • König B (1989) Behavioural ecology of kin recognition in house mice. Ethol Ecol Evol 1:99–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambin X, Mathers C (1997) Dissipation of kin discrimination in Orkney voles, Microtus arvalis orcadensis: a laboratory study. Ann Zool Fennici 34:23–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackin-Rogalska R (1979) Elements of the spatial organization of a common vole population. Acta Theriol 24:171–199

    Google Scholar 

  • Madison DM (1984) Group nesting and its ecological and evolutionary significance in overwintering microtine rodents. In: Merritt JF (ed) Winter ecology of small mammals. Special publication 10. Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, pp 267–274

  • Manning CJ, Dewsbury DA, Wakeland EK, Potts WK (1995) Communal nesting and communal nursing in house mice, Mus musculus domesticus. Anim Behav 50:741–751

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McShea WJ, Madison DM (1984) Communal nesting between reproductively active females in a spring population of Microtus pennsylvanicus. Can J Zool 62:344–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nubbemeyer R (1999) Progesterone and testosterone concentrations during oestrous cycle and pregnancy in the common vole (Microtus arvalis Pallas). Comp Biochem Physiol A 122:437–444

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ostfeld RS (1986) Territoriality and mating system of California voles. J Anim Ecol 55:691–706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostfeld RS, Canham CD, Pugh CD (1993) Intrinsic density-dependent regulation of vole populations. Nature 366:259–261

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Parker KJ, Lee TM (2002) Interaction of photoperiod and testes development is associated with paternal care in Microtus pennsylvanicus (meadow voles). Physiol Behav 75:91–95

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Paz y Miño CG, Tang-Martínez Z (1999) Social interactions, cross-fostering, and sibling recognition in prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster. Can J Zool 77:1631–1636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pusenius J, Viitala J (1993) Varying spacing behaviour of breeding field voles, Microtus agrestis. Ann Zool Fennici 30:143–152

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricankova V, Sumbera R, Sedlacek F (2007) Familiarity and partner preferences in female common voles, Microtus arvalis. J Ethol 25:95–98. doi:10.1007/s10164-006-0211-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts RL, Williams JR, Wang AK, Carter CS (1998) Cooperative breeding and monogamy in prairie voles: influence of the sire and geographical variation. Anim Behav 55:1131–1140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rozenfeld FM, Denoël A (1994) Chemical signals involved in spacing behavior of breeding female bank voles (Clethrionomys glareolus Schreber 1780, Microtidae, Rodentia). J Chem Ecol 20:803–813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff JO (1994) Reproductive success of solitarily and communally nesting white-footed mice and deer mice. Behav Ecol 5:206–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright SL, Brown RE (2002) The importance of paternal care on pup survival and pup growth in Peromyscus californicus when required to work for food. Behav Processes 60:41–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I benefited from a grant from the Belgian “Fonds pour la Formation à la Recherche dans l’Industrie et dans l’Agriculture” (FRIA). I thank Dr. F. Rozenfeld for initial advice, two anonymous referees for helpful comments, and Audrey Ross for the correction of English. Thanks are due to the Veterinary and Agrochemical Research Centre (CODA/CERVA) for support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexandre Dobly.

About this article

Cite this article

Dobly, A. Breeding suppression between two unrelated and initially unfamiliar females occurs with or without social tolerance in common voles (Microtus arvalis). J Ethol 27, 299–306 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10164-008-0118-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10164-008-0118-8

Keywords

Navigation