Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 37–47 | Cite as

Colonization in a pika population: dispersal vs philopatry

  • Andrew T. Smith
  • Barbara L. Ivins


Relative tendencies toward dispersal or philopatry in a marked population of alpine mammals, the pika (Ochotona princeps), were investigated over a 3-year period in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado. Home range size, distances between centers of activity of dyads, and weighted overlaps of home ranges of dyads were used to define space use patterns. Disappearance and establishment of individuals reflected the temporal component of space use. Social relationships among conspecifics were defined by agonistic and affiliative behaviors.

Home ranges of resident adult males and females were of equal size on talus, the obligate habitat of pikas. Adjacent home ranges were normally occupied by members of the opposite sex, and this spacing apparently results from the balance of agonistic and affiliative behaviors exhibited by nearest-neighbor heterosexual pairs.

Most juveniles were philopatric. Throughout the summer they remained on their natal home range where they were involved in both agonistic and affiliative behaviors with their mother and putative father. Most animals that established residency were juveniles, and of these almost all settled within 50 m of their natal home range center. This pattern was independent of population density.

Immigrants were met with extreme aggression by resident adults that was not balanced by affiliative behaviors. Few immigrants of either sex successflly established on the study area. Adults occasionally changed home ranges, probably to enhance their chances of mating. Intense aggression directed at unfamiliar animals coupled with the acceptance of spatial overlap of related young throughout the summer apparently promote philopatry in pikas. Philopatric settlement in pikas may lead to incestuous matings and contribute to their low intrapopulation genetic variability.


Home Range Home Range Size Rocky Mountain Resident Adult Relative Tendency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barash DP (1973) Territorial and foraging behavior of pika (Ochotona princeps) in Montana. Am Midl Nat 89:202–207Google Scholar
  2. Brunson JT, Seaman RN, Nash DJ (1977) Interpopulational variation of blood proteins in pika (Ochotona princeps saxatilis). Great Basin Nat 37:77–80Google Scholar
  3. Duke KL (1951) The external genitalia of the pika, Ochotona princeps. J Mammal 32:169–173Google Scholar
  4. Gaines MS, McClenaghan LR Jr (1980) Dispersal in small mammals. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 11:163–196Google Scholar
  5. Glover DG, Smith MH, Ames L, Joule J, Dubach JM (1977) Genetic variation in pika populations. Can J Zool 55:1841–1845Google Scholar
  6. Greenwood PJ (1980) Mating systems, philopatry and dispersal in birds and mammals. Anim Behav 28:1140–1162Google Scholar
  7. Greenwood PJ, Harvey PH, Perrins CM (1978) Inbreeding and dispersal in the great tit. Nature 271:52–54Google Scholar
  8. Hanken J, Sherman PW (1981) Multiple paternity in Belding's ground squirrel litters. Science 212:351–353Google Scholar
  9. Hobbs RP (1976) Taxonomy and ecology of gastro-intestinal helminths in pikas of North America. M Sc thesis, University of Alberta, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
  10. Hoogland JL (1982) Prairie dogs avoid extreme inbreeding. Science 215:1639–1641Google Scholar
  11. Kleiman DG (1981) Correlations among life history characteristics of mammalian species exhibiting two extreme forms of monogamy. In: Alexander RD, Tinkle DW (eds) Natural selection and social behavior. Chiron Press, New York Concord, pp 332–344Google Scholar
  12. Kleiman DG, Malcolm JR (1981) The evolution of male parental investment in mammals. In: Gubernick DJ, Klopfer PH (eds) Parental care in mammals. Plenum Press, New York, pp 347–387Google Scholar
  13. Koeppl JW, Slade NA, Hoffmann RS (1975) A bivariate home range model with possible application to ethological data analysis. J Mammal 56:81–90Google Scholar
  14. Krear HR (1965) An ecological and ethological study of the pika (Ochotona princeps Bangs) in the Front Range of Colorado. PhD thesis, University of Colorado, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  15. Lerner IM (1954) Genetic homeostasis. Oliver and Boyd, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  16. Lidicker WZ Jr (1975) The role of dispersal in the demography of small mammals. In: Golly FB, Petrusewicz K, Ryszkowski L (eds) Small mammals: their productivity and population dynamics. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 103–128Google Scholar
  17. Michener GR (1980) The measurement and interpretation of interaction rates: an example with adult Richardson's ground squirrels. Biol Behav 5:371–384Google Scholar
  18. Millar JS (1971) Breeding of the pika in relationship to the environment. PhD thesis, University of Alberta, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
  19. Millar JS (1972) Timing of breeding of pikas in southwestern Alberta. Can J Zool 50:665–669Google Scholar
  20. Millar JS (1973) Evolution of litter size in the pika, Ochotona princeps (Richardson). Evolution 27:134–143Google Scholar
  21. Millar JS (1974) Success of reproduction in pikas Ochotona princeps (Richardson). J Mammal 55:527–542Google Scholar
  22. Millar JS, Tapper SC (1973) Growth rates of pikas in Alberta. Can Field Nat 87:457–459Google Scholar
  23. Millar JS, Zwickel FC (1972) Determination of age, age structure, and mortality of the pika, Ochotona princeps (Richardson). Can J Zool 50:229–232Google Scholar
  24. Ricklefs RE (1967) A graphical method of fitting equations to growth curves. Ecology 48:978–983Google Scholar
  25. Sharp PL (1973) Behavior in the pika (Ochotona princeps) in the Kananaskis region of Alberta. M Sc thesis, University of Alberta, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
  26. Sherman PW (1980) The limits of ground squirrel nepotism. In: Barlow GW, Silverberg J (eds) Sociobiology: beyond nature/nurture? Westview Press, Boulder, pp 505–544Google Scholar
  27. Shields WM (1979) Philopatry, inbreeding, and the adaptive advantages of sex. PhD thesis, Ohio State University, ColumbusGoogle Scholar
  28. Smith AT (1974a) The distribution and dispersal of pikas: consequences of insular population structure. Ecology 55:1112–1119Google Scholar
  29. Smith AT (1974b) The distribution and dispersal of pikas: influence of behavior and climate. Ecology 55:1368–1376Google Scholar
  30. Smith AT (1978) Comparative demography of pikas (Ochotona): effect of spatial and temporal age-specific mortality. Ecology 59:133–139Google Scholar
  31. Smith AT (1981) Territoriality and social behavior of Ochotona princeps. In: Myers K, MacInnes CD (eds) Proceedings of the world lagomorph conference. Guelph University Press, Guelph, pp 310–323Google Scholar
  32. Smith AT, Ivins BL (in press) Reproductive tactics of pikas: why have two litters? Can J ZoolGoogle Scholar
  33. Svendsen GE (1979) Territoriality and behavior in a population of pikas (Ochotona princeps). J Mammal 60:324–330Google Scholar
  34. Tapper SC (1973) The spatial organisation of pikas (Ochotona), and its effect on population recruitment. PhD thesis, University of Alberta, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
  35. Waser PM, Jones WT (in press) Natal philopatry among solitary mammals: distribution, causes, and consequences. Q Rev BiolGoogle Scholar
  36. Waser PM, Wiley RH (1979) Mechanisms and evolution of spacing in animals. In: Marler P, Vandenbergh J (eds) Handbook of behavioral neurobiology: social behavior and communication. Plenum Press, New York, pp 159–223Google Scholar
  37. Wiseley AN (1973) Patterns of variation in populations of the pika, Ochotona princeps. MA thesis, University of Mantana, MissoulaGoogle Scholar
  38. Whitworth MR, Southwick CH (1981) Growth of pika in laboratory confinement. Growth 45:67–72Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew T. Smith
    • 1
  • Barbara L. Ivins
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyArizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations