European Journal of Wildlife Research

, Volume 61, Issue 1, pp 57–62 | Cite as

A new method for assessing food quality in common vole (Microtus arvalis) populations

  • Eva Janova
  • Josef Bryja
  • David Cizmar
  • Ladislav Cepelka
  • Marta Heroldova
Original Paper

Abstract

Food quality is an important factor influencing the demography of small rodents. While there have been numerous studies on food supply during small mammal population cycles, studies on quality of food consumed are rare due to technical difficulties in estimating nitrogen in small samples, such as stomachs or faeces. In this study, we use a new method, near infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS), for estimating nitrogenous compounds (NC) in stomachs of common voles (Microtus arvalis). Samples were taken from two populations over two 3-year periods. Vegetation cover (managed alfalfa/set-aside field), and thus also food supply, differed significantly between the two periods. In analysing the effects of food supply and individual attributes (i.e. sex, body size, reproduction) on NC in stomachs, we were able to show that nitrogen varied uniformly and that sex, body size and season had no effect. No significant difference in NC intake was observed between the two study periods, despite individuals being smaller and the population less abundant during the second period. During the peak densities, however, reproducing females consumed food with a significantly higher level of nitrogen than all other individuals. Our results indicate that changes in food supply do not affect the overall quality of food consumed but that maintenance of nutritional quality may require higher energetic release, which may affect body condition. We confirm that NIRS represents a useful new tool opening new possibilities in small-mammal ecology studies.

Keywords

NIRS Nitrogen Rodent Food quality Food supply 

References

  1. AOAC (1980) Official methods of analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, D.C., 1081 ppGoogle Scholar
  2. Balmelli L, Nentwig W, Airoldi JP (1999) Food preferences of the common vole Microtus arvalis in the agricultural landscape with regard to nutritional components of plants. Z Saugetierkd Int J Mamm Biol 64:154–168Google Scholar
  3. Batzli GO (1986) Nutritional ecology of the California vole: effects of food quality on reproduction. Ecology 67:406–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bergeron JM, Jodoin L (1987) Defining “high quality” food resources of herbivores: the case for meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Oecologia 71:510–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borkowska A (1995) Seasonal changes in gut morphology of the striped field mouse (Apodemus agrarius). Can J Zool 73:1095–1099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Briner T, Favre N, Nentwig W, Airoldi J-P (2007) Population dynamics of Microtus arvalis in a weed strip. Mammal Biol 72:106–115Google Scholar
  7. Büning-Pfaue H, Hartmann R, Kehraus S, Urban C (1998) Near infrared spectrometric analysis of food and its achievable performance. J Near Infrared Spectrosc 6:A27–A33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Butet A (1996) Does food quality drive cycle in Microtus arvalis? Study on a French Atlantic march population. Proceedings of the I. European Congress of Mammalogy, Museu Bocage Lisboa 177–188, Déposito legal no, 104920/96Google Scholar
  9. Cepelka L, Heroldova M, Janova E, Suchomel J (2013) Dynamics of nitrogenous substance content in the diet of the wood mouse (Apodemus sylvaticus). Acta Univ Agric Silvic Mendel Brun 61:1247–1253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cepelka L, Heroldova M, Janova E, Suchomel J (2014) The dynamics of nitrogenous substances in rodent diet in a forest environment. Mammalia 78:327–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clarke JR (1985) The reproductive biology of the bank vole (Clethrionomys glareolus) and the wood mouse (Apodemus sylvaticus). Symp Zool Soc Lond 55:133–159Google Scholar
  12. Cole RF, Batzli GO (1978) Influence of supplemental feeding on a vole population. J Mammal 59:809–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dixon R, Coates D (2009) Review: near infrared spectroscopy of faeces to evaluate the nutrition and physiology of herbivores. J Near Infrared Spectrosc 17:1–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ebensperger LA, Botto-Mahan C, Tamarin RH (2000) Nonparental infanticide in meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus: the influence of nutritional benefits. Ethol Ecol Evol 12:149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Foley WJ, McIlwee A, Lawler I, Aragones L, Woolnough AP, Berding N (1998) Ecological application of near infrared reflectance spectroscopy—a tool for rapid, cost-effective prediction of the composition of plant and animal tissues and aspects of animal performance. Oecologia 116:293–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Franois HT, David WM, Will JM (1997) Small mammals on one-year set aside. Acta Theriol 42:329–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gorman ML, Akbar Z (1993) A comparative study of the ecology of wood mice Apodemus sylvaticus in two contrasting habitats: deciduous woodland and maritime sand-dunes. J Zool (Lond) 229:385–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Haken AE, Batzli GO (1996) Effects of availability of food and interspecific competition on diets of prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster). J Mammal 77:315–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hambäck PA, Grellman D, Hjalten J (2002) Winter herbivory by voles during a population peak: the importance of plant quality. Ecography 25:74–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hansson L (1979) Food as a limiting factor for small rodent numbers. Test of two hypotheses. Oecologia 37:297–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hansson L (1999) Intraspecific variation in dynamic: small rodents between food and predation in changing landscapes. Oikos 86:159–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hardy MP, Gao HB, Dong Q, Ge R, Wang Q, Chai WR, Feng X, Sottas C (2005) Stress hormone and male reproductive function. Cell Tissue Res 322:147–153PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Heroldova M (1994) Diet of 4 rodent species from Robinia pseudoacacia stands in South Moravia. Acta Theriol 39:333–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Heroldova M, Janova E (2010) Alimentary tract morphology of two rodent species from the same set-aside fields. Rodens et Spatium, Zonguldak, 20.–24. July, 2010, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  25. Heroldova M, Janova E, Bryja J, Tkadlec E (2005) Set-aside plots—source of small mammal pests? Succession of weeds and small mammal community on abandoned alfalfa fields. Folia Zool 54:337–350Google Scholar
  26. Holisova V (1959) Potrava hraboše polního [The diet of common vole]. In: Kratochvil J (ed.) Hraboš polní (Microtus arvalis) [Common vole (Microtus arvalis)]. NČSAV, Praha [In Czech with German abstract]. pp. 108–127Google Scholar
  27. Jacob J, Tkadlec E (2010) Rodent outbreaks in Europe: dynamics and damage. In: Singleton GR, Belmain SR, Brown PR, Hardy B (eds) Rodent outbreaks: ecology and impacts. IRRI, Los Baños, pp 207–223Google Scholar
  28. Janova E, Heroldova M, Bryja J (2008) Conspicuous demographic and individual changes in a population of the common vole in a set-aside alfalfa field. Ann Zool Fenn 45:39–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Janova E, Skoric M, Heroldova M, Tenora F, Fictum P, Pavlik I (2010) Determinants of the prevalence of Heligmosomum costelatum (Heligmosomidae: Trichostrongiloidea) in a common vole population in southern Moravia, Czech Republic. J Helminthol 84:410–414PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kalela O (1962) On the fluctuations in the numbers of arctic and boreal small rodents as a problem of production biology. Ann Acad Sci Fenn A IV 66:1–38Google Scholar
  31. Kamler J, Homolka M (2005) Faecal nitrogen: a potential indicator of red and roe deer diet quality in forest habitats. Folia Zool 54:89–98Google Scholar
  32. Karasov WH, Martinez del Rio C (2007) Physiological ecology. How animals process energy, nutrients and toxins. Princeton University Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  33. Kidane NF, Stuth JW, Tolleson DR (2008) Predicting diet quality of donkeys via fecal-NIRS calibration. Rangel Ecol Manag 61:232–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Leslie DM, Bowyer RT, Jenks JA (2008) Facts from feces: nitrogen still measures up as a nutritional index for mammalian herbivores. J Wildl Manag 72:1420–1433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lin YTK, Batzli GO (2001) The influence of habitat quality on dispersal demography, and population dynamics of voles. Ecol Monogr 71:245–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Maisonneuve C, Rioux S (2001) Importance of riparian habitats for small mammal and herpetofaunal communities in agricultural landscapes of southern Quebec. Agric Ecosyst Environ 83:165–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Martinet L, Spitz F (1971) Variation saisonnieres de la croissance et de la mortalite du campagnol des champs, Microtus arvalis Role du photoperiodisme et de la vegetation sur ces variations [Seasonal variation in growth and mortality in the common vole, Microtus arvalis. The role of photo-period and vegetation on variation]. Mammalia 35:38–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McKey DB (1979) The distribution of secondary compounds within plants. In: Rosenthal GA, Janzen DH (eds) Herbivores: their interaction with secondary plant metabolites. Academic, New York, pp 56–133Google Scholar
  39. Migula P (1969) Bioenergetics of pregnancy and lactation in European common vole. Acta Theriol 14:167–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Myrcha A (1964) Variation of the length and weight of the alimentary tract of Clethrionomys glareolus (Schreber, 1780). Acta Theriol 9:139–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Obrtel R, Holisova V (1982) The trophic niche of Apodemus microps in Southern Moravia. Folia Zool 31:305–319Google Scholar
  42. Palo RT, Olsson GE (2009) Nitrogen and carbon concentrations in the stomach content of bank voles (Myodes glareolus). Does food quality determine abundance? Open Ecol J 2:86–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pelikan J (1959) Reprodukce hraboše polního [Reproduction in the common vole]. In: Kratochvil J (ed) Hraboš polní (Microtus arvalis) [Common vole (Microtus arvalis)]. NČSAV, Prague [In Czech with German abstract]. pp 51–89Google Scholar
  44. Pitelka FA, Schulz AM (1964) The nutrient-recovery hypothesis for arctic microtine rodents. In: Crisp D (ed) Grazing in terrestrial and marine environments. Blackwell Sci. Publ, Oxford, pp 55–68Google Scholar
  45. Raoul F, Defaut R, Michelat D, Montadert M, Pepin D, Quere JP, Tissot B, Delattr P, Giraudoux P (2001) Landscape effects on the population dynamics of small mammal communities: a preliminary analysis of prey-resource variations. Rev Ecol (Terre Vie) 56:339–352Google Scholar
  46. Schetter TA, Lochmiller RL, Leslie DM Jr, Engle DM, Payton ME (1998) Examination of the nitrogen limitation hypothesis in non-cyclic populations of cotton rats (Sigmodon hispidus). J Anim Ecol 67:705–721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sibly RM, Hone J (2002) Population growth rate and its determinants: an overview. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 357:1153–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tast J, Kalela O (1971) Comparison between rodent cycles and plant production in Finnish Lapland. Ann Acad Sci Fenn A (IV) 186:1–14Google Scholar
  49. Tew TE, MacDonald DW (1993) The effect of harvest on arable wood mice, Apodemus sylvaticus. Biol Conserv 65:279–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tumur A, Airoldi JP, Nentwig W, Halik M (2005) The population structure and dynamics of small mammals in set aside areas in western Switzerland. Acta Theriol Sin 25:254–260Google Scholar
  51. Verheyden H, Aubry L, Merlet J, Petibon P, Chauveau-Duriot B, Guillon N, Duncan P (2011) Faecal nitrogen, an index of diet quality in roe deer Capreolus capreolus? Wildl Biol 17:166–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Von Blanckenhagen F, Eccard JA, Ylönen H (2007) Animal protein as a reproductive constraint in spring reproduction of the bank vole. Ecoscience 14:323–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wilson WL, Montgpmery WI, Elwood RW (1993) Population regulation in the wood mouse Apodemus sylvaticus (L.). Mamm Rev 23:73–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhu J, Wang Y, Zhang M, Li B, Yang Y (2011) Effects of dietary protein content and food restriction on the physiological characteristics of female Microtus fortis. Shengtai Xuebao/Acta Ecol Sin 31:7464–7470Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eva Janova
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Josef Bryja
    • 1
    • 4
  • David Cizmar
    • 5
  • Ladislav Cepelka
    • 6
  • Marta Heroldova
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Vertebrate BiologyAcademy of Sciences of the Czech RepublicBrnoCzech Republic
  2. 2.Institute of Animal GeneticsVeterinary and Pharmaceutical UniversityBrnoCzech Republic
  3. 3.CEITEC-VFUUniversity of Veterinary and Pharmaceutical SciencesBrnoCzech Republic
  4. 4.Department of Botany and Zoology, Faculty of ScienceMasaryk UniversityBrnoCzech Republic
  5. 5.Central Institute for Supervising and Testing in AgricultureBrnoCzech Republic
  6. 6.Department of Forest Protection and Wildlife ManagementMendel University in BrnoBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations