Advertisement

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 36, Issue 4, pp 243–250 | Cite as

Inter-specific variation in anti-predator behavior in sympatric species of kangaroo rat

  • Jan A. Randall
  • Susan M. Hatch
  • Evon R. Hekkala
Article

Abstract

Kangaroo rats, Dipodomys, occupy desert habitats with little cover and thus are under high predation risk from diverse predators. The behavior used to assess predation risk or to escape capture is unknown. We therefore compared anti-predator behavior of two sympatric species of kangaroo rat of different sizes, D. merriami and D. spectabilis. We first examined whether kangaroo rats use olfaction as a first line of defense against snake predation and tested the rats for their responses to scent extracted from two species of snake that live sympatrically with the kangaroo rats, the Mojave rattlesnake (Crotalus scutulatus) and the gopher snake (Pitophis melanoleucus). We also tested for species differences in anti-predator behavior through 15-min interactions between the kangaroo rats and free-moving gopher snakes. We found that D. spectabilis actively approached the scent of both rattlesnakes and gopher snakes more than controls of vegetable oil and evaporated solvent (Fig. 1). In contrast, D. merriami did not differentiate snake odors from controls in the experimental arena, but they sniffed the sand where a free-moving snake had passed more than D. spectabilis. Both species successfully avoided predation in encounters with live snakes. Although total numbers of approaches and withdrawals were similar (Fig. 2), D. spectabilis spent significantly more time within striking distance of the snake than D. merriami. D. spectabilis approached the head of the snake in 93% of its approaches and often engaged in nose to snout contact with the snake. If the snake struck, D. spectabilis jumped directly backward to avoid a strike and footdrummed at a safe distance. In contrast, D. merriami oriented to the snake more than D. spectabilis, but approached the head in only 41% of the approaches and rarely engaged in nose-to-snout contact. The snakes struck, hissed and decreased predatory approaches with D. spectabilis but not with D. merriami (Fig. 3). These results show that kangaroo rats can behaviorally influence the risk of being preyed on by snakes. The two species differ, however, in how they react to snakes. The larger D. spectabilis confronts snakes while the smaller D. merriami monitors snakes from a safe distance and avoids them.

Key words

Snake Anti-predator Dipodomys 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bartholomew GA, Caswell HH (1951) Locomotion in kangaroo rats and its adaptive significance. J Mammal 32:155–169Google Scholar
  2. Best TL (1972) Mound development by a pioneer population of the banner-tailed kangaroo rat, Dipodomys spectabilis Goldman, in eastern New Mexico. Am Midl Nat 87:201–206Google Scholar
  3. Brown JS (1988) Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competition. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22:37–47Google Scholar
  4. Coss RG, Owings DH (1978) Snake-directed behavior by snake naive and experienced California ground squirrels in a simulated burrow. Z Tierpsychol 48:421–435Google Scholar
  5. Curio E (1978) The adaptive significance of mobbing. I. Teleonomic hypotheses and prediction. Z Tierpsychol 48:175–183Google Scholar
  6. Curio E, Ernst U, Vieth W (1978) Cultural transmission of enemy recognition: one function of mobbing. Science 202:899–901Google Scholar
  7. Daly M, Wilson M, Behrends PR, Jacobs LF (1990) Characteristics of kangaroo rats, Dipodomys merriami, associated with differential predation risk. Anim Behav 40:380–389Google Scholar
  8. Daly M, Behrends PR, Wilson MI, Jacobs LF (1992) Behavioural modulation of predation risk: moonlight avoidance and crepuscular compensation in a nocturnal desert rodent, Dipodornys merriami. Anim Behav 44:1–9Google Scholar
  9. Dawkins R, Krebs JR (1978) Animal signals: information or manipulation. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology. Blackwell, Oxford pp 282–308Google Scholar
  10. Djawdan M (1993) Locomotor performance of bipedal and quadrupedal heteromyid rodents. Funct Ecol 7:195–202Google Scholar
  11. Djawdan M, Garland T Jr (1988) Maximal running speeds of bipedal and quadrupedal rodents. J Mammal 69:765–772Google Scholar
  12. Epple G, Mason JR, Nolte DL, Campbell DL (1993) Effects of predator odors on feeding in the mountain beaver (Aplodontia rufa). J Mammal 74:715–722Google Scholar
  13. Gillingham JC, Clark DG (1981) An analysis of prey searching behavior in the western diamondback rattlesnake, Crotalus atrox. Behav Neur Biol 32:235–240Google Scholar
  14. Goldthwaite RO, Coss RG, Owings DH (1990) Evolutionary dissipation of an antisnake system: differential behavior by California and arctic ground squirrels in above- and below-ground contexts. Behaviour 112:246–269Google Scholar
  15. Graves BM, Halpern M (1988) Neonate plains garter snakes (Thamnophis radix) are attracted to conspecific skin extracts. J Comp Psychol 102:251–253Google Scholar
  16. Halpin ZT (1983) Naturally occurring encounters between black-tailed prairie dogs (Cynomys ludovicianus) and snakes. Am Midl Nat 109:50–54Google Scholar
  17. Hennessy DF, Owings DH (1978) Snake species discrimination and the role of olfactory cues in the snake-directed behavior of the California ground squirrel. Behaviour 67: 115–124Google Scholar
  18. Jones WT (1984) Natal philopatry in bannertailed kangaroo rats. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 15:151–155Google Scholar
  19. Kobayashi T (1987) Does the Siberian chipmunk respond to the snake by identifying it? J Ethol 5:137–144Google Scholar
  20. Kotler BP (1984) Risk of predation and the structure of desert rodent communities. Ecology 65:689–701Google Scholar
  21. Kotler BP (1992) Behavioral resource depression and decaying perceived risk of predation in two species of coexisting gerbils. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 30:239–244Google Scholar
  22. Kotler BP, Brown JS, Smith RJ, Wirtz WO II (1988) The effects of morphology and body size on rates of owl predation on desert rodents. Oikos 53:145–152Google Scholar
  23. Kotler BP, Brown JS, Slotow RH, Goodfriend WL, Strauss M (1993) The influence of snakes on the foraging behavior of gerbils. Oikos 67:309–316Google Scholar
  24. Lima SL, Dill LM (1990) Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68:619–640Google Scholar
  25. Longland WS, Price MV (1991) Direct observations of owls and heteromyid rodents: can predation risk explain microhabitat use? Ecology 72:2261–2273Google Scholar
  26. Loughry WJ (1987) The dynamics of snake harassment by blacktailed prairie dogs. Behaviour 103:27–48Google Scholar
  27. Owings DH, Coss RG (1977) Snake mobbing by California ground squirrels: adaptive variation and ontogeny. Behaviour 62:50–69Google Scholar
  28. Owings DH, Owings SC (1979) Snake-directed behavior by blacktailed prairie dogs (Cynomoys ludovicianus). Z Tierpsychol 49:35–54Google Scholar
  29. Owings DH, Loughry WJ (1985) Variation in snake-elicited jump-yipping by black-tailed prairie dogs: ontogeny and snake specificity. Z Tierpsychol 70:177–200Google Scholar
  30. Pierce BM, Longland WS, Jenkins SH (1992) Rattlesnake predation on desert rodents: microhabitat and species-specific effects on risk. J Mammal 73:859–865Google Scholar
  31. Pulliam HR, Caraco T (1984) Living in groups: Is there an optimal group size? In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology: an evolutionary approach, Sinauer, Sunderland, pp 122–147Google Scholar
  32. Radcliffe GW, Esteop K, Boyer T, Chizar D (1986) Stimulus control of predatory behavior in red spitting cobras (Naja mossambiea pallida) and prairie rattlesnakes (Crotalus v. viridis). Anim Behav 34:804–814Google Scholar
  33. Randall JA (1984) Territorial defense and advertisement by foot-drumming in bannertail kangaroo rats (Dipodomys spectabilis) at high and low population densities. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 16: 11–20Google Scholar
  34. Randall JA (1989a) Individual footdrumming signatures in banner-tailed kangaroo rats, Dipodomys spectabilis. Anim Behav 38: 620–630Google Scholar
  35. Randall JA (1989b) Neighbor recognition in a solitary mammal (Dipodomys merriami). Ethology 81:123–133.Google Scholar
  36. Randall JA (1993) Behavioural adaptations of desert rodents (Heteromyidae). Anim Behav 45:263–287Google Scholar
  37. Randall JA (1994) Discrimination of footdrumming signatures by kangaroo rats (Dipodomys spectabilis). Anim Behav 47:45–54Google Scholar
  38. Randall JA, Stevens CM (1987) Footdrumming and other antipredator responses in the bannertail kangaroo rat (Dipodomys spectabilis). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 20:187–194Google Scholar
  39. Schroder GD (1979) Foraging behavior and home range utilization of the bannertail kangaroo rat (Dipodomys spectabilis). Ecology 60:657–665Google Scholar
  40. Sweet SS (1985) Geographic variation, convergent crypsis and mimicry in gopher snakes (Pituphis melanoleucus) and Wester rattlesnakes (Crotalus viridis). J Herpetol 19:55–67Google Scholar
  41. Tamura N (1989) Snake-directed mobbing by Formosan squirrel Callosciurus erythraeus thaiwanensis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 24: 175–180Google Scholar
  42. Towers, SR, Coss RG (1990) Confronting snakes in the burrow: snake-species discrimination and antisnake tactics of two California ground squirrel populations. Ethology 84:177–192Google Scholar
  43. Towers SR, Coss RG (1991) Antisnake behavior of Columbian ground squirrels (Spermophilus columbianus). J Mammal 72: 776–783Google Scholar
  44. Webster DB (1962) A function of the enlarged middle-cavity of the kangaroo rat Dipodomys. Physiol Zool 35:248–255Google Scholar
  45. Webster DB, Webster M (1971) Adaptive value of hearing and vision in kangaroo rat predator avoidance. Brain Behav Evol 4:310–322Google Scholar
  46. Webster DB, Webster M (1984) The specialized auditory system of kangaroo rats. Sensory Physiol 8:161–196Google Scholar
  47. Weldon PJ (1990) Responses by vertebrates to chemicals from predators. In: Macdonald DW, Muller-Schwarze D, Natynczuk SE (eds) Chemical signals in vertebrates 5. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 500–521Google Scholar
  48. Woodland DJ, Jaafar Z, Knight ML (1980) The “pursuit deterrent” function of alarm signals. Am Nat 115:748–753Google Scholar
  49. Wilkinson L (1990) SYSTAT: the system for statistics. Systat, EvanstonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan A. Randall
    • 1
  • Susan M. Hatch
    • 1
  • Evon R. Hekkala
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologySan Francisco State UniversitySan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations