Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 21, Issue 5, pp 635–639 | Cite as

Effects of mongoose odors on rat capture success

  • Mark E. Tobin
  • Richard M. Engeman
  • Robert T. Sugihara


Wild rats,Rattus norvegicus, R. exulans, andR. rattus, avoided wire-cage live traps that had previously captured mongooses,Herpestes auropunctatus. Replacing traps soiled by mongooses with clean traps would increase rat capture success and reduce a source of experimental bias.

Key Words

Herpestes auropunctatus predator odors Rattus semiochemicals trap success 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Andelt, W.F., Baker, D.L., andBurnham, K.P. 1992. Relative preference of captive cow elk for repellent-treated diets.J. Wildl. Manage. 56:164–173.Google Scholar
  2. Arnould, C., andSignoret, J.-P. 1993. Sheep food repellents: Efficacy of various products, habituation, and social facilitation.J. Chem. Ecol. 19:225–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baldwin, P.H., Schwartz, C.W., andSchwartz, E.R. 1952. Life history and economic status of the mongoose in Hawaii.J. Mammal. 33:335–356.Google Scholar
  4. Blom, S. 1993. A primer to ingredients used for coyote lures and baits.The Probe 135:1, 4–6.Google Scholar
  5. Calder, C.J., andGorman, M.L. 1991. The effects of red foxVulpes vulpes faecal odours on the feeding behaviour of Orkney volesMicrotus arvalis.J. Zool. London 224:599–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coulston, S., Stoddart, D.M., andCrump, D.R. 1993. Use of predator odors to protect chickpeas from predation by laboratory and wild mice.J. Chem. Ecol. 19:607–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dickman, C.R. 1992. Predation and habitat shift in the house mouse,Mus musculus.Ecology 73:313–322.Google Scholar
  8. Dickman, C.R., andDoncaster, C.P. 1984. Responses of small mammals to red fox (Vulpes vulpes) odour.J. Zool. London 204:521–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Epple, G., Mason, J.R., Nolte, D.L., andCampbell, D.L. 1993. Effects of predator odors on feeding in the mountain beaver (Aplodontia rufa).J. Mammal. 74:715–722.Google Scholar
  10. Fagre, D.B., Butler, B.A., Howard, W.E., andTeranishi, R. 1981. Behavioral responses of coyotes to selected odors and tastes.Proc. World Furbearer Conf. 2:966–983.Google Scholar
  11. Gorman, M.L. 1984. The response of prey to stoat (Mustela erminea) scent.J. Zool. London 202:419–423.Google Scholar
  12. Griffith, C.R. 1920. The behavior of white rats in the presence of cats.Psychobiology 2:19–28.Google Scholar
  13. Jędrzejewski, W., Rychlik, L., andJędrzejewska, B., 1993. Responses of bank voles to odours of seven species of predators: Experimental data and their relevance to natural predator-vole relationships.Oikos 68:251–257.Google Scholar
  14. Kami, H.T. 1964. Foods of the mongoose in the Hamakua district, Hawaii.Zoonoses Res. 3:165–170.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Lima, S.L., andDill, L.M. 1990. Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: A review and prospectus.Can. J. Zool. 68:619–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mason, J.R., Epple, G., andNolte, D.L. 1994. Semiochemicals and improvements in rodent control, pp. 327–345,in B.G. Galef, M. Mainardi, and P. Valsecchi (eds.). Behavioral Aspects of Feeding: Basic and Applied Research in Mammals. Harwood Academic, Chur, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  17. Melchiors, M.A., andLeslie, C.A. 1985. Effectiveness of predator fecal odors as black-tailed deer repellents.J. Wildl. Manage. 49:358–362.Google Scholar
  18. Merkens, M., Harestad, A.S., andSullivan, T.P. 1991. Cover and efficacy of predator-based repellents for Townsend's vole,Microtus townsendii.J. Chem. Ecol. 17:401–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Müller-Schwarze, D. 1972. Responses of young black-tailed deer to predator odors.J. Mammal. 53:393–394.Google Scholar
  20. Müller-Schwarze, D. 1990. Leading them by their noses: animal and plant odours for managing vertebrates, pp. 585–598,in D.W. MacDonald, D. Müller-Schwarze, and S.E. Natynczuk (eds.). Chemical Signals in Vertebrates 5. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  21. Nolte, D.L., Farley, J.P., Campbell, D.L., Epple, G.M., andMason, J.R. 1993. Potential repellents to prevent mountain beaver damage.Crop Prot. 12:624–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shumake, S.A. 1977. The search for applications of chemical signals in wildlife management, pp. 357–376,in D. Müller-Schwarze and M.M. Mozell, (eds.). Chemical Signals in Vertebrates. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Stoddart, D.M. 1976. Effect of the odour of weasels (Mustela nivalis L.) on trapped samples of their prey.Oecologia 22:439–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Stoddart, D.M. 1979. Some responses of a free living community of rodents to the odors of predators, pp. 1–10,in D. Müller-Schwarze and R.M. Silverstein (eds.). Chemical Signals, Vertebrates and Aquatic Invertebrates. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  25. Stoddart, D.M. 1982. Does trap odour influence estimation of population size of the short-tailed vole,Microtus agrestis?J. Anim. Ecol. 51:375–386.Google Scholar
  26. Sullivan, T.P. 1986. Influence of wolverine (Gulo gulo) odor on feeding behavior of snowshoe hares (Lepus Americanus).J. Mammal. 67:385–388.Google Scholar
  27. Sullivan, T.P., Nordstrom, L.O., andSullivan, D.S. 1985. Use of predator odors as repellents to reduce feeding damage by herbivores. I. Snowshoe hares (Lepus Americanus).J. Chem. Ecol. 11:903–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sullivan, T.P., Crump, D.R., andSullivan, D.S. 1988a. Use of predator odors as repellents to reduce feeding damage by herbivores. III Montane and meadow voles (Microtus montanus andMicrotus pennsylvanicus).J. Chem. Ecol. 14:363–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sullivan, T.P., Crump, D.R., andSullivan, D.S. 1988b. Use of predator odors as repellents to reduce feeding damage by herbivores. IV. Northern pocket gophers (Thomomys talpoides).J. Chem. Ecol. 14:379–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sullivan, T.P., Sullivan, D.S., Crump, D.R., Weiser, H., andDixon, E.A. 1988c. Predator odors and their potential role in managing pest rodents and rabbits.Proc. Vertebr. Pest Conf. 13:145–150.Google Scholar
  31. Sullivan, T.P., Crump, D.R., Wieser, H., andDixon, E.A. 1990a. Comparison of release devices for stoat (Mustela erminea) semiochemicals used as montane vole (Microtus montanus) repellents.J. Chem. Ecol. 16:951–957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sullivan, T.P., Crump, D.R., Wieser, H., andDixon, E.A. 1990b. Response of pocket gophers (Thomomys talpoides) to an operational application of synthetic semiochemicals of stoat (Mustela erminea).J. Chem. Ecol. 16:941–949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Swihart, R.K. 1991. Modifying scent-marking behavior to reduce woodchuck damage to fruit trees.Ecol. Appl. 1:98–103.Google Scholar
  34. Teranishi, R., Murphy, E.L., Stern, D.J., Howard, W.E., andFagre, D.F. 1980. Chemicals useful as attractants and repellents for coyotes.Proc. World Furbearer Conf. 3:1839–1851.Google Scholar
  35. Weldon, P.J. 1990. Responses by vertebrates to chemicals from predators, pp. 500–521,in D.W. Macdonald, D. Müller-Schwarze, and S.E. Natynczuk (eds.). Chemical Signals in Vertebrates 5. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  36. Ylönen, H., Jędrzejewska, B., Jędrzejewski, W., andHeikkilä, J. 1992. Antipredatory behaviour ofClethrionomys voles—“David and Goliath” arms race.Ann. Zool. Fenn. 29:207–216.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark E. Tobin
    • 1
  • Richard M. Engeman
    • 2
  • Robert T. Sugihara
    • 1
  1. 1.US Department of AgricultureDenver Wildlife Research CenterHilo
  2. 2.US Department of AgricultureDenver Wildlife Research CenterDenver

Personalised recommendations