Abstract
Interactions between congeneric species in sympatry offer opportunities to study mating preferences for conspecifics, preferences that maintain premating reproductive isolation between species. Sixteen males and 16 females of two sympatric species, prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) and meadow voles (M. pennsylvanicus), were tested for conspecific as opposed to heterospecific preferences in an automated preference apparatus. The results indicated that male prairie and meadow voles displayed preferences for conspecifics when the females were in estrus, but showed no preference when females were in diestrus. Female prairie voles in both estrous and diestrous conditions likewise displayed a preference for conspecifics, whereas meadow vole females showed no such preference. These species differences may be related to social organization, for prairie voles are monogamous, pair-bonding, and contact-prone, whereas meadow voles, which are polygamous, display high intraspecific aggression during initial contact. Conspecific preferences can be considered as one factor that maintains existing isolation between the species.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bradshaw, W. N. (1965). Species discrimination in the Peromyscus leucopus group of mice. Texas Journal of Science, 17, 278–293.
Brown, R. E. (1979). Mammalian social odors: A critical review. In J. S. Rosenblatt, R. A. Hinde, C. Beer, and M. C. Bushnel (Eds.), Advances in the study of behavior (Vol. 10, pp. 103–162). New York: Academic Press.
Carter, C. S., Getz, L. L., & Cohen-Parsons, M. (1986). Relationships between social organization and behavioral endocrinology in a monogamous mammal. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 16, 109–145.
Colvin, D. V. (1973). Agonistic behaviour in males of five species of voles Microtus. Animal Behaviour, 21, 471–480.
Cranford, J. A., & Derting, T. L. (1983). Intra and interspecific behavior of Microtus pennsylvanicus and Microtus pinetorum. Behavioral Ecology & Sociobiology, 13, 7–11.
De Jonge, G. (1980). Response to con- and heterospecific male odours by the voles Microtus agrestis, M. arvalis and Clethrionomys glareolus with respect to competition for space. Behaviour, 73, 277–303.
De Jonge, G. (1983). Aggression and group formation in the voles Microtus agrestis, M. arvalis and Clethrionomys glareolus in relation to intra- and interspecific competition. Behaviour, 84, 1–72.
Dewsbury, D. A., Ferguson, B., Hodges, A. W., & Taylor, S. A. (1986). Tests of preferences of deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus bairdi) for individuals and their odors as a function of sex and estrous condition. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 100, 117–127.
Getz, L. L. (1962). Aggressive behavior of the meadow and prairie voles. Journal of Mammalogy, 43, 351–358.
Getz, L. L., Carter, C. S., & Gavish, L. (1981). The mating system of the prairie vole, Microtus ochrogaster. Field and laboratory evidence for pair-bonding. Behavioral Ecology & Sociobiology, 8, 189–194.
Getz, L. L., & Hoffman, J. E. (1986). Social organization in free-living prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster. Behavioral Ecology & Sociobiology, 18, 275–282.
Gray, G. D., Kenney, A. M., & Dewsbury, D. A. (1977). Adaptive significance of the copulatory behavior pattern of male meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus) in relation to induction of ovulation and implantation in females. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 91, 1308–1319.
Heske, E. J., & Repp, J. M. (1986). Laboratory and field evidence for the avoidance of California voles (Microtus californicus) by western harvest mice (Reithrodontomys megalotis). Canadian Journal of Zoology, 64, 1530–1534.
Krebs, C. J. (1977). Competition between Microtus pennsylvanicus and Microtus ochrogaster. American Midland Naturalist, 97, 42–49.
Krebs, C. J., Keller, B. L., & Tamarin, R. H. (1969). Microtus population biology: Demographic changes in fluctuating populations of M. ochrogaster and M. pennsylvanicus in Southern Indiana. Ecology, 50, 587–606.
Madison, D. M. (1980a). An integrated view of the social biology of Microtus pennsylvanicus. Biologist, 62, 20–33.
Madison, D. M. (1980b). Space use and social structure in meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus. Behavioral Ecology & Sociobiology, 7, 65–71.
McGuire, B., & Novak, M. (1987). The effects of cross-fostering on the development of social preferences in meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Behavioral & Neural Biology, 47, 167–172.
Miller, W. C. (1969). Ecological and ethological isolating mechanisms between Microtus pennsylvanicus and Microtus ochrogaster at Terre Haute, Indiana. American Midland Naturalist, 82, 140–148.
Moore, R. E. (1965). Olfactory discrimination as an isolating mechanism between Peromyscus maniculatus and Peromyscus polionotus. American Midland Naturalist, 73, 85–100.
Murphy, M. R. (1977). Intraspecific sexual preferences of female hamsters. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 91, 1337–1346.
Murphy, M. R. (1978). Oestrous Turkish hamsters display lordosis toward conspecific males but attack heterospecific males. Animal Behaviour, 26, 311–312.
Shapiro, L. E. (1987). Behavior, neuroanatomy, and social organization of two species of voles (Microtus ochrogaster and Microtus montanus) (Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, 1987). Dissertation Abstracts International, 48, 2495.
Smith, M. H. (1965). Behavioral discrimination shown by allopatric and sympatric males of Peromyscus eremicus and Peromyscus californicus between females of the same two species. Evolution, 19, 430–435.
Taylor, S. A., & Dewsbury, D. A. (1988). Effects of experience and available cues on estrous versus diestrous preferences in male prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster. Physiology & Behavior, 42, 379–388.
Taylor, S. A., & Dewsbury, D. A. (in press). Male preferences for females of different reproductive conditions: A critical review. In D. MacDonald & R. Brown (Eds.), Chemical signals in vertebrates V. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Webster, D. G., Williams, D. C., Sawrey, D. K., & Dewsbury, D. A. (1984). An automated apparatus for the assessment of social preferences in rodents. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 16, 3–6.
Zimmerman, E. G. (1965). A comparison of habitat and food of two species of Microtus. Journal of Mammalogy, 46, 605–612.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by Grant BNS-8520318 from the National Science Foundation. The authors thank Stephen A. Taylor for helpful comments.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pierce, J.D., Ferguson, B. & Dewsbury, D.A. Conspecific preferences in prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster, and meadow voles, M. pennsylvanicus. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 27, 267–270 (1989). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03334603
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03334603