Skip to main content
Log in

Spatial population structure in the banner-tailed kangaroo rat, Dipodomys spectabilis

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

I attempted to characterize spatial units of local dynamics and dispersal in banner-tailed kangaroo rats (Dipodomys spectabilis), to determine if spatial structure influenced population dynamics in the way predicted by current metapopulation models. D. spectabilis exhibited a hierarchical spatial structure. “Local populations” that appeared as discrete entities on a scale of kilometers were subdivided into clusters of mounds on a scale of meters. This structure, however, cannot be characyerized in terms of the discrete habitat patches envisioned by the metapopulation models. Occupied areas were statistically distinguishable from the surrounding matrix, but this difference was only quantitative. There were no discrete boundaries between occupied areas and the matrix. Habitat within occupied areas was heterogeneous, and occupied areas in different locations were statistically distinguishable from each other. High heterogeneity within occupied areas, and high contrast among them, make it difficult to define what is a suitable habitat patch for D. spectabilis. On a smaller spatial scale, there was significant aggregation of resident mounds within occupied areas. These aggregations, however, do not correspond to discrete habitat patches. Rather, they appear to result from an interaction between fine-scale habitat heterogeneity and limited dispersal due to natal philopatry and low adult vagility. These complications make it difficult to identify habitat patches independent of the species' distribution. For species like D. spectabilis that are patchily distributed but do not occupy discrete habitat patches, a patch occupancy approach does not seem appropriate for describing spatial structure. Hierarchical spatial structure underscores the need for a framework that incorporates multiple scales of spatial structure, rather than one that pre-imposes a single spatial scale as being important for population dynamics. A framework that (i) considers patchiness as a combination of both habitat heterogeneity, and life-history and behavioral characteristics, and (ii) incorporates hierarchical spatial structure, appears to be the most suitable for conceptualizing spatial dynamics of behaviorally complex vertebrates such as D. spectabilis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bowers MA, Brown JH (1982) Body size and coexistence in desert rodents: chance or community structure? Ecology 63: 391–400

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyce MS (1992) Population viability analysis. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 23: 481–506

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JH, Gibson AC (1983) Biogeography. Mosby, St. Louis

    Google Scholar 

  • Caughley G (1994) Directions in conservation biology. J Anim Ecol 63: 215–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis GJ, Howe RW (1992) Juvenile dispersal limited breeding sites, and the dynamics of metapopulations. Theor Popul Biol 41: 184–207

    Google Scholar 

  • Doak DF, Mills LS (1994) A useful role for theory in conservation. Ecology 75: 615–626

    Google Scholar 

  • Doak DF, Marino PC, Kareiva PM (1992) Spatial scale mediates the influence of habitat fragmentation on dispersal success: implications for conservations. Theor Popul Biol 41: 315–336

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilpin ME (1987) Spatial structure and population vulnerability. In: Soule ME (ed) Viable populations for conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 125–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilpin ME (1991) A spatially structured model for Stephens' kangaroo rat reserve design. In: Report on the reserve design model developed for the long-term habitat conservation plan for the Stephens' kangaroo rat in western Riverside County University of California, San Diego, pp 107–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Gotelli NJ, Kelly WG (1993) A general model of metapopulation dynamics. Oikos 68: 36–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Gyllenberg M, Hanski I (1992) Two general metapopulation models and the core-satellite hypothesis. Am Nat 142: 17–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1982) Dynamics of regional distribution: the core and satellite species hypothesis. Oikos 38: 210–221

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1985) Single species spatial dynamics may contribute to long-term rarity and commonness. Ecology 66: 335–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1991) Single-species metapopulation dynamics: concepts, models and observations. Biol J Linn Soc 42: 17–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1994a) Patch-occupancy dynamics in fragmented landscapes. Trends Ecol Evol 9: 131–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1994b) A practical model of metapopulation dynamics. J Anim Ecol 63: 151–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1994c) Metapopulation dynamics and conservation—a spatially explicit model applied to butterflies. Biol Conserv 68: 167–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I, Gilpin ME (1991) Metapopulation dynamics: brief history and conceptual domain. Biol J Linn Soc 42: 3–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I, Gyllenberg M (1993) Single-species metapopulation dynamics: a structured model. Theor Popul Biol 42: 35–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison SP (1989) Long-distance dispersal and colonization in the bay checkerspot butterfly, Euphydryas editha bayensis. Ecology 70: 1236–1243

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison SP (1991) Local extinction in a metapopulation context: an empirical evaluation. Biol J Linn Soc 42: 73–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison SP (1993) Metapopulations and conservation. In: Edwards PJ, May RM (eds) Large-scale ecology and conservation biology. Blackwell Scientific Publ. London, pp 111–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassell MP, Comins HN, May RM (1991) Spatial structure and chaos in insect population dynamics. Nature 353: 255–258

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones WT (1982) Natal nondispersal in kangaroo rats. PhD thesis, Purdue University, Indiana, USA

  • Jones WT (1986) Survivorship and philopatric and dispersing kangaroo rats (Dipodomys spectabilis). Ecology 67: 202–207

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones WT (1987) Dispersal patterns in kangaroo rats (Dipodomys spectabilis). In: Chepko-Sade BD, Halpin ZT (eds) Mammalian dispersal patterns: the effect of social structure on population genetics. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 119–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones WT (1988a) Variation in sex ratios of banner-tailed kangaroo rats in relation to population density. J Mammal 69: 303–310

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones WT (1988b) Density-related changes in survival of philopatric and dispersing kangaroo rats. Ecology 69: 1474–1478

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones WT, Waser PM, Elliott LF, Link NE and Bush BB (1988) Philopatry, dispersal and habitat saturation in the banner-tailed kangaroo rat, Dipodomys spectabilis. Ecology 69: 1466–1473

    Google Scholar 

  • Kareiva PM (1986) Patchiness, dispersal and species interactions. In: Diamond J, Case TJ (eds) Community ecology. Harper and Row, New York, pp 192–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Kareiva PM (1990) Population dynamics in spatially complex environments: theory and data. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 330: 175–190

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitching R (1971) A simple simulation model of dispersal of animals among units of discrete habitats. Oecologia 7: 95–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotliar NB, Wiens JA (1990) Multiple scales of patchiness and patch structure—a hierarchical framework for the study of heterogeneity. Oikos 59: 253–260

    Google Scholar 

  • Levins R (1969) Some demographic and genetic consequences of environmental heterogeneity for biological control. Bull Entomol Soc Am 15: 237–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Levins R (1970) Extinction. In: Gerstenhaber M (ed) Some mathematical problems in biology. American Mathematical Society, Providence, pp 77–107

    Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey K, Noon BR, Lamberson RH (1992) Conservation planning for species occupying fragmented landscapes: the case of the northern spotted owl. In: Kareiva PM, Kingslover JG, Huey RB (eds) Biotic interactions and global change. Sinauer, Sunderland, pp. 42

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller-Dombois D, Ellenberg H (1974) Aims and methods of vegetation ecology. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Murdoch WM, Briggs CL, Nisbet RM, Gurney WSC, Stewart-Oaten A (1992) Aggregation and stability in metapopulation models. Am Nat 140: 41–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Murrey JD (1989) Mathematical biology. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pielou EC (1977) Mathematical ecology. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pulliam HR (1988) Sources, sinks, and population regulation. Am Nat 132: 652–661

    Google Scholar 

  • Pulliam HR, Danielson BJ (1992) Sources, sinks and habitat selection: a landscape perspective on population dynamics. Am Nat 137: S50-S66

    Google Scholar 

  • Roos AM, McCauley E, Wilson WG (1991) Mobility versus density-limited predator-prey dynamics on different spatial scales. Proc R Soc Lond B 246: 117–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotenberry JT, Wiens JA (1980) Habitat structure, patchiness, and avian communities in North American steppe vegetation: a multivariate analysis. Ecology 61: 1228–1250

    Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute (1990) SAS User's Guide, version 6.03. SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Biometry. Freeman, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor AD (1988) Large-scale spatial structure and population dynamics in arthropod predator-prey systems. Ann Zool Fenn 25: 63–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Waser PM, Elliott LF (1991) Dispersal and genetic structure in banner-tailed kangaroo rats, Dipodomys spectabilis. Evolution 45: 935–943

    Google Scholar 

  • Waser PM, Jones WT (1989) Heritability of dispersal in banner-tailed kangaroo rats, Dipodomys spectabilis. Anim Behav 37: 987–991

    Google Scholar 

  • Waser PM, Jones WT (1991) Survival and reproductive effort in banner-tailed kangaroo rats, D. spectabilis. Ecology 72: 771–777

    Google Scholar 

  • Winer BJ, Brown DR, Michaels KM (1991) Statistical analysis in experimental design. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wooten JT, Bell DA (1992) A metapopulation model of the peregrine falcon in California: viability and management strategies. Ecol Appl 2: 307–321

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Amarasekare, P. Spatial population structure in the banner-tailed kangaroo rat, Dipodomys spectabilis . Oecologia 100, 166–176 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00317143

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00317143

Key words

Navigation