Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Foraging responses of wild house mice to accumulations of conspecific odor as a predation risk

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many predators hunt using the social and waste odors of their prey. It is unknown, however, whether potential prey modify their behavior in response to the risks of predation associated with accumulations of conspecific odor. We examined this question by measuring foraging trade-offs of wild house mice (Mus domesticus) in the field where we increased both predation risk and conspecific odor at artificial food patches in a two-factor design. Mouse giving-up densities (GUDs) were significantly higher in open habitats than in closed habitats but did not differ with the addition of mouse odors. Fine-scale behavioral observations of captive mice confirmed their attraction to the conspecific odor in an enclosure experiment, without any change to the GUD. These results indicate that house mice continue to visit and forage at food patches despite accumulations of predator-attracting odors. This most likely occurs for the social benefits obtained from conspecific odor exploration; however, such behavior may cause mice to become vulnerable to considerable olfactory exploitation by their predators. Future work must therefore focus on how mice trade off the social benefits of investigating odors that also attract their enemies.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abramsky Z, Strauss E, Subach A, Kotler BP, Ricchman A (1996) The effect of barn owls (Tyto alba) on the activity and microhabitat selection of Gerbillus allenbyi and Gerbillus pyramidum. Oecologia 105:313–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banks PB, Hume ID, Crowe O (1999) Behavioural, morphological and dietary response of rabbits to predation risk from foxes. Oikos 85:247–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banks PB, Norrdahl K, Korpimäki E (2000) Nonlinearity in the predation risk of prey mobility. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 267:1621–1625

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Banks PB, Norrdahl K, Korpimäki E (2002) Mobility decisions and the predation risks of reintroduction. Biol Conserv 103:133–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blaustein AR (1981) Sexual selection and mammalian olfaction. Am Nat 117:1006–1010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown RE (1979) Mammalian social odors: a critical review. Adv Study Behav 10:103–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JS (1988) Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk and competition. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22:37–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christophe N, Baudoin C (1998) Olfactory preferences in two strains of wild mice, Mus musculus musculus and Mus musculus domesticus, and their hybrids. Anim Behav 56:365–369

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cushing BS (1985) Estrous mice and vulnerability to weasel predation. Ecology 66:1976–1978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drickamer LC (1989) Odor preferences of wild stock female house mice (Mus domesticus) tested at three ages using urine and other cues from conspecific males and females. J Chem Ecol 15:1971–1987

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drickamer LC (1992) Oestrous female house mice discriminate dominant from subordinate males and sons of dominant from sons of subordinate males by odour cues. Anim Behav 43:868–870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drickamer LC, Mikesic DG (1990) Urinary chemosignals, reproduction, and population size for house mice (Mus domesticus) living in field enclosures. J Chem Ecol 16:2955–2968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferkin MH (1999) Scent over-marking and adjacent-marking as competitive tactics used during chemical communication in voles. In: Johnston RE, Muller-Schwartz D, Sorenson P (eds) Advances in chemical signals in vertebrates. Plenum, New York, pp 239–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Gosling LM, McKay HV (1990) Competitor assessment by scent-matching: an experimental test. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 26:415–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gosling LM, Atkinson NW, Collins SA, Roberts RJ, Walters RL (1996a) Avoidance of scent-marked areas depends on the intruder’s body size. Behaviour 133:491–502

    Google Scholar 

  • Gosling LM, Atkinson NW, Dunn S, Collins SA (1996b) The response of subordinate male mice to scent marks varies in relation to their own competitive ability. Anim Behav 52:1185–1191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpern M, Halpern J, Erichsen E, Borghjid S (1997) The role of nasal chemical senses in garter snake response to airborne odor cues from prey. J Comp Physiol 111:251–260

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Honkavaara J, Koivula M, Korpimäki E, Siitari H, Viitala J (2002) Ultraviolet vision and foraging in terrestrial vertebrates. Oikos 98:505–511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphries RE, Robertson DHL, Beynon RJ, Hurst JL (1999) Unravelling the chemical basis of competitive scent marking in house mice. Anim Behav 58:1177–1190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hurst JL (1987) The functions of urine marking in a free-living population of house mice, Mus domesticus Rutty. Anim Behav 35:1433–1442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurst JL (1990a) Urine marking in populations of wild house mice Mus domesticus Rutty. I. Communication between males. Anim Behav 40:209–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurst JL (1990b) Urine marking in populations of wild house mice, Mus domesticus Rutty. II. Communication between females. Anim Behav 40:223–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurst JL (1990c) Urine marking in populations of wild house mice, Mus domesticus Rutty. III. Communication between the sexes. Anim Behav 40:233–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurst JL (1993) The priming effects of urine substrate marks on interactions between male house mice, Mus musculus domesticus Schwarz and Schwarz. Anim Behav 45:55–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurst JL, Hayden L, Kingston M, R L, K S (1994) Response of the aboriginal house mouse Mus spretus Lataste to tunnels bearing the odours of conspecifics. Anim Behav 48:1219–1229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacob J, Brown JS (2000) Microhabitat use, giving-up densities and temporal activity as short- and long-term anti-predator behaviors in common voles. Oikos 91:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacquot C, Baudoin C (2002) Foraging behavioural changes induced by conspecific and heterosubspecific odours in two strains of wild mice. Behav Processes 58:115–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jedrzejewski W, Tychlik L, Jedrzejewska 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston RE, Munver R, Tung C (1995) Scent counter marks: selective memory for the top scent by golden hamsters. Anim Behav 49:1435–1442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston RE, Sorokin ES, Ferkin MH (1997) Female voles discriminate males’ overmarks and prefer top-scent males. Anim Behav 54:679–690

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jones EN, Coman BJ (1981) Ecology of the feral cat (Felis catus) in southeastern Australia 1. Diet. Aust Wildl Res 8:537–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones M, Dayan T (2000) Foraging behavior and microhabitat use by spiny mice, Acomys cahirinus and A. russatus, in the presence of Blanford’s fox (Vulpes cana) odor. J Chem Ecol 26:455–469

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kats LB, Dill LM (1998) The scent of death: chemosensory assessment of predation risk by prey animals. Ecoscience 5:361–394

    Google Scholar 

  • Kavaliers M, Colwell DD (1995) Discrimination by female mice between the odours of parasitized and non-parasitized males. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 261:31–35

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kay BJ, Twigg LE, Korn TJ, Nicol HI (1994) The use of artificial perches to increase predation on house mice (Mus domesticus) by raptors. Wildl Res 21:95–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellie A, Dain SJ, Banks PB (2004) Ultraviolet properties of Australian mammal urine. J Comp Physiol [A] 190:429–435

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Koivula M, Viitala J (1999) Rough legged buzzards use vole scent marks to assess hunting areas. J Avian Biol 30:329–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koivula M, Korpimäki E (2001) Do scent marks increase predation risk of microtine rodents? Oikos 95:275–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotler BP, Blaustein L (1995) Titrating food and safety in a heterogeneous environment: when are the risky and safe patches of equal value? Oikos 74:251–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 53:145–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotler BP, Brown JS, Hasson O (1991) Factors affecting gerbil foraging behavior and rates of owl predation. Ecology 72:2249–2260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moncho-Bogani J, Lanuza E, Hernandez A, Novejarque A, Martinez-Garcia F (2002) Attractive properties of sexual pheromones in mice: innate or learned? Physiol Behav 77:167–176

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Powell F, Banks PB (2004) Do house mice modify their foraging behaviour in response to predator odours and habitat? Anim Behav 67:753–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rich TJ, Hurst JL (1998) Scent marks as reliable signals of the competitive ability of mates. Anim Behav 56:727–735

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Righetti J, Fox BJ, Croft DB (2000) Behavioural mechanisms of competition in small dasyurid marsupials. Aust J Zool 48:561–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts SC, Gosling LM, Thornton EA, McClung J (2001) Scent-marking by male mice under the risk of predation. Behav Ecol 12:698–705

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohner C, Krebs CJ (1996) Owl predation on snowshoe hares: consequences of antipredator behaviour. Oecologia 108:303–310

    Google Scholar 

  • Shine R, Madsen T (1997) Prey abundance and predator reproduction: rats and pythons on a tropical Australian floodplain. Ecology 78:1078–1086

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair ARE, Olsen PD, Redhead TD (1990) Can predators regulate small mammal populations? Evidence from house mouse outbreaks in Australia. Oikos 59:382–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singleton G (1989) Population dynamics of an outbreak of house mice (Mus domesticus) in the mallee wheatlands of Australia—hypothesis of plague formation. J Zool 219:495–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoddart DM (1980) The ecology of vertebrate olfaction. Chapman & Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood AJ (1996) Experiments in ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Viitala J, Korpimäki E, Palokangas P, Koivula M (1995) Attraction of kestrels to vole scent marks visible in ultraviolet light. Nature 373:425–427

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Whitaker PB, Shine R (2003) A radiotelemetric study of movements and shelter-site selection by free-ranging brownsnakes (Pseudonaja textilis, Elapidae). Herpetol Monogr 17:130–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff JO (2004) Scent marking by voles in response to predation risk: a field–laboratory validation. Behav Ecol 15:286–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ylönen H, Jacob J, Davies MJ, Singleton G (2002) Predation risk and habitat selection of Australian house mice Mus domesticus during an incipient plague: desperate behaviour due to food depletion. Oikos 99:284–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ylönen H, Jedrzejewska B, Jedrzejewski W, Heikila J (1992) Antipredatory behaviour of Clethrionomys voles—“David and Goliath” arms race. Ann Zool Fenn 29:207–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Ylönen H, Sundell J, Tiilikainen R, Eccard JA, Horne T (2003) Weasels (Mustela nivalis nivalis) preference for olfactory cues of the vole (Clethrionomys glareolus). Ecology 84:1447–1452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank C. Barclay and two anonymous referees for comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript. Thanks also to T. Graham and P. and M. Wythes who provided access to their farms for fieldwork and to N.K. Hughes and J. Nedved for assistance in the field. This work was funded by an FRGP grant complied with current Australian ethics laws.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, 2052, Australia

    Louise A. Pastro & Peter B. Banks

Authors
  1. Louise A. Pastro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter B. Banks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter B. Banks.

Additional information

Communicated by E. Korpimäki

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pastro, L.A., Banks, P.B. Foraging responses of wild house mice to accumulations of conspecific odor as a predation risk. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 60, 101–107 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-005-0146-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-005-0146-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation