DO BREEDING NOMADIC AVIAN PREDATORS DAMPEN POPULATION FLUCTUATIONS OF SMALL MAMMALS

被引:102
作者
KORPIMAKI, E [1 ]
NORRDAHL, K [1 ]
机构
[1] UNIV HELSINKI, DEPT ZOOL, DIV ECOL, SF-00100 HELSINKI 10, FINLAND
关键词
D O I
10.2307/3545265
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
The mean consumption of all prey by adult and young European kestrels (EKs), short-eared owls (SOs) and long-eared owls (LOs) in one breeding season was (+/- S.D.) 585 +/- 525 kg in 47 km2 of farmland area in western Finland during 1977-87. The proportion of prey consumption was highest by EKs (50%), followed by SOs (36%) and LOs (14%). The voles (Microtus agrestis and M. epiroticus) were the most frequent prey taken by the three species of birds of prey, though in vole lows shrews and small birds were the most abundant prey. In good vole years, Microtus voles suffered from a heavier predation than bank voles and common shrews, but the contrary was true in poor vole years when numbers of birds of prey were low. The pooled predation rate of Microtus voles by EKs, SOs and LOs was positively density-dependent. This indicates that they were able to dampen the amplitude of the vole cycle because they took a higher proportion of the summer standing crop and production of voles with increasing prey density and productivity. There was a negative correlation between the yearly vole consumption rates by avian predators and density changes of microtines from spring to autumn in farmland. When birds of prey removed > 500 voles per km2, microtine densities did not increase during the summer. Most individuals of all the three predatory species emigrate when voles crashed. The remaining ones shifted to alternative foods, made possible by a rich supply of alternative prey. Therefore, these predators were unable to deepen and prolong vole troughs.
引用
收藏
页码:195 / 208
页数:14
相关论文
共 73 条
  • [1] ADAMCIK RS, 1978, CAN FIELD NAT, V92, P156
  • [2] INFLUENCE OF PREDATION ON RODENT POPULATIONS
    ANDERSSON, M
    ERLINGE, S
    [J]. OIKOS, 1977, 29 (03) : 591 - 597
  • [3] AULAK WLADYSLAW, 1967, EKOL POL SER A, V15, P755
  • [4] ESTIMATES OF FOOD CONSUMPTION BY LIZARD LACERTA-VIVIPARA JACQUIN
    AVERY, RA
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ANIMAL ECOLOGY, 1971, 40 (02) : 351 - &
  • [5] THE EFFECTS OF OWL PREDATION ON THE FORAGING BEHAVIOR OF HETEROMYID RODENTS
    BROWN, JS
    KOTLER, BP
    SMITH, RJ
    WIRTZ, WO
    [J]. OECOLOGIA, 1988, 76 (03) : 408 - 415
  • [6] BUJALSKA GABRIELA, 1966, ACTA THERIOLOGICA, V11, P351
  • [7] ECOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS OF RESOURCE DEPRESSION
    CHARNOV, EL
    ORIANS, GH
    HYATT, K
    [J]. AMERICAN NATURALIST, 1976, 110 (972) : 247 - 259
  • [8] DELATTRE P, 1984, ACTA OECOL-OEC GEN, V5, P285
  • [9] CAN VERTEBRATE PREDATORS REGULATE THEIR PREY
    ERLINGE, S
    GORANSSON
    HOGSTEDT
    JANSSON
    LIBERG, O
    LOMAN, J
    NILSSON, IN
    VONSHANTZ, T
    SYLVEN, M
    [J]. AMERICAN NATURALIST, 1984, 123 (01) : 125 - 133
  • [10] PREDATION AND NONCYCLICITY IN A MICROTINE POPULATION IN SOUTHERN SWEDEN
    ERLINGE, S
    [J]. OIKOS, 1987, 50 (03) : 347 - 352