Reviewed - The PD0325901 Pros As well as , Downsides

Trapping revealed a grassland rodent community of the four-striped grass mouse (R. pumilio), the pygmy mouse (Mus minitoides), the climbing mice (Dendromus melanotis), and a few individuals of Aethomys sp. from neighbouring woodland and rocky habitats. Rhabdomys pumilio was the most abundant comprising 267 total captures of 120 different individuals. Only 15, 8 and 9 different individuals of the climbing mice, pygmy mouse and Aethemys sp. were captured respectively. Hereon, we present trapping data and patch http://www.selleck.cn/products/JNJ-26481585.html use behaviour only for R. pumilio. Although captures revealed higher striped mouse activity during the daytime, captures from nocturnal activity suggest that individuals of this species were temporally opportunistic. Furthermore, recaptures showed that the same individuals were generally active both day and night (revealed from time-specific paint marking). The 600 trap-nights at each distance (3?days?+?3 nights?�� 50 islands) showed that trapping success significantly increased with distance from the wooded patches with 0.17, 1.3, 16, and 27% at ?6, 0, 6 and 12?m from the edge of the wooded patches into the surrounding grassland. Captures at 6 and 12?m distances comprised 30% and 61% of total captures respectively http://www.selleckchem.com/products/epz-6438.html (Table?2). In addition to trapping as a measure of activity, we compared this with the number of food patches foraged by striped mice at the four distances (Table?2). The four stations were significantly different for both day and night with respect to number of foraged trays (��2 for goodness of fit 378.2 and 420.1 respectively, d.f.?=?3, P? http://www.selleckchem.com/products/PD-0325901.html P?=?0.0355). The difference was also significant between the 6 and 12?m stations (��2 test of heterogeneity 6.79, d.f.?=?1, P?=?0.009). GUDs of R. pumilio were significantly lower in the grassland away from the wooded patch. No foraging ever occurred within the wooded patch (the ?6?m station). The mean GUDs were 32.6 (n?=?37), 16.7 (n?=?424) and 13.3 (n?=?451) respectively, at distances of 0?m (edge habitat), 6 and 12?m into the grassland. GUDs from the four stations declined significantly with distance from the wooded patch (F3,138?=?181.65, P?