Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T11:16:31.788Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Reproduction of wild Mongolian gerbils bred in the laboratory with respect to generation and season 1. Morphological changes and fertility lifespan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

I. W. Stuermer*
Affiliation:
Georg-August-University Göttingen, Sensory Developmental Research Group, Robert-Koch-Strasse 40, D-37075, Göttingen, Germany
C. Tittmann
Affiliation:
Georg-August-University Göttingen, Sensory Developmental Research Group, Robert-Koch-Strasse 40, D-37075, Göttingen, Germany
C. Schilling
Affiliation:
Georg-August-University Göttingen, Sensory Developmental Research Group, Robert-Koch-Strasse 40, D-37075, Göttingen, Germany Lower Saxony State Museum, Department of Natural Science, Willy-Brandt-Allee 5, D-30169, Hannover, Germany
S. Blottner
Affiliation:
Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research, PO Box 601103, D-10252, Berlin, Germany
*
Get access

Abstract

A new strain of wild Meriones unguiculatus (strain Ugoe:MU95, named WILD) with high genetic variability was recently established in Germany. A previous study showed that offspring (F-1) of WILD founders (F-0) showed reduced spermatogenesis and testosterone compared to domesticated gerbils (LAB) maintained under similar conditions. We investigated F-0 and subsequent generations in respect to sexual maturation, duration of fertility and gonadal weights of different seasons. Body and reproductive organ weights showed negligible seasonal fluctuations in both strains. Testis and epididymis weights in WILD covered a wide range, which indicates a high reproductive variability. Reproductive organ weights increased in F-3. Less variable and high reproductive organ weights (testis >900 mg, epididymis >200 mg) in almost all LAB illustrate their readiness to reproduce, even in small individuals. Prominent testis (T+) was found in 71% of adult males (F-1, F-2) reflecting the natural portion of T+(63%) found in wild gerbils investigated in Mongolia in 1995 and 2002. Testicular descent was accelerated and pronounced in WILD F-3 (T+, 88%) and LAB (T+, 91%). Time between mating and the first litter was significantly longer in wild F-0 than in their offspring or LAB. The average age in wild F-0 when the last litter was born was 27 months. Breeding went on for 2 to 32 months and was mostly terminated by the death of the females. Relative testis and epididymis weights correspond in young adults and in old males up to 6 years, the total life span of male wild Mongolian gerbils. In summary, the results suggest that laboratory conditions improve the reproductive fitness of wild gerbils.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ågren, G. 1984a. Pair formation in the Mongolian gerbil. Animal Behaviour 32: 528535.Google Scholar
Ågren, G. 1984b. Incest avoidance and bonding between siblings in gerbils. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 14: 161169.Google Scholar
Ågren, G. and Meyerson, B. J. 1977. Influences of gonadal hormones on the behaviour of pairliving the Mongolian gerbils (Meriones unguiculatus) towards the cagemate versus a non-cagemate in a social choice test. Behavioral Processes 2: 325335.Google Scholar
Ågren, G., Zhou, Q. and Zhong, W. 1989. Ecology and social behaviour of Mongolian gerbils, M. unguiculatus, at Xilinhot, Inner Mongolia, China. Animal Behaviour 37: 1127.Google Scholar
Bodzsar, E. B. 2000. Studies on sexual maturation of Hungarian children. Acta Biologica Szegediensis 44: 155165.Google Scholar
Blottner, S., Franz, C., Rohleder, M., Zinke, O. and Stuermer, I. W. 2000. Higher testicular activity in domesticated laboratory gerbils compared to wild Mongolian gerbils (M. unguiculatus). Journal of Zoology, London 250: 461466.Google Scholar
Blottner, S. and Stuermer, I. W. 2006. Reproduction of wild Mongolian gerbils bred in the laboratory in dependence on generation and season. 2. Spermatogenetic activity and testicular testosterone concentration. Animal Science 82: 389395.Google Scholar
Böttger, I., von Benten, C., Wissdorf, H. and Petzoldt, K. 1976. Untersuchungen zur Anatomie, Topographie, Größe und Gewicht der weiblichen Geschlechtsorgane von Meriones unguiculatus. Zeitschrift fűr Versuchtierkunde 18: 263284.Google Scholar
Cheal, M. 1987. Enviromental enrichment facilitates foraging behavior. Physiology and Behavior 39: 281283.Google Scholar
Cheal, M. 1995. Multiple factors modulating courtship, habituation, attention, and other motivated and motivating behaviors. In Biological perspectives on motivated and cognitive activities (ed. Wong, R.), pp 111162. Ablex Press, NJ.Google Scholar
Cheal, M., Foley, K. and Kastenbaum, R. 1986. Brief periods of enviromental enrichment facilitate adolescent development of gerbils. Physiology and Behavior 36: 10471051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, B. R. and Price, E. O. 1981. Sexual maturation and fecundity of wild and domestic Norway rats (R. norvegicus). Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 63: 215220.Google Scholar
Clark, M. and Galef, B. G. 1980. Effects of rearing enviroment on adrenal weights, sexual development, and behavior in gerbils: an examination of richter's domestication hypothesis. Journal of Comparative Physiology and Psychology 94: 857863.Google Scholar
Clark, M. and Galef, B. G. 1981. Environmental influence on development, behavior, and endocrine morphology of gerbils. Physiology and Behavior 27: 761765.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, M. and Galef, B. G. 1985. Measures of growth, development, and sexual maturation in Mongolian gerbils (Meriones unguiculatus): effects of photic period during ontogeny. Developmental Psychobiology 18: 191202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, D., Begon, M., Bruyn, L. D., Ageyev, V. S., Klassovskiy, N. L., Pole, S. B., Viljugrein, H., Stenseth, N. C. and Leirs, H. 2004. Predictive thresholds for plaque in Kazakhstan. Science 304: 736738.Google Scholar
Davis, H. Jr, Estep, D. Q. and Dewsbury, D. A. 1974. Copulatory behavior of Mongolian gerbils (Meriones unguiculatus). Animal Learning and Behavior 2: 6973.Google Scholar
Drickamer, L. 1990. Seasonal variation in fertility, fecundity and litter sex ratio in laboratory and wild stocks of house mice (M. domesticus). Laboratory Animal Science 40: 284288.Google Scholar
Gallup, G. and Waite, M. S. 1970. Some preliminary observations on the behavior of Mongolian gerbils (Meriones unguiculatus) under seminatural conditions. Psychonomic Science 20: 3536.Google Scholar
Haase, E. 2000. Comparison of reproductive biological parameters in male wolves and domestic dogs. Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde 65: 257270.Google Scholar
Herre, W. and Röhrs, M. 1990. Haustiere - zoologisch gesehen, second edition. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Kruska, D. 1987. How fast can total brain size change in mammals? Journal für Hirnforschung 28: 5970.Google Scholar
Krylova, T. 1978. Age structure of a natural population of the clawed jird M. unguiculatus. Zoologichesky Zhurnal 57: 18421847.Google Scholar
Kuenzl, C., Kaiser, S., Meier, E. and Sachser, N. 2003. Is a wild mammal kept and reared in captivity still a wild animal? Hormones and Behavior 43: 187196.Google Scholar
Kuenzl, C. and Sachser, N. 1999. The behavioral endocrinology of domestication: a comparsion between the domestic guinea pig (Cavia aperea f. porcellus) and its wild ancestor, the cavy (Cavia aperea). Hormones and Behavior 35: 2837.Google Scholar
Lozan, J. L. 1992. Angewandte Statistik für Naturwissenschaftler. Verlag Paul Parey, Hamburg.Google Scholar
Marston, J. and Chang, M. C. 1965. The breeding, management and reproductive physiology of the mongolian gerbil (Meriones unguiculatus). Laboratory Animal Care 15: 3448.Google ScholarPubMed
Nakai, K., Nimura, H., Tamura, M., Shimizu, S. and Nishimura, H. 1960. Reproduction and postnatal development of the colony bred Meriones unguiculatus Kurauchi Mori. Experimental Animals 9: 157159.Google Scholar
Naumov, N. P. and Lobachev, V. S. 1975. Ecology of desert rodents of the USSR (jerboas and gerbils). In Rodents in desert environments (ed. Prakash, I. and Ghosh, P. K.), pp. 295299. Junk Publishers, Den Hague.Google Scholar
Neumann, K., Maak, S., Stuermer, I. W., von Lengerken, G. and Gattermann, R. 2001. Low microsatellite variation in laboratory gerbils. Journal of Heredity 92: 7174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, M. and Adams, C. E. 1972. Aggressive behaviour and reproduction in the Mongolian gerbil, Meriones unguiculatus, relative to age sexual experience at pairing. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 31: 447450.Google Scholar
Pavlinov, I. J., Dubrovsky, Y. A., Rossolimo, O. L. and Potapova, E. G. 1990. Gerbils of the world. Nauka, Moscow.Google Scholar
Pettijohn, T. F. 1978. Reactions of Mongolian gerbils in the presence of urine stimuli. Animal Learning and Behaviour 5: 370372.Google Scholar
Price, E. O. 2002. Animal domestication and behaviour. CABI Publishing, Wallingford.Google Scholar
Probst, B. and Lorenz, M. 1987. Increased scent marking in male Mongolian gerbils by urinary polypeptides of female conspecifics. Journal of Chemical Ecology 13: 851886.Google Scholar
Rehwald, C. 2003. Postnatale Verhaltensentwicklung und Körperwachstum juveniler Mongolischer Wüstenrennmäuse eines Wildstammes von Meriones unguiculatus (Milne-Edwards, 1867). Diplomarbeit, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Fakultät BiologieGoogle Scholar
Roper, T. and Polioudakis, E. 1977. The behaviour of Mongolian gerbils in a semi-natural environment, with special reference to ventral marking, dominance and sociability. Behaviour 61: 207237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwentker, V. 1963. The gerbil–a new laboratory animal. Illinois Vet 6: 59.Google Scholar
Stuermer, I. W., Plotz, K., Leybold, A., Zinke, O., Kalberlah, O., Samjaa, R. and Scheich, H. 2003. Intraspecific allometric comparison of laboratory gerbils with Mongolian gerbils trapped in the wild indicates domestication in Meriones unguiculatus (Milne-Edwards, 1867); (Rodentia: Gerbillinae). Zoologischer Anzeiger 242: 249266.Google Scholar
Stuermer, I. W., Tittmann, C., Kalberlah, O., Plotz, K., Tungalag, R., Surjo, D., Frey, R. and Samjaa, R. 2004. Methods and routes of two German-Mongolian zoological expeditions through the steppe, semi-desert zones of Mongolia in 1995 and 2002. Mongolian Journal of Biological Science 2: 3346.Google Scholar
Thiessen, D., Friend, H. C. and Lindzey, G. 1968. Androgen control of territorial marking in the Mongolian gerbil. Science 160: 432433.Google Scholar
Thiessen, D., Owen, K. and Lindzey, G. 1971. Mechanism of territorial marking in the male and female Mongolian gerbil (Meriones unguiculatus). Journal of Comparative Physiology and Psychology 77: 3847.Google Scholar
Thiessen, D. D. and Yahr, P. 1977. The gerbil in behavioral investigations. University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
Tittmann, C. and Stuermer, I. W. 2003. Changes in the population structure of Mongolian gerbils (Meriones unguiculatus) trapped in June, July and August in the Mongolian shortgrass steppe. Mammalian Biology 68:(suppl.) 6869.Google Scholar
Trainor, B. C. and Marler, C. A. 2001. Testosterone promotes paternal behaviour in a monogamous mammal via conversion to oestrogen. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 269: 823829.Google Scholar
Trut, L. N. 1999. Early Canid domestication: the farm-fox experiment. American Scientist 87: 160169.Google Scholar
Weiner, J. and Górecki, A. 1982. Small mammals and their habitats in the arid steppe of central eastern Mongolia. Polish Ecological Studies 8: 721.Google Scholar
Xia, W., Liao, C., Zhong, W., Sun, C. and Tian, Y. 1982. On the population dynamics and regulation of Meriones unguiculatus in agricultural region north to Yin mountains, Inner Mongolia. Acta Theriologica Sinica 2: 5172.Google Scholar
Yapa, W. B. 1994. Social behaviour of the Mongolian gerbil, Meriones unguiculatus , with special reference to acoustic communication. Disseration, Ludwig-Maximilians Universität München, Fakultät für BiologieGoogle Scholar