Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-f46jp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-10T12:46:15.682Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ecology of small mammals in tropical forest habitats of southern India

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Anjali Chandrasekar-Rao  and
Melvin E. Sunquist
Anjali Chandrasekar-Rao
Affiliation:
Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, U.S.A.
Melvin E. Sunquist
Affiliation:
Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Five species of rodent (Rattus rattus wroughtoni, Mus platythrix, Funambulus tristriatus, Cremnomys blanfordi and Golunda ellioti) were live-trapped over a period of eight months in three different habitat types (moist evergreen forest, moist deciduous forest and teak plantation) in Anaimalais Wildlife Sanctuary, Tamil Nadu, India. Small mammal densities ranged between 16.3 individuals ha−1 and 20.7 ha−1 for the natural forest sites and were 10.4 ha−1 in the teak plantation. Moist deciduous forest had the highest species richness and diversity scores. Although the teak plantation site had the same mammal species richness as the moist evergreen forest, numbers of individuals and overall small mammal biomass in the plantation was far lower than on the natural forest sites. Compared to moist deciduous forest, species richness and diversity were significantly lower on the teak plantation. R. r. wroughtoni and M. platythrix were the two most common species captured on all three sites. R. r. wroughtoni was the most common small mammal species captured, reaching densities of 14.5 ha−1 in moist evergreen forest. G. ellioti was the least common species, present only in moist deciduous forest. Demographic patterns and microhabitat selection were examined for R. r. wroughtoni, M. platythrix, and F. tristriatus. Only M. platythrix appeared to show any distinct seasonality in reproduction, with an increase in capture of breeding individuals towards the end of the wet season. Discriminant analysis did not reveal any distinct microhabitat preferences for any of the species. However, R. r. wroughtoni showed a significant association with bamboo, and F. tristriatus was associated with areas of higher canopy height and density in moist deciduous forest.

Keywords

Indiaplantationssmall mammalsspecies diversityspecies richnesstropical forests
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 12 , Issue 4 , July 1996 , pp. 561 - 571
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

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

LITERATURE CITED

August, P. V. 1984. Population ecology of small mammals in the Llanos of Venezuela. Special Publications, The Museum, Texas Technical University 22:71–104.Google Scholar
Bhat, S. K. & Mathew, D. N.. 1985. Food and nesting habits of Funambulus tristriatus Waterhouse in Malabar. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 82:637–643.Google Scholar
Dietz, J. M., Couto, E. A., Alfenas, A. C., Faccini, A. & Da Silva, G. F. 1975. Efeitos de duas plantaçoes de florestas homogéneas sobre populaçoes de mamiferos pequenos. Brasil Florestal 6:54–57.Google Scholar
Ellerman, J. R. 1961. The fauna of India including Pakistan, Burma and Ceylon. 2nd ed.Mammalia 3: Rodentia (in two parts). Manager of Publications, New Delhi. 884 pp.Google Scholar
Emmons, L. H. 1987. Comparative feeding ecology of fields in a Neotropical rainforest. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 20:271–283.Google Scholar
Fleming, T. H. 1975. The role of small mammals in tropical ecosystems. Pp. 269–298 in Golley, F. B., Petrusewicz, K., & Ryszkowski, L. (eds). Small mammals: their productivity and population dynamics. Cambridge University Press, New York. 451 pp.Google Scholar
Golley, F. B., Petrusewicz, K., & Ryszkowski, L. (eds.). Small mammals: their productivity and population dynamics. Cambridge University Press, New York. 451 pp.Google Scholar
Green, S. M. & Minkowski, K. 1977. The lion-tailed monkey and its south Indian rainforest habitat. Pp. 289–337 in Rainier, H. S. H. III and Bourne, G. H. (eds). Primate conservation. Academic Press, New York. 658 pp.Google Scholar
Harrison, J. L. 1969. The abundance and population density of mammals in Malayan lowland forests. Malayan Nature Journal 22:174–178.Google Scholar
Hayward, G. F. & Phillipson, J. 1979. Community structure and functional role of small mammals in ecosystems. Pp. 135–212 in Stoddart, D. M. (ed.). Ecology of small mammals. Chapman and Hall, London. 386pp.Google Scholar
Hilborn, R., Redfield, J. A. & Krebs, C. J. 1976. On the reliability of enumeration for mark and recapture census of voles. Canadian Journal of Zoology 54:1019–1024.Google Scholar
Honacki, J. H., Kinman, K. E. & Koeppl, J. W. (eds). 1982. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Allen Press, Lawrence, Kansas. 694 pp.Google Scholar
Isabirye-Basuta, G., & Kasenene, J. M. 1987. Small rodent populations in selectively felled and mature tracts of Kibale Forest, Uganda. Biotropica 19:260–266.Google Scholar
Jeffery, S. M. 1977. Rodent ecology and land use in western Ghana. Journal of Applied Ecology 14:741–755.Google Scholar
Johnsingh, A. J. T. 1983. Large mammalian prey-predators in Bandipur. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 80:1–57.Google Scholar
Karanth, U. K., & Sunquist, M. E. 1991. Population structure, density and biomass of large herbivores in the tropical forests of Nagarahole, India. Journal of Tropical Ecology 8:21–35.Google Scholar
Krebs, C. J. 1966. Demographic changes in fluctuating populations of Microtus californicus. Ecological Monographs 36:239–273.Google Scholar
Kumar, A. 1985. Patterns of extinction in India, Sri Lanka, and. elsewhere in Southeast Asia: implications for lion-tailed macaques, wildlife management and the Indian conservation system. Pp. 65–89 in Heltne, P. G. (ed.). The lion-tailed macaque: status and conservation. Alan R. Liss, Inc., New York. 411 pp.Google Scholar
Mani, M. S. 1974. Ecology and biogeography in India. Dr. W. Junk b. v. Publ., The Hague, The Netherlands. 773 pp.Google Scholar
Nitikman, L. Z., & Mares, M. A. 1987. Ecology of small mammals in a gallery forest of Central Brazil. Annals of Carnegie Museum 56:75–95.Google Scholar
Phillips, W. W. A. 1981. Manual of the mammals of Sri Lanka, Part II. Wildlife and nature protection society of Sri Lanka, Colombo. 390 pp.Google Scholar
Pielou, E. C. 1975. Ecological diversity. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Prasad, S. N., Nair, P. V., Sharatchandra, H. C. & Gadgil, M. 1980. On factors governing the distribution of wild mammals in Karnataka. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 77:718–743.Google Scholar
Puri, G. S., Meher-Homji, V. M., Gupta, R. K. & Puri, S. 1983. Forest ecology. Oxford and IBH Publishing Company, New Delhi. 549 pp.Google Scholar
Rabinowitz, A. R. & Walker, S. 1991. The carnivore community in a dry tropical forest mosaic in Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary, Thailand. Journal of Tropical Ecology 7:37–47.Google Scholar
Stallings, J. R. 1989. Small mammal inventories in an eastern Brazilian park. Bulletin Florida State Museum, Biological Sciences 34:153–200.Google Scholar
Subramanyam, K. & Nayer, M. P. 1974. Vegetation and phytogeography of the western Ghats. Pp. 178–196 in Mani, M. S. (ed.). Ecology and biogeography in India. Dr. W. Junk b. v. Publ., The Hague, The Netherlands. 773 pp.Google Scholar
Sundararju, R. 1986. Management plan for Indira Gandhi Wildlife Sanctuary, 1988–1992. Tamil Nadu Forest Department.Google Scholar