Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-jwnkl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-08T16:08:45.614Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Small mammal community structure and composition in the Cerrado Province of central Brazil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Michael A. Mares ,
Kristina A. Ernest  and
Donald D. Gettinger
Michael A. Mares
Affiliation:
Stovall Museum and Department of Zoology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma 73019, USA
Kristina A. Ernest
Affiliation:
Stovall Museum and Department of Zoology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma 73019, USA
Donald D. Gettinger
Affiliation:
Stovall Museum and Department of Zoology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma 73019, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Community structure, macrohabitat selection, and patterns of species co-occurrence were examined during a 14-month study of small mammals in the Cerrado Province of central Brazil. Data were collected from mark-recapture grids in brejo and gallery forest, and from live-trapping and specimen collection in all habitat types within cerrado (campo limpo, campo sujo, cerrado [s.s.], cerradão, brejo, valley-side wet campo, and gallery forest). Gallery forest supported the highest species richness, most complex vertical distribution of species, highest level of trophic diversity, and highest macroniche diversity. Degree of habitat selection varied widely. All habitat types supported both rodents and marsupials, although marsupials tended to be much less common in the grasslands (campos) than in woodlands (cerrado) and forests (cerradão, gallery forest). Some species, such as Didelphis albiventris, occurred in all habitat types, while others were much more restricted. Oryzomys bicolor, for example, ocur-red only in gallery forest. No habitat type had a completely distinct fauna: overlap in species composition always occurred with at least one other habitat type. Because of the great variability of habitats, and the fact that subsets of the mammal fauna were frequently habitat specific, the overall species richness of any portion of mixed cerrado vegetation is remarkably high.

Keywords

Brazilcommunity structuregallery foresthabitat selectionmarsupialsneotropicsrodentstropical savanna
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 2 , Issue 4 , November 1986 , pp. 289 - 300
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

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

Alho, C. J. R 1981a. Roedores silvestres do cerrado: habitos e habitats. Pp. 155–156 in Alho, C. J. R. (ed.). Resumos das Comunicaçoes Científicas do VIII Congresso Brasileiro de Zoologia. Universidade de Brasilia, D.F., Brasil.Google Scholar
Alho, C. J. R. 1981b. Mata ciliar como refúgio da faúna do cerrado em caso de fogo? Pp. 173–174 in Alho, C. J. R. (ed.). Resumos das Comunicaçoes Científicas do VIII Congresso Brasileiro de Zoologia. Universidade de Brasilia, D.F., Brasil.Google Scholar
Alho, C. J. R. 1981c. Small mammal populations of Brazilian cerrado: the dependence of abundance and diversity on habitat complexity. Revista Brasileiro de Biologia 41:223–230.Google Scholar
Alho, C. J. R. 1982a. Brazilian rodents: their habitats and habits. Pp. 143–166 in Mares, M. A & Geno-ways, H. H. (eds). Mammalian biology in South America. Pymatuning Laboratory of Ecology Special ublications No. 6, Linesville, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Alho, C. J. R. 1982b. Quantitative components of three cerrado landscape habitats in Brazil. Tropical Ecology 23:125–133.Google Scholar
Anderson, S. 1982. Monodelphis kunsi. Mammalian Species 190:1–3.Google Scholar
Cabrera, A. L. & Willink, A 1973. Biogeografía de América Latina. Washington, D.C., OEA, Monografías Científicas, Serie Biológica, 13.Google Scholar
Cerqueira, R. 1982. South American landscapes and their mammals. Pp. 53–75 in Mares, M. A. & Genoways, H. H. (eds). Mammalian Biology in South America. Pymatuning Laboratory of Ecology Special Publications No. 6, Linesville, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Charles-Dominique, P., Atramentowicz, M., Charles-Dominique, M., Gerard, H., Hladik, A, Hladik, C. M. & Prevost, M. F. 1981. Les mammifères frugivores arboricoles noc turnes d'une forêt Guyanaise: inter-relations plantes-animaux. Terre et Vie 35:341–435.Google Scholar
Crespo, J. A. 1982. Ecología de la comunidad de mamíferos del Parque Nacional Iguazú, Misiones. Revista del Museu Argentina de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia” 3:45–162.Google Scholar
Davis, D. E. 1947. Notes on the life histories of some Brazilian mammals. Boletim do Museu National, Rio de Janeiro 76:1–8.Google Scholar
Dietz, J. M. 1983. Notes on the natural history of some small mammals in Central Brazil. Journal of Mammalogy 64:521–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenberg, J. F. 1981. The mammalian radiations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Eiten, G. 1972. The cerrado vegetation of Brazil. Botanical Review 38:205–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eiten, G. 1974. An outline of the vegetation of South America. Pp. 529–545 in Proceedings from The Symposia of the Fifth Congress of the International Primatological Society. Nagoya, Japan.Google Scholar
Emmons, L. H. 1982. Ecology of Proechimys (Rodentia, Echimyidae) in southeastern Peru. Tropical Ecology 23:280–290.Google Scholar
Fadem, B. H., Trupin, G. L., Maliniak, E., Van De Berg, J. L. & Hayssen, V. 1982. Care and breeding of the gray, short-tailed opossum (Monodelphis domestica). Laboratory Animal Science 32:405–409Google ScholarPubMed
Fearnside, P. M. 1982. Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon: how fast is it occurring? Interciencia 7:82–88.Google Scholar
Fleming, T. H. 1970. Comparative biology of two temperate-tropical rodent counterparts. American Midland Naturalist 83:462–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodland, R. J. 1971. A physiognomic analysis of the ‘Cerrado’ vegetation of Central Brasil. Journal of Ecology 59:411–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodland, R. J. & Irwin, H. S. 1977. Amazonian forest and cerrado: development and environ mental conservation. Pp. 214–233 in Prance, G. T. & Elias, T. S. (eds). Extinction is forever. New York Botanical Garden, Millbrook, New York.Google Scholar
Lovejoy, T. E., Rankin, J. M., Bierregard, R. O. Jr, Brown, K. S. Jr, Emmons, L. H. & Van Der Voort, M. E. 1984. Ecosystem decay of Amazon forest remnants. Pp. 295–325 in Nitecki, M. H. (ed.). Extinctions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Macarthur, R. H., Diamond, J. M., & Karr, J. R. 1972. Density compensation in island faunas. Ecology 53:330–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macarthur, R. H., Recher, H. & Cody, M. 1966. On the relation between habitat selection and species diversity. American Naturalist 100:319–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mares, M. A. 1982. The scope of South American mammalian biology: perspectives on a decade of research. Pp. 1–26 in Mares, M. A. & Genoways, H. H. (eds). Mammalian biology in South America. Pymatuning Laboratory of Ecology Special Publications No. 6, Linesville, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Mares, M. A. 1986. Conservation in South America: problems, consequences and solutions. Science 233:734–739.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mares, M. A. & Ojeda, R. A. 1982. Patterns of diversity and adaptation in South American hystricog-nath rodents. Pp. 53–75 in Mares, M. A. & Genoways, H. H. (eds). Mammalian biology in South America. Pymatuning Laboratory of Ecology Special Publications No. 6, Linesville, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Mares, M. A., Ojeda, R. A. & Kosco, M. P. 1981a. Observations on the distribution and ecology of the mammals of Salta Province, Argentina. Annals of the Carnegie Museum 50:151–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mares, M. A., Willig, M. R., Streilein, K. E. & Lacher, T. E. Jr 1981b. The mammals of north-eastern Brazil: a preliminary assessment. Annals of the Carnegie Museum 50:81–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, L. G. 1978. Chironectes minimus. Mammalian Species 109:1–6.Google Scholar
Myers, N. 1980. Conversion of tropical moist forests. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Nowak, R. M. & Paradiso, J. L. 1983. Walker's Mammals of the World, 4th Edition. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.Google Scholar
O'Connell, M. A. 1982. Population biology of North and South American grassland rodents: a com parative review. Pp. 167–185 in Mares, M. A. & Genoways, H. H. (eds). Mammalian biology in South America. Pymatuning Laboratory of Ecology, Special Publications No. 6, Linesville, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Paula, A. C. De. 1983. Relacòes espaciais de pequenos mamiferos em uma comunidade de mata de galeria do Parque National de Brasilia. Master's Thesis, Universidade de Brasilia, Departmento de Biologia Vegetal.Google Scholar
Pine, R. H. 1982. Current status of South American mammalogy. Pp. 27–37 in Mares, M. A. & Genoways, H. H. (eds). Mammalian biology in South America. Pymatuning Laboratory of Ecology Special Publications No. 6, Linesville, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Redford, K. H. & De Fonesca, G. A. B.A zoogeographic analysis of the non-volant mammalian fauna of the Cerrado. Neotropica (in press).Google Scholar
Sneath, P. H. A. & Sokal, R. R. 1973. Numerical taxonomy. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Souza, M. J. & Alho, C. J. R. 1980. Distribuição espacial do roedor silvestre Zygodontomys lasiurus em habitat natural do cerrado. Brasil Florestal 44:31–74.Google Scholar
Streilein, K. E. 1982. Ecology of small mammals in the semiarid Brazilian Caatinga. I. Climate and faunal composition. Annals of the Carnegie Museum 51:79–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar