Male and Female Meadow Voles,Microtus pennsylvanicus,Differ in Their Responses to Heterospecific/Conspecific Over‐Marks

Voles use runways, paths, and trails that may also be used by rabbits and mink. These shared areas could contain the scent marks of conspecifics and heterospecifics. Thus, it is likely that the scent marks of heterospecifics may overlap or be overlapped by those of voles, forming over‐marks. Much is known about how voles respond to over‐marks of two different conspecifics. However, we do not know how they would respond to an opposite‐sex conspecific whose scent marks are in an over‐mark with the scent marks of predator or the scent marks of a non‐predator heterospecifics. We tested the hypothesis that meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, differ in their response to the scent mark of the opposite‐sex conspecific if the scent mark was overlapped by that of a mink, a vole predator, or rabbit, a vole non‐predator. We found that female but not male voles showed a preference for the scent marks of the opposite‐sex conspecifics that were part of the mink‐vole over‐mark when compared to those of opposite‐sex conspecifics that were not part of the over‐mark. This preference by female voles was independent of whether the male vole was the top‐scent donor or bottom‐scent donor of the over‐mark. Male and female voles showed no preference between the scent marks of the opposite‐sex conspecifics whose marks were part of or not part of the rabbit‐vole over‐mark. Sex differences in the manner that meadow voles respond to rabbit‐vole and mink‐vole over‐marks are discussed.     

Meadow Voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus) and Prairie Voles (M. ochrogaster) Differ in Their Responses to Over-Marks from Opposite- and Same-Sex Conspecifics

Over‐marking occurs when one individual deposits its scent mark on the scent mark of a conspecific. Previous studies have shown that meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus) and prairie voles (M. ochrogaster) that were exposed to an over‐mark of two same‐sex conspecifics, later responded similarly to the top‐scent mark but differed in their response to the bottom‐scent mark. In the present study, we examined the responses of meadow voles and prairie voles to same‐sex and mixed‐sex over‐marks to ascertain whether their responses reflect the different tactics which males and females in promiscuous (meadow voles) and monogamous (prairie voles) species use to attract opposite‐sex conspecifics and to compete with same‐sex conspecifics. Males and females of both species spent more time investigating the mark of the top‐scent donor than that of the bottom‐scent donor of an over‐mark. Meadow voles exposed to a mixed‐sex over‐mark spent more time investigating the mark of the opposite‐sex conspecific independently of whether it was from the top‐ or bottom‐scent donor. In contrast, prairie voles spent more time investigating the mark of the opposite‐sex donor if it was from the top‐scent donor. These results suggest that: (i) over‐marking serves a competitive function; (ii) the scent marks of individuals attract multiple mates in promiscuous species such as the meadow vole; and (iii) the scent marks of individuals establish and maintain pair bonds between familiar opposite‐sex conspecifics in monogamous species such as the prairie vole.     

Potential risks of olfactory signaling: the effect of predators on scent marking by beavers

Mammals scent mark their territories to advertise occupancyand ownership. However, signaling with scent for territorialdefense can have a negative effect by advertising an individual'spresence and location to predators. In this study, we measuredresponses to a simulated territorial intrusion by conspecificadult male Eurasian beavers (Castor fiber) either in the localizedpresence or in the absence of odor of a predator to test thehypothesis that the territorial defense of free-living beaverswould be disrupted by the presence of predation risk in theirnatural environment. We predicted that beavers would significantlyreduce their willingness to countermark intruder's scent inthe presence of the scent of predators (wolf [Canis lupus] andlynx [Lynx lynx]), compared with a control (no odor), as responsesare in general stronger to predator scent marks than nonpredatorscent. Therefore, we also predicted that the effects of nonpredatorymammal scent (neophobic control) (eland [Taurotragus oryx] andhorse [Equus cabalus]) are to be expected somewhere in betweenthe effects of the predator odor and a control. Our resultssuggest that both predator and nonpredator scents reduce beaversresponse to a simulated intruder's scent mounds and thereforedisrupt their territorial defense. However, predator scent hada stronger effect than nonpredator scent. Beavers may thereforebe at great risk on territories with predators present becauseof the trade-off between predator avoidance and territorialdefense. Our study demonstrates the potential of predation riskas a powerful agent of counterselection on olfactory signalingbehavior.     

Meadow voles and prairie voles differ in the percentage of conspecific marks they over-mark

Many terrestrial mammals scent mark in areas containing the scent marks of conspecifics, and thus, may deposit their own scent marks on top of those that were deposited previously by conspecifics. This phenomenon, known as over-marking appears to play a role in same-sex competition or mate attraction. The present study determines whether meadow and prairie voles avoid over-marking the scent marks of conspecifics, target the scent marks of conspecifics and over-mark them, or randomly over-mark the scent marks of conspecifics. The data show that meadow and prairie voles adjust the number and location of scent marks that they deposit in areas marked previously by particular conspecifics. Male and female meadow and prairie voles target the scent marks of opposite-sex conspecifics and over-mark them. Female meadow and prairie voles also target the scent marks of female conspecifics. In contrast, male meadow and prairie voles over-mark the scent marks of male conspecifics in a random manner. By differentially over-marking the scent marks of conspecifics, voles may be able to communicate particular information to a variety of conspecifics.     

The predation risks of interspecific eavesdropping: weasel–vole interactions

Competing species benefit from eavesdropping on each other's signals by learning about shared resources or predators. But conspicuous signals are also open to exploitation by eavesdropping predators and should also pose a threat to other sympatric prey species. In western Finland, sibling voles Microtus rossiameridionalis and field voles M. agrestis compete for food and space, and both species rely upon scent marks for intraspecific communication. Both vole species are prey to a range of terrestrial scent hunting predators such as least weasels, however, the competitively superior sibling voles are taken preferentially. We tested in large out‐door enclosures whether field voles eavesdrop on the signals of its competitor, and whether they behave as though this eavesdropping carries a risk of predation. We presented field voles with scent marks from unknown conspecifics and sibling voles and measured their visitation, activity and scent marking behaviours at these scents under high (weasel present) and low (weasel absent) predation risk. Field voles readily visited both field and sibling vole scents under both high and low predation risk; however their activity at sibling vole scent marks declined significantly under increased predation risk. In contrast, predation risk did not affect field voles’ activity at conspecific scents. Thus, field voles were compelled to maintain eavesdropping on heterospecific scents under an increased risk of predation, however they compensated for this additional risk by reducing their activity at these risky scents. Scent marking rates declined significantly under high predation risk. Our results therefore reveal a hidden complexity in the use of social signals within multi‐species assemblages that is clearly sensitive to the potential for increased predation risk. The predation risks of interspecific eavesdropping demonstrated here represents a significant generalisation of the concept of associational susceptibility.     

Standardization of prey immunomarking: does a positive test always indicate predation?

A prey immunomarking procedure (PIP) in combination with generic anti-rabbit and anti-chicken immunoglobulin G (IgG) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) are used frequently to study arthropod predation. This study was conducted to: (1) further standardize the PIP as a tool for predator gut analysis research, (2) investigate the most effective means for administering IgG marks to prey items, and (3) assess the possibility of the PIP yielding false positive reactions as a consequence of a predator obtaining a mark by incidental contact with, or by a failed predation attempt on, a protein-marked prey item. The pest Lygus hesperus Knight (Hemiptera: Miridae) was tagged with either an external rabbit IgG mark, an internal chicken IgG mark, or a double (external rabbit IgG and internal chicken IgG) mark treatment. Then, the variously marked prey items were fed to chewing and piercing-sucking type predators and their gut contents were examined for the presence of IgG remains. Data revealed that all three marking treatments were highly effective at tagging targeted prey. However, ELISA results showed that the prey items should only be marked internally to maximize the likelihood of detecting prey remains while minimizing the risk of obtaining false positive errors. The merits and limitations of using the generic PIP for predator gut analysis research are discussed.     

Female prairie voles do not choose males based on their frequency of scent marking

We conducted an experiment to test three alternative hypotheses for the function of frequency of scent marking in male prairie voles, MICROTUS OCHROGASTER: (1) sexual attraction (to advertise male quality for mating); (2) reproductive competition; and (3) self-advertisement or individual identity. In laboratory experiments, males deposited scent on all areas of a bare substrate, and more in an area next to a stimulus animal than other areas, regardless of the stimulus animal's sex. Females did not choose mates based on their frequency of scent marking and scent marking did not antagonize or stimulate aggression between males. The frequency of scent marking by males supports the individual identity hypothesis, and is less consistent with the sexual attraction or reproductive competition hypotheses. Mate choice is likely based on a complex suite of characters, but at least in prairie voles, the frequency of scent marking by males does not appear to be one of them.     

Predator‐Naïve Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) Show Antipredator Behaviours to Scent from an Introduced Piscivorous Mammalian Predator Fed Conspecifics

Introduced mammalian predators may pose a high risk for native and naïve prey populations, but little is known about how native fish species may recognize and respond to scents from introduced mammalian predators. We investigated the role of diet‐released chemical cues in facilitating predator recognition, hypothesizing that native brown trout (Salmo trutta) would exhibit antipredator behaviours to faeces scents from the introduced American mink (Neovision vison) fed conspecifics, but not to non‐trout diets. In treatments‐control and replicate stream tank experiments, brown trout showed significant antipredator responses to faeces scent from mink fed conspecifics, but not to faeces scent from mink fed a non‐trout diet (chicken), or the non‐predator food control, Eurasian beaver (Castor fiber). We conclude that native and naïve brown trout show relevant antipredator behaviours to an introduced mammalian predator, presumably based on diet‐released conspecific alarm cues and thereby estimate the predation risk.     

Scent marking and mate choice in the prairie vole, Microtus ochrogaster

Scent marking is common among male and female rodents and might be used in male-male competition and as a mechanism for mate attraction. I tested the hypotheses that females would choose males based on their frequency and placement of scent marks, and that a female would advertise interest in a particular male by placing her scent marks on or near those of a preferred mating partner. In a series of experiments conducted with prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster, females did not choose mates based on the frequency or placement of scent marks by males nor did they advertise their interest in a particular male through the frequency or placement of scent marks. The number of males chosen that scent-marked more than their opponents did not differ significantly between females exposed (11 of 15) and not exposed (10 of 15) to scents of males. Females exposed and not exposed to scents of males preferred seven of the same males that had scent-marked more than their opponents. When a third group of females was exposed to four times more scent of the less preferred than preferred males, they still chose the preferred males. Thus, the frequency and placement of scent marks by males were not used to assess males for mate choice nor did female prairie voles use scent to advertise their preference for a mating partner. In that scent marking is common in male and female mammals, scent quality might be more important than quantity in male-male competition and mate attraction.Copyright 2002 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved .     

Scent-marking by male mice under the risk of predation

The use by predators of scent marks made by potential prey isa largely unexplored potential cost of olfactory signaling.Here we investigate how animals that differ in their investmentin scent-marking respond to simulated predation risk, by comparingthe willingness to approach and counter-mark the scent marksof a competitor in the presence or absence of predator odor.We aimed to test whether animals that invest heavily in scent-marking,and which may thus be more vulnerable to eavesdropping predators,will either (1) take greater risks to counter-mark the competitor'sscent or (2) reduce or abandon scent-marking. Using outbredmale laboratory mice, Mus musculus, we show that, in the absenceof predators, individuals which initially scent-mark at highfrequency (high markers) approach the competitor's scent marksmore quickly and spend more time in counter-marking than thosewhich initially invest relatively little (low markers). Ina sib-sib experimental design, simulated presence of predationrisk (urine of ferrets, Mustela putorius furo) caused bothkinds of individual to approach the competitor's marks moreslowly, but high markers approached more quickly than low markersand spent more time in the vicinity of the competitor's marks.Only high markers significantly reduced their overmarking ofthe competitor's scent. These results suggest (1) that thereis a unique danger inherent to scent-marking at high frequenciesand (2) that high-marking males were prepared to accept increasedcosts of intrasexual competition in order to reduce the riskof predation. Further tests using the scent of naked mole-rats, Heterocephalus glaber, showed that these effects were not elicited simply by an unfamiliar odor. We discuss reasons for the observeddifference in response to predation risk between the groups,and the implications of these results for counter-selectionon scent-marking strategies.     

The influence of American mink odour on the spatial distribution and behaviour of water voles

The perception and assessment of predation risk often cause changes in the activities of animals and induce behavioural responses that may in turn affect their movements and distribution. To simulate high predation risk in a midfield pond riparian habitat, we used fresh faeces from ranch American mink Neovison vison and recorded behavioural responses of water voles Arvicola amphibius. In areas where mink odour was deployed, the numbers of captured vole individuals and their trappability were significantly lower than in control areas. Several voles migrated from the zones with deployed mink faeces to the areas without faeces, thus proving that increased predation risk affects the distribution of individuals in a population. The response to mink odour was much more pronounced in females than in males; in areas with deployed mink faeces, not a single female was trapped. We conclude that although American mink is a non‐native, invasive predator, water voles respond to mink odour by reducing their activity and/or by avoiding places with higher predation risk.     

Meadow Voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus, Arvicolidae) Over-mark and Adjacent-mark the Scent Marks of Same-sex Conspecifics

Scent over-marking occurs when an animal deposits its scent mark on top of the scent mark of a conspecific; adjacent-marking occurs when an animal deposits its scent mark next to the scent mark of a conspecific. Given that male rodents usually scent mark more than females and that animals spend more time investigating the odor of the top-scent donor of an over-mark, I tested the following three hypotheses. First, male meadow voles deposit more scent marks than female meadow voles. Second, male meadow voles will deposit more over-marks and adjacent-marks in response to the scent marks of a same-sex conspecific than females would. Third, meadow voles spend more time investigating the odor of the second vole placed in the arena than that of the first vole placed in the arena. To test these hypotheses, two age-matched, like-sex conspecifics (first vole and second vole) were placed successively into an arena in which they were allowed to freely explore and scent mark for 15 min. The first hypothesis was not supported. The first and second vole, independently of sex, deposited a similar number of scent marks. The second hypothesis was also not supported by the data: more conspecific scent marks were over-marked by the second female than by the second male. The third hypothesis was supported by the data. After investigating a scented arena, males and females spent more time investigating the odor of the second vole than that of the first vole. Sex differences in scent-marking behaviors of meadow voles are unlike those reported for other species of rodents.     

Over-marking and Adjacent Marking are Influenced by Sibship in Male Prairie Voles,Microtus ochrogaster

Scent over-marking occurs when an animal deposits its scent mark on top of the scent mark of a conspecific. Over-marking may provide advantages in the transfer of information to the individual whose scent is on top but not to the individual whose scent is on the bottom. We tested the hypothesis that over-marking is a competitive form of olfactory communication and that male prairie voles would over-mark the scent marks of same-sex conspecifics more than those of same-sex siblings. Two age-matched male voles (first male and second male) were placed successively into an arena in which they were allowed to explore freely and scent mark for 15 min at age 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52 d. The first male was placed into a clean arena, whereas the second male was placed into an arena containing either the scent marks of an age-matched male sibling or nonsibling. Age affected the total number of scent marks deposited by the voles; 12-20-d-old voles deposited fewer scent marks, over-marks and adjacent marks than did 28-52-d-old voles. Sibship did not affect the total number of scent marks deposited by the first and second voles but did affect the number of over-marks and adjacent marks deposited by the second vole. Siblings received significantly fewer over-marks and adjacent marks than did nonsiblings; this effect was most dramatic after the voles reached 28 d of age, a time coincident with the onset of puberty. Males separated from siblings and housed singly at 44-d-old and tested at 52-d-old, deposited significantly more over-marks and adjacent marks in arenas if the first vole was a nonsibling than if it was a sibling. This differential scent-marking supports the hypothesis that over-marking and adjacent marking are used as competitive forms of olfactory communication by male prairie voles.     

Meadow Voles and Prairie Voles Differ in the Length of Time They Prefer the Top-Scent Donor of an Over-Mark

Scent over-marking occurs when one individual places its scent mark on top of one deposited by a conspecific. Studies have shown that animals investigating an over-mark later behave as if the top-scent mark is more important than the bottom-scent mark. Differences in response to over-marks may reflect differences in social and mating systems. Here, we ascertained the length of time that meadow voles ( Microtus pennsylvanicus ) and prairie voles ( Microtus ochrogaster ), exposed to an over-mark, maintain a preference for the mark of the top-scent donor compared with that of the bottom-scent donor. If voles had no previous sexual experience with their top-scent and bottom-scent donors, male and female meadow voles maintained a preference for their top-scent donor's mark over their bottom-scent donor's mark for 48 h. In contrast, male and female prairie voles maintained such preferences for 24 h and 12 h, respectively. If voles had prior sexual experience with either their top- or bottom-scent donor, such experience did not affect the length of time meadow voles and male prairie voles maintained a preference for their top-scent donor. Female prairie voles maintained a 12-h preference for the top-scent mark if it belonged to the mate. If the mate was the bottom-scent donor, female prairie voles showed no preference for it or the top-scent mark. These findings are discussed within the framework that an association may exist between the manner in which voles respond to over-marks and their social and mating systems.     

Nonlinearity in the predation risk of prey mobility

Odorous waste products such as urine and faeces are unavoidable for most animals and are widely exploited by predators and their prey. Consequently, waste accumulations can be risky and prey which increase their mobility in order to disperse and dilute their waste should avoid a high predation risk until this benefit is balanced by the increasing risks of random predator encounter. This hypothesis was tested for voles (Microtus spp.) in Finland which are vulnerable to predation due to the scent and ultraviolet attractiveness of their urine. The mortality and mobility of radio-collared voles showed a U-shaped relationship, regardless of vole sex, species or population cycle phase. The low risks for prey making intermediate movements suggest that predation risk can exert strong selective pressures on prey such that they have little respite from the risk of being killed.     

Chronic exposure of cat odor enhances aggression,urinary attractiveness and sex pheromones of mice

To test whether predator odor exposure negatively affects the behavior of prey, we exposed three groups of male house mice (Mus musculus) to the odors of cat (Felis catus) urine, rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) urine and water (control), respectively, for consecutive 58 days and investigated how the treatments affected the response, aggressiveness, dominance, urinary attractiveness to females and pheromone composition of male mice. Compared to mice exposed to rabbit urine or water, those exposed to cat odor did not show any response habituation to the cat odor and became more aggressive, increased mark urine production and were more attractive to females when the latter were tested with their urine. Furthermore, gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry analysis revealed coincident elevations of the well-known male pheromones, E,E-α-farnesene, E-β-farnesene, R,R-dehydro-exo-brevicomin or S-2-sec-butyl-dihydrothiazole. In addition, rabbit urine exposure increased urinary attractiveness to females and pheromonal levels of the males in comparison with the mice exposed to water. This could be related to olfactory enrichment of heterospecific chemosignals, suggesting that predator odors were more beneficial. In light of these anti-intuitional findings in the chemical interaction between cats and mice, we conclude that predator odor affects prey more profoundly than previously believed and that its impact may not always be negative.     

Olfactory Experience Affects the Response of Meadow Voles to the Opposite‐Sex Scent Donor of Mixed‐Sex Over‐Marks

Scent marking and over‐marking are important forms of communication between the sexes for many terrestrial mammals. Over the course of three experiments, we determined whether the amount of time individuals investigate the scent marks of opposite‐sex conspecifics is affected by 4 d of olfactory experience with those conspecifics. In Experiment 1, female meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, spent more time investigating the scent mark of the novel male conspecific than that of the familiar male donor, whereas male voles spent similar amounts of time investigating the scent mark of the familiar female and a novel female conspecific. In Experiment 2, voles were exposed to a mixed‐sex over‐mark in which subjects did not have 4 d of olfactory experience with either the top‐scent donor or the bottom‐scent donor. During the test phase, male and female voles spent more time investigating the scent mark of the opposite‐sex conspecific that provided the top‐scent mark than that of a novel, opposite‐sex conspecific. Male and female voles spent similar amounts of time investigating the scent mark of the bottom‐scent donor and that of a novel opposite‐sex conspecific. In Experiment 3, voles were exposed to a mixed‐sex over‐mark that contained the scent mark of an opposite‐sex conspecific with which they had 4 d of olfactory experience. During the test phase, male voles spent more time investigating the mark of the familiar, top‐scent female than the scent mark of a novel female donor but spent similar amounts of time investigating the mark of the familiar, bottom‐scent female and that of a novel female donor. In contrast, female voles spent more time investigating the mark of a novel male donor than that of either the familiar, top‐scent male or that of the familiar, bottom‐scent male. The sex differences in the responses of voles to scent marks and mixed‐sex over‐marks are discussed in relation to the natural history and non‐monogamous mating system of meadow voles.     

The effect of pair bonding in Cabrera vole’s scent marking

The Cabrera vole (Microtus cabrerae) is a rare rodent living in patchy grassy areas of the Iberian Peninsula where unpaired individuals of both sexes use scent marking primarily to increase their mate-finding likelihood. Cabrera voles establish long-term pair bonds with opposite-sex conspecifics constituting a breeding pair, which is expected to reduce the efforts in searching for a new mate. Under such circumstances, scent marking as a strategy to increase mate-finding likelihood became useless. Accordingly, we hypothesise that pair bonded Cabrera voles suppress mate-finding scent marking to reduce energetic costs and predation risk. To test this hypothesis, we compared scent-marking behaviour towards a clean substrate, in both paired and non-paired voles. No differences were found in the scent marks’ type and the amount of marks placed by voles in both conditions. We also analysed the scent-marking behaviour of both sex pair bonded voles when exposed simultaneously to a clean substrate, a substrate pre-marked by males and a substrate pre-marked by females. We found no significant differences in scent-marks (urine-marked area and number of faecal boli) across the three types of substrate types. In accordance with our prediction, these results suggest that pair bonded Cabrera voles did not use scent marking for mate finding, thus providing further support to the existence of a monogamous mating strategy. Furthermore, our results fail to support the use of scent marking for territorial defence purposes.     

Mammalian predator scent, vegetation cover and tree seedling predation by meadow voles

Herbivores are thought to respond to the increased risk of attack by predators during foraging activities by concentrating feeding in safe habitats and by reducing feeding in the presence of predators. We tested these hypotheses by comparing tree seedling predation by meadow voles within large outdoor enclosures treated either with scent of large mammalian predators (red fox, bobcat, coyote) or a control scent (vinegar). In addition, we compared the distribution of voles in relation to naturally occurring variation in vegetation cover and the tendency of voles to attack tree seedlings planted in small patches with cover manipulation (intact, reduced or removed cover). Predator scent did not affect the rate or spatial distribution of tree seedling predation by voles, nor did it affect giving up densities (a surrogate of patch quitting harvest rate), survival rates, body size or habitat distribution of voles. In both predator scent and vinegar treatments voles preferred abundant vegetation providing good cover, which was also the site of almost all tree seedling predation. We conclude that large mammalian predator scent does not influence the perception by voles of the general safety of habitat, which is more strongly affected by the presence of cover.     

Predation and the evolution of prey behavior: an experiment with tree hole mosquitoes

We tested for facultative changes in behavior of an aquaticinsect in response to cues from predation and for evolutionof prey behavior in response to experimental predation regimes.Larvae of the tree hole mosquito Aedes triseriatus reducedfiltering, browsing, and time below the surface in responseto water that had held a feeding larva of the predator Toxorhynchitesrutilus. We subjected experimental A. triseriatus populationsto culling of 50% of the larval population, either by T. rutiluspredation or by random removal. After two generations of laboratoryculling, behavior of the two treatment groups diverged. Aedestriseriatus in control-culled lines retained their facultativeshift from filtering to resting, but tended to lose the response of reduced browsing below the surface in water that had helda feeding predator. Predator-culled lines lost their facultativeresponse of reduced filtering in water that had held a feedingpredator and evolved toward more time resting and less timefiltering in both water that had held a feeding predator andwater that had held only A. triseriatus. Predator-culled linesretained their facultative response of reduced browsing belowthe surface in water that had held a feeding predator. Twofield populations and their reciprocal hybrids responded similarlyto cues from predation and did not differ in their evolutionaryresponse to experimental culling. We conclude that consistentpresence or absence of predation can select rapidly for divergencein prey behavior, including facultative behavioral responsesto predators.