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.     

Scent-marking in the tamarin, Saguinus oedipus: Sex differences and ontogeny

Many mammalian species which exhibit scent-marking behaviour show a pronounced sexual dimorphism in marking behaviour and scent gland morphology. However, several species of marmosets and tamarins do not show dimorphism in these traits. We examined sex differences in scent-marking structures and behaviour in cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus o. oedipus; Primates: Callitrichidae). While body size and weight were virtually identical in adult males and females, there were pronounced sex differences in scent gland size and in rates of marking behaviour. Females possessed larger anogenital and suprapubic glands and showed 10-fold higher rates of anogenital marking and slightly higher rates of suprapubic marking than males. Observations on the development of anogenital marking revealed a lack of dimorphism during the first 2 years. Adult rates of anogenital marking in females were only observed in females housed separately from their natal family group. The onset of adult levels of marking behaviour corresponds with the adoption of the role of a breeding adult female, suggesting that anogenital marking plays a role in sexual communication.     

Scent‐Mark Identification and Scent‐Marking Behaviour in African Wild Dogs (Lycaon pictus)

Scent‐marking is common in mammals, but where signals are carried by urine and faeces, distinguishing between scent‐marking and mere elimination is problematic. To do so, we documented behaviours and context variables associated with urination and defecation in free‐ranging endangered African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus) and tested whether these were related to the responses of other dogs to deposits. We found that distinct postures were almost uniquely associated with deposits by dominant wild dogs, were more common during urination than defecation, and increased the likelihood that these deposits would be investigated by other wild dogs. The likelihood of investigation depended on the sex and dominance status of the depositor, the type of deposit and the substrate. Urine from dominant females was more likely to be investigated by other wild dogs than any other deposits, and deposits placed on vegetation were more likely to be investigated than those on bare ground. The likelihood that a deposit would be overmarked was affected by the deposit type and the sex and dominance status of the last depositor. Collectively, these results suggest that dominant wild dog urine is of greatest interest to other dogs. Our results show that some deposits by African wild dogs are not scent‐marks and that detailed observations of behaviours and context variables during elimination events can be used to distinguish deposits that are likely to be of communication value.     

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.     

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.     

Female preference for males that have exclusively marked or invaded territories depends on male presence and its identity in the subterranean rodent Ctenomys talarum

Territorial scent‐marking provides chemical records of male competitive interactions that are available to females, who gain valuable information to assess and identify best quality partners. In this context, the solitary subterranean rodent tuco‐tuco (Ctenomys talarum) offers excellent possibilities to evaluate the effects of male exclusive scent‐marking of territories on female assessment. For evaluation, we used wild caught individuals of C. talarum, manipulated their scent marks within the territories in captive conditions and staged preference tests where females were able to choose between exclusive and invaded territories. The evaluation was performed in two scenarios considering the identity of the intruder scent mark: territories invaded by a strange male and territories invaded by a neighbour male. Females investigated the chemical cues deposited on the substrate of the exclusively marked territory more frequently. Next, females displayed equal interest to scent samples of both males presented in a Y‐maze. Finally, when females could gain access to both individually isolated males and their scent‐marked territories, they spent more time within invaded territories despite they visited them with the same frequency. Moreover, females tried to get in contact by scratching the mesh of the owner of the invaded territory more frequently. We found that females of C. talarum evaluate the homogeneity (exclusiveness) of scent marks within a male territory and then show preferences in relation to the identity of the intruder's scent –whether strange or neighbour.     

The scent-marking behaviour of the spotted hyaena Crocuta crocuta in the southern Kalahari

All hyaenas scent mark their territories by smearing grass stems with paste from their subcaudal scent glands and by depositing faeces at latrines, but they adopt different strategies in terms of how they disperse these scent marks in their territories. For example, brown hyaenas living in the southern Kalahari deposit pastes and latrines throughout the whole of their territory, while spotted hyaenas living in the Ngorongoro Crater of East Africa place their scent marks strictly along the territorial borders. We have argued elsewhere (Gorman & Mills, 1984) that these different strategies are not species-specific but are instead adaptive responses to local conditions. Here, we use data from a population of spotted hyaenas, living in small clans and large territories in the Kalahari, to test the hypothesis that hinterland marking is a response to the problem of marking a very large territory with a limited amount of scent and within a limited time budget.     

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.     

Scent marking by voles in response to predation risk: a field-laboratory validation

Predators use scent to locate their prey, and prey animals oftenalter their behavior in response to predation risk. I testedthe hypothesis that voles would decrease their frequency ofscent marking in response to predation risk. I conducted trialsin which prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster, and woodland voles,M. pinetorum, were allowed to scent mark ceramic tiles placedin their runways in the field. The tiles were subjected to oneof three treatments: scented with odor from mink, Mustela vison(a rodent predator); rabbit, Oryctolagus cuniculus (a nonpredatormammal control); and no odor (control). No significant differenceswere found in the frequency of scent marking in response tothe three treatments for either species. To validate that volesdid not decrease their scent marking in response to predationrisk, I brought male prairie voles from the field site intothe laboratory and allowed them to scent mark white paper substratetreated with mink odor, rabbit odor, or no odor. No significantdifferences were found in the frequency of scent marks in responseto the three treatments. These results differ from what waspredicted based on laboratory studies with other species ofrodents that show avoidance, reproductive suppression, decreasedactivity, and reduced scent marking in response to odors ofpredators. Voles appear to scent mark different substrates andunder a wide variety of social and environmental situations,and this is not influenced by the presence of odor from a predator.     

Scent marking in two western Amazonian populations of woolly monkeys (Lagothrix lagotricha)

We describe patterns of scent marking observed in two wild populations of lowland woolly monkeys that were the subjects of long-term studies in the westernmost portion of the Amazon basin. The woolly monkeys engaged primarily in two types of scent marking: chest rubbing and anogenital rubbing. In both study populations, males and females performed both types of scent marking, but males chest-rubbed more commonly than females, while females engaged in more anogenital rubbing. We evaluated two nonexclusive hypotheses for the function of scent marking by woolly monkeys: 1) that scent marking is used in sociosexual contexts, and 2) that scent marking is used to convey information about occupancy of or willingness to defend an area from conspecifics in other social groups. We found no association between the occurrence of scent-marking behavior and location within the home range, but did find that scent marking occurred more commonly than expected on days when copulations, mating solicitations, and intergroup encounters were observed. Additionally, mating activity and chest rubbing were highly correlated across the yearly cycle, even when the potentially confounding variable of ripe fruit availability was controlled for. In woolly monkeys, overt male-male competition is rare and female choice is an important part of the mating system. Our results are most consistent with the idea that scent marking plays a role in advertising male quality or competitive ability, and perhaps in coordinating mating activity.     

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.     

The Asian grass lizard (Takydromus sexlineatus) does not respond to the scent of a native mammalian predator

Lacertid lizards use chemical cues emitted by saurophagous snakes to evade predation. Whether these lizards can detect and respond to the chemical cues of predatory mammals has not been studied. As many mammals carry distinct body odours and/or use chemical cues for intraspecific communication, lizards can be expected to use these chemicals as early warning cues. To test this idea, we observed the behaviour of Asian grass lizards (Takydromus sexlineatus) that had been transferred to an unfamiliar test arena containing one of four scent treatments. No particular scent was applied to the arena in the control situation. Diluted aftershave served as a pungency control. In the snake treatment, scent of the Oriental whip snake (Ahaetulla prasina) was applied. We included this treatment to learn how Asian grass lizards react to predator chemical cues. Finally, in the mongoose treatment, the lizards were confronted with scent cues of several small Indian mongooses (Herpestes auropunctatus). Snake scent elicited foot shakes, startles and tail vibrations. These are behaviours that in lacertid lizards are associated with stressful situations such as predatory encounters. Surprisingly, lizards confronted with mongoose scent exhibited none of these stress-indicating behaviours. In fact, their behaviour did not differ from that of lizards subjected to an odourless control treatment. These results raise concern. Mongooses are rapidly invading ecosystems worldwide. If lizards that have co-evolved with mongooses are unable to detect these predators’ presence through chemical cues, it seems highly unlikely that evolutionary naïve lizards will develop this ability rapidly.     

Central and peripheral action of testosterone propionate on scent gland morphology and marking behaviour in the Mongolian gerbil

Scent gland size and activity and frequency of marking under standard conditions were compared in five groups of male and female gerbils: (1) intact, sham-operated controls, (2) intact with scent glands excised, (3) gonadectomized, (4) gonadectomized injected with 1000 μg testosterone propionate (TP) on alternate days, and (5) gonadectomized with a low dose (25 μg) TP applied topically to the ventral scent gland on alternate days. The animals were housed in individual cages and tested for marking in an open field arena with plastic pegs.The scent gland is not required in either sex for the behavioural act of marking. Topical application of a dose of TP too low to exert a systematic effect restored the scent gland but not marking. Injection of sufficient TP to restore seminal vesicle weight restored marking, as well as the scent glands.It was concluded that in the male, both marking behaviour and scent gland size are controlled by the testes. The effect of androgens on marking is mediated directly through the central nervous system, and not through peripheral stimulation of the glands.Females have smaller glands and mark less than males. The ovaries appear to have little control over marking frequency, and some control over scent gland size. It is possible to stimulate marking behaviour to supernormal levels by TP injection, but not by topical application.     

Scent marking in a territorial African antelope: I. The maintenance of borders between male oribi

Scent marking is ubiquitous among the dwarf antelope and gazelles of Africa, but its function has been the subject of debate. This study examined preorbital gland scent marking in the oribi, Ourebia ourebi, a territorial African antelope. Several hypotheses for the function of scent marking by territorial antelope were tested with observational data. Of these, the hypotheses that scent marking is driven by intrasexual competition between neighbouring males, and that marks serve as an honest advertisement of a male's ability to defend his territory from rivals, were supported best. Thirty-three territorial male oribi on 23 territories marked most at borders shared with other territorial males, and territorial males marked more often at borders shared with multimale groups than at borders shared with a single male. This suggests that males perceived neighbouring male groups as a greater threat to territory ownership than neighbouring males that defended their territories without the aid of adult subordinates. Marking rate was unrelated to territory size or the number of females on adjacent territories, but males with many male neighbours marked at higher rates than those with fewer male neighbours. These results suggest that the presence of male neighbours has a greater effect on the scent marking behaviour of territorial antelope than has been considered previously. Copyright 1999 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.     

Scent‐Marking Behaviour in a Pack of Free‐Ranging Domestic Dogs

Most mammals scent‐mark, and a variety of hypotheses have been put forward to explain this behaviour. Most of our knowledge about scent marking in domestic dogs comes from studies carried out on laboratory or companion dogs, while few studies have been carried out on free‐ranging dogs. Here, we explored the functional significance of different scent‐marking behavioural patterns in a pack of free‐ranging domestic dogs by testing two non‐exclusive hypotheses: the indirect territorial defence and the dominance/threat hypotheses. Through direct observation, we recorded the locations of dog scent marks (urination, defecation and ground scratching) and information regarding the identity and posture of the marking animal. We found evidence that markings are used by dogs to form a ‘property line’ and to threaten rivals during agonistic conflicts. Both males and females utilized scent marking to assert dominance and probably to relocate food or maintain possession over it. Raised‐leg urination and ground scratching probably play a role in olfactory and visual communication in both males and females. Urinations released by females, especially through flexed‐leg posture, may also convey information about their reproductive state. Finally, our observations suggest that defecation does not play an essential role in olfactory communication among free‐ranging dogs and that standing and squat postures are associated with normal excretion. Our results suggest that many of the proposed functions of marking behaviours are not mutually exclusive, and all should be explored through detailed field and laboratory studies.     

Scent Counter-marking by Male Meadow Voles: Females Prefer the Top-scent Male

Scent counter-marking, in which one individual deposits scent in close proximity to the scent of another individual, is a widespread but poorly understood aspect of olfactory communication. Recent work with golden hamsters suggests that animals may have specially evolved mechanisms for determining which individual has marked most recently, and this work emphasizes the need for studies with other species. In Experiment 1 it was shown for the first time that male meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, scent mark with urine and anogenital scents and probably also counter-mark with these scents. Female meadow voles, after investigation of an area marked by two males, preferred the whole-body odours of the male that had marked the arena most recently (Experiment 2). After females investigated a male's home cage that had just been marked by another male, they again preferred the whole-body odours of the male that had marked in the cage most recently (Experiment 3). These results demonstrate that female voles, like male hamsters, can distinguish the top or most recent individual's scent from the bottom or older scent in places marked by two males, and further indicate that female voles may prefer the individual that deposited the top scent. Taken together, the results suggest that counter-marking by male voles may be a type of competitive advertising and that females may base mate-choice decisions on information from the pattern of such counter-marks.     

Do cavity‐nesting primates reduce scent marking before retirement to avoid attracting predators to sleeping sites?

The largest population of endangered golden lion tamarins (Leontopithecus rosalia, GLTs) decreased from approximately 330 to 220 individuals between 1995 and 2000 due to a dramatic increase in predation at sleeping sites. We used behavioral data from eight social groups in this population to test two hypotheses: First, if GLTs attempt to mitigate the risk of predation at sleeping sites, they should reduce their rates of scent marking just prior to retirement. Second, if the benefits of scent marking prior to entering the sleeping site merit an increase in the rate of marking, then tamarins should increase their rate of pre-retirement scent marking during the breeding season, when such behavior would have its greatest impact on reproductive fitness. We used a generalized linear model (GLM) repeated-measures analysis to compare rates of daytime scent marking with rates of marking just prior to retirement for males and females. In addition, we compared scent marking prior to retiring in the nonbreeding season to marking rates before retirement in the breeding season for males and both sexes considered concurrently. Contrary to our expectations, GLTs significantly increased their rates of scent marking during the 30 min prior to entering their sleeping site-an observation driven by an increase in male (but not female) rates of marking. Rates of marking before entering the sleeping site were greater in the nonbreeding season compared to the breeding season, when both sexes were considered concomitantly and when males were evaluated alone. We conclude that GLTs do not attempt to minimize predation risk by decreasing scent marking in the period before they enter their sleeping site, and that tamarins do not scent mark at this time of day in order to transmit information about reproductive status or to control reproduction of subordinates. We speculate that scent marking in the 30 min prior to entering sleeping sites may serve to reduce predation risk by enabling tamarin groups to return quickly to favored sleeping sites in the evening when crepuscular predators are active.     

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.     

The Reproductive State of Female Voles Affects their Scent Marking Behavior and the Responses of Male Conspecifics to Such Marks

During the breeding season, the reproductive condition of female mammals changes. Females may or may not be sexually receptive. We conducted a series of experiments to determine whether reproductive condition of female meadow voles affects their scent marking behavior as well as the scent marking behavior of male conspecifics. In expt 1, females in postpartum estrus (PPE females) deposited more scent marks than females that were neither pregnant nor lactating (REF females) or ovariectomized females (OVX females). In expt 2, male voles scent marked more and deposited more over‐marks in areas marked by PPE females than by REF and OVX females. In expt 3, PPE females deposited more scent marks and over‐marks in areas marked by males than did females in the other reproductive states. The results of these experiments showed that male and female voles may vary in the number, type and location of scent marks they deposit in areas scented by particular conspecifics.     

Persistence of the Attractiveness of Two Sex-specific Scents in Meadow Voles,Microtus pennsylvanicus

The function of an odour may be reflected in its fade-out time in the environment. In this study, we investigated fade-out times of two specific odours, the anogenital area scent and that of the posterolateral region. These two odours support opposite-sex preferences in male and female meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, but convey nonidentical information to conspecifics during the breeding season. The first experiment tested whether meadow voles respond preferentially to scents that were aged for 15 min (fresh) to 30 d. Males preferred female anogenital area scent to male anogenital area scent if both scents were ≤ 10 d old. By comparison, females preferred male anogenital area scent to female anogenital area scent if the scents were ≤ 25 d old. However, male and female voles preferred the posterolateral scent of males to that of females if the scents were ≤ 1 d old. Thus, fade-out times for these two scents differ for males and females, suggesting different functions. In the second experiment, male and female voles preferred fresh anogenital area scent and fresh posterolateral region scent compared with those same scents that were older. This result suggests that older scents may have lost information over time about the sex of the donor. Overall, data from both experiments indicate that voles may use specific scents for communication in different social contexts.