A test of five mechanisms of species coexistence between rodents in a southern African savanna

M. R. Perrin, B. P. Kotler

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    21 Scopus citations

    Abstract

    The operation of five different mechanisms of species coexistence in a community of rodents was examined in a semi-arid Kalahari savanna in southern Africa. The two most common species were Tatera leucogaster (bushveld gerbil) and Rhabdomys pumilio (striped mouse). The mechanisms examined were habitat selection in a mosaic, microhabitat selection, spatial variation in resource abundance, temporal variation in resource abundance, and diet partitioning. The rodents were censused using mark-recapture live trapping, activity measured using sand-tracking, and foraging efficiency measured using giving-up densities (GUDs; the amount of food remaining following patch exploitation) in experimental food patches. There was no support for any of the five mechanisms: T leucogaster tended to be a more efficient and mobile forager than R. pumilio. It is suggested that coexistence maybe based on a sixth mechanism, seasonal variation in resource abundance and a tradeoff of maintenance efficiency versus foraging efficiency. Further, it appears that R. pumilio is more efficient at maintaining harvest potential, not by maintaining high consumer biomass, but rather by having a high intrinsic rate of increase.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)55-61
    Number of pages7
    JournalAfrican Zoology
    Volume40
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    StatePublished - 1 Jan 2005

    Keywords

    • Africa
    • Giving-up densities
    • Habitat selection
    • Kalahari desert
    • Optimal patch use
    • Resource abundance
    • Rodents
    • Species coexistence

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Animal Science and Zoology

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'A test of five mechanisms of species coexistence between rodents in a southern African savanna'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this