Comparing Longworth live traps to hair tubes for describing small mammal communities
Abstract
Ecologists are always interested in studying populations of a certain area. There are many reasons for this, but two reasons include to see the change in distribution over time and because it can help tell about interactions between species. A traditional way of studying small mammal populations that has been commonly used is live trapping. As useful as it has been, live trapping does have some downfalls. It requires handling animals and is time restrictive. An alternate method of collecting small mammal population data has been explored and was tested in this experiment. My results demonstrated that abundance data from hair-tube traps was significantly positively correlated with traditional live-trap mark recapture population estimates. However, hair identification was difficult, so live trapping is still necessary to identify the species.
Local Knowledge Graph (5 entities)
Related Works
Items connected by shared entities, co-authorship, citations, or semantic similarity.
Effects of avalanches on rodent populations
The effects of recreational trail use on small mammal species richness and abundance
A comparative study of mammalian faunal diversity and density in aspen versus meadow habitat or if you want a mouse, don't climb a tree
Data from: The effect of repeated, lethal sampling on wild bee abundance and diversity
Social Behavior and Population Dynamics of Yellow-bellied Marmots
Social Behavior and Population Dynamics of Yellow-bellied Marmots
Small Mammals: A Beaver Pond Ecosystem and Adjacent Riparian Habitat in Idaho
Beavers: Biologists "Rediscover" a Natural Resource
Small Mammal Survey, Acid Fen, Mt. Emmons Gunnison, Colorado
References (3)
3 references to works outside the Knowledge Hub