355
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Study of climbing ability for two closely related mouse species

, , , &
Pages 395-400 | Received 08 Nov 2022, Accepted 14 Feb 2023, Published online: 31 May 2023

References

  • Bárdos B, Kovács B, István N, Altbäcker V. 2022. In vivo classification of two closely related species of mice, mound-building mouse (Mus spicilegus) and house mouse (Mus musculus). Acta Agraria Kaposváriensis 26(1):27–35. DOI:10.31914/aak.2656.
  • Bihari Z. 2004. A güzüegér (Mus spicilegus) életmódjának sajátságai és mezőgazdasági jelentősége. Növényvédelem 40:245–250.
  • Brown RZ. 1953. Social behavior, reproduction, and population changes in the house mouse (Mus musculus L.). Ecological Monographs 23(3):218–240. DOI:10.2307/1943592.
  • Carlsen M. 1993. Migrations of Mus musculus musculus in Danish farmland. Zeitschrift für Saugetierkunde 58:172–180.
  • Cox DR. 1972. Regression Models and Life Tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 34:187–220.
  • Demeter A, Rácz G, Csorba G. 1995. Identification of house mice (Mus musculus) and mound-building mice (Mus spicilegus) using distance and landmark data. In: Marcus LF, Corti M, Loy A, Naylor G, Slice DE, editors. Advances in Morphometrics. New York: Plenum Press. pp. 359–369.
  • Dice LR. 1938. Variation in nine stocks of the deermouse, Peromyscus maniculatus, from Arizona. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology 375:1–19.
  • Earl Z, Nel JAJ. 1976. Climbing behaviour in three African rodent species. African Zoology 11(1):183–192. DOI:10.1080/00445096.1976.11447523.
  • Hall E, Kelson KR. 1959. The mammals of North America. Vol. 2. New York: Ronald Press.
  • Hamilton WJ. 1943. The mammals of eastern United States. Ithaca, New York: Comstock Publishing Company. pp. 432.
  • Holbrook SJ. 1979a. Habitat utilization, competitive interactions, and coexistence of three species of Cricetine rodents in east-central Arizona. Ecology 60(4):758–769. DOI:10.2307/1936613.
  • Holbrook SJ. 1979b. Vegetational affinities, arboreal activity, and coexistence of three species of rodents. Journal of Mammalogy 60(3):528–542. DOI:10.2307/1380093.
  • Homer BE. 1954. Arboreal adaptations of Peromyscus with special reference to use of the tail. Contributions from the Laboratory of Vertebrate Biology of the University of Michigan 61:1–84.
  • Kaplan EL, Meier P. 1958. Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete observations. Journal of the American Statistical Association 53(282):457–481. DOI:10.1080/01621459.1958.10501452.
  • King JA. 1968. Biology of Peromyscus (Rodentia). Vol. 2. New York: American Society of Mammalogists.
  • Layne JN. 1963. A study of the parasites of the Florida mouse, Peromyscus floridanus, in relation to host and environmental factors.
  • Layne JN. 1970. Climbing behavior of Peromyscus floridanus and Peromyscus gossypinus. Journal of Mammalogy 51(3):580–591. DOI:10.2307/1378397.
  • Le Berre M, Le Guelte L. 1993. Climbing abilities in four species of desert rodents. Tropical Zoology 6(2):237–241. DOI:10.1080/03946975.1993.10539224.
  • Osgood WH. 1909. Revision of the mice of the American genus Peromyscus. Washington: Bureau of Biological Survey, North American Fauna 28:1–285.
  • Simeonovska-Nikolova D, Gerasimov S. 2000. Seasonal changes of some population characteristics of Mus spicilegus Petenyi in North Bulgaria. Acta Zoologica Bulgarica 52:81–90.
  • Smartt RA. 1978. A comparison of ecological and morphological overlap in a Peromyscus community. Ecology 59(2):216–220. DOI:10.2307/1936365.
  • Sokolov VE, Kotenkova EV, Michailenko AG. 1998. Mus spicilegus. Mammalian Species 592(592):1–6. DOI:10.2307/3504484.
  • Thompson DB. 1990. Different spatial scales of adaptation in the climbing behavior of Peromyscus maniculatus: Geographic variation, natural selection, and gene flow. Evolution 44(4):952–965.
  • Woodward M. 2014. Epidemiology, study design and data analysis. 3rd ed. New York: CRC Press.