var bibbase_data = {"data":"\"Loading..\"\n\n
\n\n \n\n \n\n \n \n\n \n\n \n \n\n \n\n \n
\n generated by\n \n \"bibbase.org\"\n\n \n
\n \n\n
\n\n \n\n\n
\n\n Excellent! Next you can\n create a new website with this list, or\n embed it in an existing web page by copying & pasting\n any of the following snippets.\n\n
\n JavaScript\n (easiest)\n
\n \n <script src=\"https://bibbase.org/show?bib=https://tsievert.com/publications/publications.bib&jsonp=1&jsonp=1\"></script>\n \n
\n\n PHP\n
\n \n <?php\n $contents = file_get_contents(\"https://bibbase.org/show?bib=https://tsievert.com/publications/publications.bib&jsonp=1\");\n print_r($contents);\n ?>\n \n
\n\n iFrame\n (not recommended)\n
\n \n <iframe src=\"https://bibbase.org/show?bib=https://tsievert.com/publications/publications.bib&jsonp=1\"></iframe>\n \n
\n\n

\n For more details see the documention.\n

\n
\n
\n\n
\n\n This is a preview! To use this list on your own web site\n or create a new web site from it,\n create a free account. The file will be added\n and you will be able to edit it in the File Manager.\n We will show you instructions once you've created your account.\n
\n\n
\n\n

To the site owner:

\n\n

Action required! Mendeley is changing its\n API. In order to keep using Mendeley with BibBase past April\n 14th, you need to:\n

    \n
  1. renew the authorization for BibBase on Mendeley, and
    2. \n
  2. update the BibBase URL\n in your page the same way you did when you initially set up\n this page.\n
    3. \n
\n

\n\n

\n \n \n Fix it now\n

\n
\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n \n
\n
\n  \n 2021\n \n \n (3)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n Bank vole alarm pheromone chemistry and effects in the field.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Sievert, T.; Ylönen, H.; Blande, J. D.; Saunier, A.; van der Hulst, D.; Ylönen, O.; and Haapakoski, M.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Oecologia, 196(3): 667–677. jul 2021.\n \n\nOpen Access.\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{sievert_bank_2021,\n\ttitle = {Bank vole alarm pheromone chemistry and effects in the field},\n\tvolume = {196},\n\tissn = {0029-8549, 1432-1939},\n\tdoi = {10/gmk34h},\n\tabstract = {Chemical communication plays an important role in mammalian life history decisions. Animals send and receive information based on body odour secretions. Odour cues provide important social information on identity, kinship, sex, group membership or genetic quality. Recent findings show, that rodents alarm their conspecifics with danger-dependent body odours after encountering a predator. In this study, we aim to identify the chemistry of alarm pheromones (AP) in the bank vole, a common boreal rodent. Furthermore, the vole foraging efficiency under perceived fear was measured in a set of field experiments in large outdoor enclosures. During the analysis of bank vole odour by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry, we identified that 1-octanol, 2-octanone, and one unknown compound as the most likely candidates to function as alarm signals. These compounds were independent of the vole’s sex. In a field experiment, voles were foraging less, i.e. they were more afraid in the AP odour foraging trays during the first day, as the odour was fresh, than in the second day. This verified the short lasting effect of volatile APs. Our results clarified the chemistry of alarming body odour compounds in mammals, and enhanced our understanding of the ecological role of AP and chemical communication in mammals.},\n\tlanguage = {en},\n\tnumber = {3},\n\turldate = {2021-08-26},\n\tjournal = {Oecologia},\n\tauthor = {Sievert, Thorbj{\\"{o}}rn and Yl{\\"{o}}nen, Hannu and Blande, James D. and Saunier, Amélie and van der Hulst, Dave and Yl{\\"{o}}nen, Olga and Haapakoski, Marko},\n\tmonth = {jul},\n\tyear = {2021},\n\tpages = {667--677},\n\tbibbase_note = {<span style="color: green">Open Access.</span>}\n}\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Chemical communication plays an important role in mammalian life history decisions. Animals send and receive information based on body odour secretions. Odour cues provide important social information on identity, kinship, sex, group membership or genetic quality. Recent findings show, that rodents alarm their conspecifics with danger-dependent body odours after encountering a predator. In this study, we aim to identify the chemistry of alarm pheromones (AP) in the bank vole, a common boreal rodent. Furthermore, the vole foraging efficiency under perceived fear was measured in a set of field experiments in large outdoor enclosures. During the analysis of bank vole odour by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry, we identified that 1-octanol, 2-octanone, and one unknown compound as the most likely candidates to function as alarm signals. These compounds were independent of the vole’s sex. In a field experiment, voles were foraging less, i.e. they were more afraid in the AP odour foraging trays during the first day, as the odour was fresh, than in the second day. This verified the short lasting effect of volatile APs. Our results clarified the chemistry of alarming body odour compounds in mammals, and enhanced our understanding of the ecological role of AP and chemical communication in mammals.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n Pre- and Postnatal Predator Cues Shape Offspring Anti-predatory Behavior Similarly in the Bank Vole.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Sievert, T.; Bouma, K.; Haapakoski, M.; Matson, K. D.; and Ylönen, H.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 9: 709207. dec 2021.\n \n\nOpen Access.\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{sievert_pre-_2021,\n\ttitle = {Pre- and {Postnatal} {Predator} {Cues} {Shape} {Offspring} {Anti}-predatory {Behavior} {Similarly} in the {Bank} {Vole}},\n\tvolume = {9},\n\tissn = {2296-701X},\n\tdoi = {10/gn64t6},\n\tabstract = {Prey animals can assess the risks predators present in different ways. For example, direct cues produced by predators can be used, but also signals produced by prey conspecifics that have engaged in non-lethal predator-prey interactions. These non-lethal interactions can thereby affect the physiology, behavior, and survival of prey individuals, and may affect offspring performance through maternal effects. We investigated how timing of exposure to predation-related cues during early development affects offspring behavior after weaning. Females in the laboratory were exposed during pregnancy or lactation to one of three odor treatments: (1) predator odor (PO) originating from their most common predator, the least weasel, (2) odor produced by predator-exposed conspecifics, which we call conspecific alarm cue (CAC), or (3) control odor (C). We monitored postnatal pup growth, and we quantified foraging and exploratory behaviors of 4-week-old pups following exposure of their mothers to each of the three odour treatments. Exposure to odors associated with predation risk during development affected the offspring behavior, but the timing of exposure, i.e., pre- vs. postnatally, had only a weak effect. The two non-control odors led to different behavioral changes: an attraction to CAC and an avoidance of PO. Additionally, pup growth was affected by an interaction between litter size and maternal treatment, again regardless of timing. Pups from the CAC maternal treatment grew faster in larger litters; pups from the PO maternal treatment tended to grow faster in smaller litters. Thus, in rodents, offspring growth and behavior are seemingly influenced differently by the type of predation risk perceived by their mothers.},\n\turldate = {2022-01-19},\n\tjournal = {Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution},\n\tauthor = {Sievert, Thorbj{\\"{o}}rn and Bouma, Kerstin and Haapakoski, Marko and Matson, Kevin D. and Yl{\\"{o}}nen, Hannu},\n\tmonth = {dec},\n\tyear = {2021},\n\tpages = {709207},\n    bibbase_note = {<span style="color: green">Open Access.</span>}\n}\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Prey animals can assess the risks predators present in different ways. For example, direct cues produced by predators can be used, but also signals produced by prey conspecifics that have engaged in non-lethal predator-prey interactions. These non-lethal interactions can thereby affect the physiology, behavior, and survival of prey individuals, and may affect offspring performance through maternal effects. We investigated how timing of exposure to predation-related cues during early development affects offspring behavior after weaning. Females in the laboratory were exposed during pregnancy or lactation to one of three odor treatments: (1) predator odor (PO) originating from their most common predator, the least weasel, (2) odor produced by predator-exposed conspecifics, which we call conspecific alarm cue (CAC), or (3) control odor (C). We monitored postnatal pup growth, and we quantified foraging and exploratory behaviors of 4-week-old pups following exposure of their mothers to each of the three odour treatments. Exposure to odors associated with predation risk during development affected the offspring behavior, but the timing of exposure, i.e., pre- vs. postnatally, had only a weak effect. The two non-control odors led to different behavioral changes: an attraction to CAC and an avoidance of PO. Additionally, pup growth was affected by an interaction between litter size and maternal treatment, again regardless of timing. Pups from the CAC maternal treatment grew faster in larger litters; pups from the PO maternal treatment tended to grow faster in smaller litters. Thus, in rodents, offspring growth and behavior are seemingly influenced differently by the type of predation risk perceived by their mothers.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n Population cycles and outbreaks of small rodents: ten essential questions we still need to solve.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Andreassen, H. P.; Sundell, J.; Ecke, F.; Halle, S.; Haapakoski, M.; Henttonen, H.; Huitu, O.; Jacob, J.; Johnsen, K.; Koskela, E.; Luque-Larena, J. J.; Lecomte, N.; Leirs, H.; Mariën, J.; Neby, M.; Rätti, O.; Sievert, T.; Singleton, G. R.; van Cann, J.; Vanden Broecke, B.; and Ylönen, H.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Oecologia. jan 2021.\n \n\nOpen Access.\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{Andreassen2020,\nauthor = {Andreassen, Harry P. and Sundell, Janne and Ecke, Fraucke and Halle, Stefan and Haapakoski, Marko and Henttonen, Heikki and Huitu, Otso and Jacob, Jens and Johnsen, Kaja and Koskela, Esa and Luque-Larena, Juan Jose and Lecomte, Nicolas and Leirs, Herwig and Mari{\\"{e}}n, Joachim and Neby, Magne and R{\\"{a}}tti, Osmo and Sievert, Thorbj{\\"{o}}rn and Singleton, Grant R. and van Cann, Joannes and {Vanden Broecke}, Bram and Yl{\\"{o}}nen, Hannu},\ndoi = {10.1007/s00442-020-04810-w},\nissn = {0029-8549},\njournal = {Oecologia},\nabstract = {Most small rodent populations in the world have fascinating population dynamics. In the northern hemisphere, voles and lemmings tend to show population cycles with regular fluctuations in numbers. In the southern hemisphere, small rodents tend to have large amplitude outbreaks with less regular intervals. In the light of vast research and debate over almost a century, we here discuss the driving forces of these different rodent population dynamics. We highlight ten questions directly related to the various characteristics of relevant populations and ecosystems that still need to be answered. This overview is not intended as a complete list of questions but rather focuses on the most important issues that are essential for understanding the generality of small rodent population dynamics.},\nmonth = {jan},\ntitle = {{Population cycles and outbreaks of small rodents: ten essential questions we still need to solve}},\nyear = {2021},\nbibbase_note = {<span style="color: green">Open Access.</span>}\n}\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Most small rodent populations in the world have fascinating population dynamics. In the northern hemisphere, voles and lemmings tend to show population cycles with regular fluctuations in numbers. In the southern hemisphere, small rodents tend to have large amplitude outbreaks with less regular intervals. In the light of vast research and debate over almost a century, we here discuss the driving forces of these different rodent population dynamics. We highlight ten questions directly related to the various characteristics of relevant populations and ecosystems that still need to be answered. This overview is not intended as a complete list of questions but rather focuses on the most important issues that are essential for understanding the generality of small rodent population dynamics.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n  \n 2020\n \n \n (2)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n Indirect and Transgenerational Effects of Predation Risk: Predator Odour and Alarm Pheromones in the Bank Vole.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Sievert, T.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Ph.D. Thesis, University of Jyväskylä, apr 2020.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"IndirectPaper\n  \n \n\n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@phdthesis{SievertDissertation2020,\nauthor = {Sievert, Thorbj{\\"{o}}rn},\nmonth = {apr},\ntitle = {{Indirect and Transgenerational Effects of Predation Risk: Predator Odour and Alarm Pheromones in the Bank Vole}},\nabstract = {Predator-prey interactions are a major evolutionary driver, affecting not only the direct mortality of prey species, but also their behaviours and reproduction. Prey species behavioural adaptations aim to mitigate the effects of predation and to maximise survival and individual fitness. These adaptations include the ability to signal a threat to conspecifics, e.g. via alarm calls or alarm secretions, or to detect predator presence via odours. In this thesis, I studied the effects of predator odours and conspecific alarm secretions on behaviour and reproduction bank voles (Myodes glareolus), a small mammal species inhabiting boreal forests. My work focused on three major points in comparing the direct predator cue and indirect conspecific cue: first, how the reproductive behaviour is affected by the predator odour or alarm pheromone, second, whether there are transgenerational effects and how they are exhibited in offspring, and third, what the chemical nature of these alarm secretions is. I conducted four experiments, which included both trials in semi-natural enclosures and under controlled laboratory conditions. I found evidence that exposure to conspecific alarm secretions causes a shift in voles’ reproductive behaviour, switching towards terminal investment. This became apparent with an increase in parturitions and an increased growth rate in larger litters, which did not occur when exposed to predator odour. I also found evidence of transgenerational effects, which affect aspects of the offspring’s exploratory and foraging behaviour. Additionally, I discovered that these behavioural effects are context-dependent and do not occur in every environment. Lastly, I identified a group of chemicals from voles’ alarm secretion, which are likely to be responsible for the observed effects. The results of my thesis fill a knowledge gap concerning chemical communication in mammals, and help to further understand the implications of predator presence on prey behaviour and reproduction.},\nschool = {{University of Jyv{\\"{a}}skyl{\\"{a}}}},\nyear = {2020},\nurl = {https://jyx.jyu.fi/bitstream/handle/123456789/68490/978-951-39-8135-8_vaitos23042020.pdf}\n}\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Predator-prey interactions are a major evolutionary driver, affecting not only the direct mortality of prey species, but also their behaviours and reproduction. Prey species behavioural adaptations aim to mitigate the effects of predation and to maximise survival and individual fitness. These adaptations include the ability to signal a threat to conspecifics, e.g. via alarm calls or alarm secretions, or to detect predator presence via odours. In this thesis, I studied the effects of predator odours and conspecific alarm secretions on behaviour and reproduction bank voles (Myodes glareolus), a small mammal species inhabiting boreal forests. My work focused on three major points in comparing the direct predator cue and indirect conspecific cue: first, how the reproductive behaviour is affected by the predator odour or alarm pheromone, second, whether there are transgenerational effects and how they are exhibited in offspring, and third, what the chemical nature of these alarm secretions is. I conducted four experiments, which included both trials in semi-natural enclosures and under controlled laboratory conditions. I found evidence that exposure to conspecific alarm secretions causes a shift in voles’ reproductive behaviour, switching towards terminal investment. This became apparent with an increase in parturitions and an increased growth rate in larger litters, which did not occur when exposed to predator odour. I also found evidence of transgenerational effects, which affect aspects of the offspring’s exploratory and foraging behaviour. Additionally, I discovered that these behavioural effects are context-dependent and do not occur in every environment. Lastly, I identified a group of chemicals from voles’ alarm secretion, which are likely to be responsible for the observed effects. The results of my thesis fill a knowledge gap concerning chemical communication in mammals, and help to further understand the implications of predator presence on prey behaviour and reproduction.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n In utero behavioral imprinting to predation risk in pups of the bank vole.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Sievert, T.; Kerkhoven, A.; Haapakoski, M.; Matson, K. D.; Ylönen, O.; and Ylönen, H.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 74(2): 13. feb 2020.\n \n\nOpen Access | Featured Student Research Paper.\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{Sievert2020,\nauthor = {Sievert, Thorbj{\\"{o}}rn and Kerkhoven, Arjane and Haapakoski, Marko and Matson, Kevin D. and Yl{\\"{o}}nen, Olga and Yl{\\"{o}}nen, Hannu},\ndoi = {10.1007/s00265-019-2791-8},\nissn = {0340-5443},\nabstract = {In the predator–prey arms race, survival-enhancing adaptive behaviors are essential. Prey can perceive predator presence directly from visual, auditory, or chemical cues. Non-lethal encounters with a predator may trigger prey to produce special body odors, alarm pheromones, informing conspecifics about predation risks. Recent studies suggest that parental exposure to predation risk during reproduction affects offspring behavior cross-generationally. We compared behaviors of bank vole (Myodes glareolus) pups produced by parents exposed to one of three treatments: predator scent from the least weasel (Mustela nivalis nivalis); scent from weasel-exposed voles, i.e., alarm pheromones; or a control treatment without added scents. Parents were treated in semi-natural field enclosures, but pups were born in the lab and assayed in an open-field arena. Before each behavioral test, one of the three scent treatments was spread throughout the test arena. The tests followed a full factorial design (3 parental treatments × 3 area treatments). Regardless of the parents’ treatment, pups exposed to predator odor in the arena moved more. Additionally, pups spend more time in the center of the arena when presented with predator odor or alarm pheromone compared with the control. Pups from predator odor–exposed parents avoided the center of the arena under control conditions, but they spent more time in the center when either predator odor or alarm pheromone was present. Our experiment shows that cross-generational effects are context-sensitive, depending on the perceived risk. Future studies should examine cross-generational behavioral effects in ecologically meaningful environments instead of only neutral ones.},\njournal = {Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology},\nmonth = {feb},\nnumber = {2},\npages = {13},\ntitle = {{In utero behavioral imprinting to predation risk in pups of the bank vole}},\nvolume = {74},\nyear = {2020},\nbibbase_note = {<span style="color: green">Open Access | Featured Student Research Paper.</span>}\n}\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n In the predator–prey arms race, survival-enhancing adaptive behaviors are essential. Prey can perceive predator presence directly from visual, auditory, or chemical cues. Non-lethal encounters with a predator may trigger prey to produce special body odors, alarm pheromones, informing conspecifics about predation risks. Recent studies suggest that parental exposure to predation risk during reproduction affects offspring behavior cross-generationally. We compared behaviors of bank vole (Myodes glareolus) pups produced by parents exposed to one of three treatments: predator scent from the least weasel (Mustela nivalis nivalis); scent from weasel-exposed voles, i.e., alarm pheromones; or a control treatment without added scents. Parents were treated in semi-natural field enclosures, but pups were born in the lab and assayed in an open-field arena. Before each behavioral test, one of the three scent treatments was spread throughout the test arena. The tests followed a full factorial design (3 parental treatments × 3 area treatments). Regardless of the parents’ treatment, pups exposed to predator odor in the arena moved more. Additionally, pups spend more time in the center of the arena when presented with predator odor or alarm pheromone compared with the control. Pups from predator odor–exposed parents avoided the center of the arena under control conditions, but they spent more time in the center when either predator odor or alarm pheromone was present. Our experiment shows that cross-generational effects are context-sensitive, depending on the perceived risk. Future studies should examine cross-generational behavioral effects in ecologically meaningful environments instead of only neutral ones.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n  \n 2019\n \n \n (2)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n Secondhand horror: effects of direct and indirect predator cues on behavior and reproduction of the bank vole.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Sievert, T.; Haapakoski, M.; Palme, R.; Voipio, H.; and Ylönen, H.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Ecosphere, 10(6): e02765. jun 2019.\n \n\nOpen Access.\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{Sievert2019,\nauthor = {Sievert, Thorbj{\\"{o}}rn and Haapakoski, Marko and Palme, Rupert and Voipio, Helin{\\"{a}} and Yl{\\"{o}}nen, Hannu},\ndoi = {10.1002/ecs2.2765},\nissn = {2150-8925},\nabstract = {Risk recognition by prey is of paramount importance within the evolutionary arms race between predator and prey. Prey species are able to detect direct predator cues like odors and adjust their behavior appropriately. The question arises whether an indirect predation cue, such as the odor of scared individuals, can be detected by conspecifics and subsequently affects recipient behavior. Parents may also transfer their experience with predators to their offspring. In two experiments, we assessed how direct and indirect predation cues affect bank vole (Myodes glareolus) foraging behavior, reproduction, and pup fitness. Weasel (Mustela nivalis) odor served as the direct cue, whereas the odor of weasel-scared conspecifics, alarm pheromones, was used as an indirect cue and both of those were compared to a control odor, clean wood shavings. Alarm pheromones attracted female voles, measured as time in proximity to the treatment and foraging. Both predator odor and alarm pheromones enhanced reproduction compared to the control odor. Females treated with alarm pheromone had significantly higher pregnancy rates, and pups from predator-treated mothers were significantly heavier at birth. Our study provides two novel ideas. First, the impact of a predator can be socially transmitted. Second, predation risk likely triggers terminal investment in reproduction.},\njournal = {Ecosphere},\nmonth = {jun},\nnumber = {6},\npages = {e02765},\ntitle = {{Secondhand horror: effects of direct and indirect predator cues on behavior and reproduction of the bank vole}},\nvolume = {10},\nyear = {2019},\nbibbase_note = {<span style="color: green">Open Access.</span>}\n}\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Risk recognition by prey is of paramount importance within the evolutionary arms race between predator and prey. Prey species are able to detect direct predator cues like odors and adjust their behavior appropriately. The question arises whether an indirect predation cue, such as the odor of scared individuals, can be detected by conspecifics and subsequently affects recipient behavior. Parents may also transfer their experience with predators to their offspring. In two experiments, we assessed how direct and indirect predation cues affect bank vole (Myodes glareolus) foraging behavior, reproduction, and pup fitness. Weasel (Mustela nivalis) odor served as the direct cue, whereas the odor of weasel-scared conspecifics, alarm pheromones, was used as an indirect cue and both of those were compared to a control odor, clean wood shavings. Alarm pheromones attracted female voles, measured as time in proximity to the treatment and foraging. Both predator odor and alarm pheromones enhanced reproduction compared to the control odor. Females treated with alarm pheromone had significantly higher pregnancy rates, and pups from predator-treated mothers were significantly heavier at birth. Our study provides two novel ideas. First, the impact of a predator can be socially transmitted. Second, predation risk likely triggers terminal investment in reproduction.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n Voles and weasels in the boreal Fennoscandian small mammal community: what happens if the least weasel disappears due to climate change?.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Ylönen, H.; Haapakoski, M.; Sievert, T.; and Sundell, J.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Integrative Zoology, 14(4): 327–340. jul 2019.\n \n\nOpen Access.\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{Ylonen2019,\nauthor = {Yl{\\"{o}}nen, Hannu and Haapakoski, Marko and Sievert, Thorbj{\\"{o}}rn and Sundell, Janne},\ndoi = {10.1111/1749-4877.12388},\nissn = {1749-4877},\nabstract = {Climate change, habitat loss and fragmentation are major threats for populations and a challenge for individual behavior, interactions and survival. Predator–prey interactions are modified by climate processes. In the northern latitudes, strong seasonality is changing and the main predicted feature is shortening and instability of winter. Vole populations in the boreal Fennoscandia exhibit multiannual cycles. High amplitude peak numbers of voles and dramatic population lows alternate in 3–5-year cycles shortening from North to South. One key factor, or driver, promoting the population crash and causing extreme extended lows, is suggested to be predation by the least weasel. We review the arms race between prey voles and weasels through the multiannual density fluctuation, affected by climate change, and especially the changes in the duration and stability of snow cover. For ground-dwelling small mammals, snow provides thermoregulation and shelter for nest sites, and helps them hide from predators. Predicted increases in the instability of winter forms a major challenge for species with coat color change between brown summer camouflage and white winter coat. One of these is the least weasel, Mustela nivalis nivalis. Increased vulnerability of wrong-colored weasels to predation affects vole populations and may have dramatic effects on vole dynamics. It may have cascading effects on other small rodent–predator interactions and even on plant–animal interactions and forest dynamics.},\njournal = {Integrative Zoology},\nmonth = {jul},\nnumber = {4},\npages = {327--340},\ntitle = {{Voles and weasels in the boreal Fennoscandian small mammal community: what happens if the least weasel disappears due to climate change?}},\nvolume = {14},\nyear = {2019},\nbibbase_note = {<span style="color: green">Open Access.</span>}\n}\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Climate change, habitat loss and fragmentation are major threats for populations and a challenge for individual behavior, interactions and survival. Predator–prey interactions are modified by climate processes. In the northern latitudes, strong seasonality is changing and the main predicted feature is shortening and instability of winter. Vole populations in the boreal Fennoscandia exhibit multiannual cycles. High amplitude peak numbers of voles and dramatic population lows alternate in 3–5-year cycles shortening from North to South. One key factor, or driver, promoting the population crash and causing extreme extended lows, is suggested to be predation by the least weasel. We review the arms race between prey voles and weasels through the multiannual density fluctuation, affected by climate change, and especially the changes in the duration and stability of snow cover. For ground-dwelling small mammals, snow provides thermoregulation and shelter for nest sites, and helps them hide from predators. Predicted increases in the instability of winter forms a major challenge for species with coat color change between brown summer camouflage and white winter coat. One of these is the least weasel, Mustela nivalis nivalis. Increased vulnerability of wrong-colored weasels to predation affects vole populations and may have dramatic effects on vole dynamics. It may have cascading effects on other small rodent–predator interactions and even on plant–animal interactions and forest dynamics.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n  \n 2016\n \n \n (1)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n Behavioral responses of CD-1 Mice to six predator odor components.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Sievert, T.; and Laska, M.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Chemical Senses, 41(5): 399–406. jun 2016.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{Sievert2016,\nauthor = {Sievert, Thorbj{\\"{o}}rn and Laska, Matthias},\ndoi = {10.1093/chemse/bjw015},\nissn = {14643553},\nabstract = {Mammalian prey species are able to detect predator odors and to display appropriate defensive behavior. However, there is only limited knowledge about whether single compounds of predator odors are sufficient to elicit such behavior. Therefore, we assessed if predator-naïve CD-1 mice ( n = 60) avoid sulfur-containing compounds that are characteristic components of natural predator odors and/or display other indicators of anxiety. A 2-compartment test arena was used to assess approach/avoidance behavior, general motor activity, and the number of fecal pellets excreted when the animals were presented with 1 of 6 predator odor components in one compartment and a blank control in the other compartment. We found that 2 of the 6 predator odor components (2-propylthietane and 3-methyl-1-butanethiol) were significantly avoided by the mice. The remaining 4 predator odor components (2,2-dimethylthietane, 3-mercapto-3-methylbutan-1-ol, 3-mercapto-3-methylbutyl-1-formate, and methyl-2-phenylethyl sulphide) as well as a nonpredator-associated fruity odor ( n -pentyl acetate) were not avoided. Neither the general motor activity nor the number of excreted fecal pellets, both widely used measures of stress- or anxiety-related behavior, were systematically affected by any of the odorants tested. Further, we found that small changes in the molecular structure of a predator odor component can have a marked effect on its behavioral significance as 2-propylthietane was significantly avoided by the mice whereas the structurally related 2,2-dimethylthietane was not. We conclude that sulfur-containing volatiles identified as characteristic components of the urine, feces, and anal gland secretions of mammalian predators can be, but are not necessarily sufficient to elicit defensive behaviors in a mammalian prey species. },\njournal = {Chemical Senses},\nkeywords = {Avoidance response,Mouse,Predator odor,Sulfur-containing odorants},\nmonth = {jun},\nnumber = {5},\npages = {399--406},\ntitle = {{Behavioral responses of CD-1 Mice to six predator odor components}},\nvolume = {41},\nyear = {2016}\n}\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Mammalian prey species are able to detect predator odors and to display appropriate defensive behavior. However, there is only limited knowledge about whether single compounds of predator odors are sufficient to elicit such behavior. Therefore, we assessed if predator-naïve CD-1 mice ( n = 60) avoid sulfur-containing compounds that are characteristic components of natural predator odors and/or display other indicators of anxiety. A 2-compartment test arena was used to assess approach/avoidance behavior, general motor activity, and the number of fecal pellets excreted when the animals were presented with 1 of 6 predator odor components in one compartment and a blank control in the other compartment. We found that 2 of the 6 predator odor components (2-propylthietane and 3-methyl-1-butanethiol) were significantly avoided by the mice. The remaining 4 predator odor components (2,2-dimethylthietane, 3-mercapto-3-methylbutan-1-ol, 3-mercapto-3-methylbutyl-1-formate, and methyl-2-phenylethyl sulphide) as well as a nonpredator-associated fruity odor ( n -pentyl acetate) were not avoided. Neither the general motor activity nor the number of excreted fecal pellets, both widely used measures of stress- or anxiety-related behavior, were systematically affected by any of the odorants tested. Further, we found that small changes in the molecular structure of a predator odor component can have a marked effect on its behavioral significance as 2-propylthietane was significantly avoided by the mice whereas the structurally related 2,2-dimethylthietane was not. We conclude that sulfur-containing volatiles identified as characteristic components of the urine, feces, and anal gland secretions of mammalian predators can be, but are not necessarily sufficient to elicit defensive behaviors in a mammalian prey species. \n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n  \n 2015\n \n \n (1)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n Behavioural responses of mice to predator odour components.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Sievert, T.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Master's thesis, Linköping University, jun 2015.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@mastersthesis{sievert_thesis_2016,\nauthor = {Sievert, Thorbj{\\"{o}}rn},\ndoi = {10.13140/RG.2.1.4872.8080},\nmonth = {jun},\ntitle = {{Behavioural responses of mice to predator odour components}},\nschool = {{Link{\\"{o}}ping University}},\nyear = {2015}\n}\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n\n
\n"}; document.write(bibbase_data.data);