Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Mammalia

Editor-in-Chief: Denys, Christiane

6 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2016: 0.805
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.000

CiteScore 2016: 0.89

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.469
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.711

Online
ISSN
1864-1547
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 77, Issue 2 (May 2013)

Issues

Habitat selection, philopatry and spatial segregation in rural Irish hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus)

Amy Haigh
  • Corresponding author
  • School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences (BEES), University College Cork, The Cooperage, North Mall, Distillery Fields, Cork, Ireland
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Ruth M. O’Riordan
  • School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences (BEES), University College Cork, The Cooperage, North Mall, Distillery Fields, Cork, Ireland
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Fidelma Butler
  • School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences (BEES), University College Cork, The Cooperage, North Mall, Distillery Fields, Cork, Ireland
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2013-01-11 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/mammalia-2012-0094

Abstract

As a non-territorial species with no known dispersal period, there are no obvious factors that regulate hedgehog numbers in an area. This study aimed to examine these factors and involved the radio-tracking of rural hedgehogs over a 3-year period. Males had a significantly larger mean annual home range (56 ha) than females (16.5 ha), which was at its maximum during the breeding season. Outside of the breeding season, the home range was relatively small (4–5 ha) in both sexes. The home ranges of males completely overlapped both each other and all of the females. In contrast, females occupied more exclusive areas with little overlap between one another. On a nightly basis, both sexes occupied spatially independent areas with little overlap. Compositional analysis of the data showed that habitats were not used in proportion to their availability but were selected, and this changed seasonally, with the highest preference being for garden and arable land. Hedgehogs tagged for consecutive years exhibited site philopatry and followed the same pattern of habitat selection annually. It is suggested that the spatial separation observed amongst individual hedgehogs could restrict numbers in an area and that female numbers reach a carrying capacity before that of males.

Keywords: carrying capacity; habitat selection; home range; sex differences; spatial separation

References

  • Aebischer, N.J., P.A. Robertson and R.E. Kenward. 1993. Compositional analysis of habitat use from animal radio-tracking data. Ecology 74: 1313–1325.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Boitani, L. and G. Reggiani. 1984. Movements and activity patterns of hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus) in Mediterranean coastal habitats. Zeitschrift fuer Saeugetierkunde 49: 193–206.Google Scholar

  • Bracken, F. and T. Bolger. 2006. Effects of set-aside management on birds breeding in lowland Ireland. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 117: 178–184.Google Scholar

  • Burt, W.H. 1943. Territoriality and home range concepts as applied to mammals. J. Mammal. 24: 346–352.Google Scholar

  • Casagrandi, R. and M. Gatto. 2002. Habitat destruction, environmental catastrophes, and metapopulation extinction. Theor. Popul. Biol. 61: 127–140.Google Scholar

  • Cassini, M.H. and J.R. Krebs. 1994. Behavioural responses to food addition by hedgehogs. Ecography 17: 289–296.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Crawford-Sidebotham, T.J. 1972. The influence of weather upon the activity of slugs. Oecologia 9: 141–154.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Croxton, P.J., W. Franssen, D.G. Myhill and T.H. Sparks. 2004. The restoration of neglected hedges: a comparison of management treatments. Biol. Conserv. 117: 19–23.Google Scholar

  • Doncaster, C. 1993. The influence of predation threat on foraging pattern: the hedgehog’s gambit. Rev. Ecol. (Terre Vie) 48: 207–213.Google Scholar

  • Doncaster, C. 1994. Factors regulating local variations in abundance: field tests on hedgehogs, Erinaceus europaeus. Oikos 69: 182–192.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Doncaster, C., C. Rondinini and P. Johnson. 2001. Field test for environmental correlates of dispersal in hedgehogs Erinaceus europaeus. J. Anim. Ecol. 70: 33–46.Google Scholar

  • Dowding, C.V. 2007. An investigation of factors relating to the perceived decline of European hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus) in Britain. PhD thesis. University of Bristol, Bristol, UK, 177 pp.Google Scholar

  • Dowding, C.V., Harris, S., Poulton, S. and Baker, P.J. 2010. Nocturnal ranging behaviour of urban hedgehogs, Erinaceus europaeus, in relation to risk and reward. Anim. Behav. 80: 13–21.Google Scholar

  • Dowie, M. 1987. Rural hedgehogs: many questions. Game Conservancy Annu. Rev. 18: 126–129.Google Scholar

  • Getz, L.L. 1959. Notes on the ecology of slugs: Arion circumscriptus, Deroceros reticulatum, and D. laeve. Am. Midl. Nat. 61: 485–498.Google Scholar

  • Glen, D.M., N.F. Milsom and C.W. Wiltshire. 1989. Effect of seed bed conditions on slug numbers and damage to winter wheat in a clay soil. Ann. Appl. Biol. 115: 177–190.Google Scholar

  • Goransson, G., J. Karlsson and A. Lindgren. 1976. Road mortality of the hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus in southern Sweden. Fauna Flora, Stockholm 71: 1–6.Google Scholar

  • Greenwood, P.J. 1980. Mating systems, philopatry and dispersal in birds and mammals. Anim. Behav. 28: 1140–1162.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Haigh, A., R. O’Riordan and F. Butler. 2012a. Intra and inter habitat differences in hedgehog distribution and potential prey availability. Mammalia 76: 261–268.Google Scholar

  • Haigh, A., R. O’Riordan and F. Butler. 2012b. Nesting behaviour and seasonal body mass changes in a rural Irish population of the Western hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus). Acta Theriolog. 57: 321–331.Google Scholar

  • Hof, A. 2009. A study of the current status of the hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus), and its decline in Great Britain since 1960. PhD thesis, Royal Holloway, London.Google Scholar

  • Holt, R. and T. Keitt. 2000. Alternative causes for range limits: a metapopulation perspective. Ecol. Lett. 3: 41–47.Google Scholar

  • Huijser, M. 2000. Life on the edge. Hedgehog Traffic victims and mitigation strategies in an anthropogenic landscape. PhD thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, 165 pp.Google Scholar

  • Huijser, M. and P. Bergers. 2000. The effect of roads and traffic on hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus) populations. Biol. Conserv. 95: 111–116.Google Scholar

  • Huijser, M., P. Bergers and J. De Vries. 1998. Hedgehog traffic victims: how to quantify effects on the population level and the prospects for mitigation. In: (G.L. Evink, P. Garrett, D. Zeigler and J. Berry, eds.) Proceedings of the International Conference on Wildlife Ecology and Transportation. Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, FL. pp. 171–180.Google Scholar

  • Jackson, D.B. and R.E. Green. 2000. The importance of the introduced hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus) as a predator of the eggs of waders (Charadrii) on machair in South Uist, Scotland. Biol. Conserv. 93: 333–348.Google Scholar

  • Jackson, D., Fuller, R.J. and Campbell, S.T. 2004. Long-term population changes among breeding shorebirds in the Outer Hebrides, Scotland, in relation to introduced hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus). Biol. Conserv. 117: 151–166.Google Scholar

  • Kristiansson, H. 1984. Ecology of a hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus population in southern Sweden. PhD thesis. University of Lund, Lund, Sweden, 77 pp.Google Scholar

  • Kruuk, H. 1979. The use of pasture by the European badger (Meles meles). J. Appl. Ecol. 16: 453–459.Google Scholar

  • Meek, B., D. Loxton, T. Sparks, R. Pywell, H. Pickett and M. Nowakowski. 2002. The effect of arable field margin composition on invertebrate biodiversity. Biol. Conserv. 106: 259–271.Google Scholar

  • Micol, T., Doncaster, C. and Mackinlay, L. 1994. Correlates of local variation in the abundance of hedgehogs Erinaceus europaeus. J. Anim. Ecol. 851–860.Google Scholar

  • Moran, S., P.D. Turner and C. O’Reilly. 2009. Multiple paternity in the European hedgehog. J. Zool. 278: 349–353.Google Scholar

  • Morris, P. 1986. The movement of hedgehogs in forest-edge habitat. Mammalia 50: 395–398.Google Scholar

  • Pollard, E., M.D. Hooper and N.W. Moore. 1974. Hedges. Collins, St James Place, London, 254 pp.Google Scholar

  • Rautio, A., P. Rannanen, A. Valtonen and M. Kunnasranta. 2009. Home range of European hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus). University of Joensuu, Finland.Google Scholar

  • Reeve, N.J. 1981. A field study of the hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus) with particular reference to movements and behaviour. PhD thesis, London, 313 pp.Google Scholar

  • Reeve, N.J. 1982. The home range of the hedgehog as revealed by a radio tracking study. Symp. Zool. Soc. 49: 207–230.Google Scholar

  • Reeve, N.J. 1994. Hedgehogs. Poyser, London. 313 pp.Google Scholar

  • Reeve, N.J. and P.A. Morris. 1986. Mating strategies in the hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus). J. Zool. 210: 613–644.Google Scholar

  • Riber, A.B. 2006. Habitat use and behaviour of European hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus in a Danish rural area. Acta Theriol. (Warsz.) 51: 363–371.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rodgers, A. and A. Carr. 1998. HRE: the home range extension for ArcView®. Tracking Animals with GPS. Center for Northern Forrest Ecosystem Review, Ontario, Canada. pp. 83.Google Scholar

  • Seaman, D.E. and R.A. Powell. 1996. An evaluation of the accuracy of kernel density estimators for home range analysis. Ecology 77: 2075–2085.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Seaman, D.E., J. Millspaugh, B.J. Kernohan, K.J. Raedeke and R.A. Gitzen. 1999. Effects of sample size on kernal home range estimates. J. Wildl. Manage. 63: 739–747.Google Scholar

  • Sheridan, H., J.A. Finn, N. Culleton and G. O’Donovan. 2008. Plant and invertebrate diversity in grassland field margins. Agri. Ecosyst. Environ. 123: 225–232.Google Scholar

  • Smiddy, P. 2002. Bird and mammal mortality on roads in counties Cork and Waterford, Ireland. Bull. Irish Biogeogr. Soc. 26: 29–38.Google Scholar

  • Smith, P.G. 2005. Compos Analysis, version 6.2 plus. Smith Ecology Ltd, Abergavenny, UK.Google Scholar

  • Sotherton, N.W. 1998. Land use changes and the decline of farmland wildlife: an appraisal of the set-aside approach. Biol. Conserv. 83: 259–268Google Scholar

  • Smith, J., S. Potts and P. Eggleton. 2008. The value of sown grass margins for enhancing soil macrofaunal biodiversity in arable systems. Agri. Ecosyst. Environ. 127: 119–125.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Whalen, J., R. Parmalee and C. Edwards. 1998. Population dynamics of earthworm communities in corn agroecosystems receiving organic or inorganic fertilizer amendments. Biol. Fert. Soils 27: 400–407.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Worton, B.J. 1995. Using monte carlo simulation to evaluate kernal based home range estimators. J. Wildl. Manage. 59: 794–800.Google Scholar

  • Yalden, D. 1976. The food of the hedgehog in England. Acta Theriol. (Warsz.) 21: 401–424.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Young, R., J. Davison, I. Trewby, G. Wilson, R. Delahay and C. Doncaster. 2006. Abundance of hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus) in relation to the density and distribution of badgers (Meles meles). J. Zool. 269: 349–356.Google Scholar

About the article

Corresponding author: Amy Haigh, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences (BEES), University College Cork, The Cooperage, North Mall, Distillery Fields, Cork, Ireland


Received: 2012-08-17

Accepted: 2012-12-06

Published Online: 2013-01-11

Published in Print: 2013-05-01


Citation Information: Mammalia, ISSN (Online) 1864-1547, ISSN (Print) 0025-1461, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/mammalia-2012-0094.

Export Citation

©2013 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin Boston. Copyright Clearance Center

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Mohammad A. Abu Baker, Nigel Reeve, April A. T. Conkey, David W. Macdonald, Nobuyuki Yamaguchi, and Danilo Russo
PLOS ONE, 2017, Volume 12, Number 7, Page e0180826
[2]
Carly E. Pettett, Tom P. Moorhouse, Paul J. Johnson, and David W. Macdonald
European Journal of Wildlife Research, 2017, Volume 63, Number 3
[3]
Emiliano Mori, Mattia Menchetti, Sandro Bertolino, Giuseppe Mazza, and Leonardo Ancillotto
Mammal Research, 2015, Volume 60, Number 2, Page 189

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in