Parental care in captive Brandt vole (Lasiopodomys brandti Radde, 1861)

Gromov V.G.

P. 137-145

In 10 male-female pairs observed under laboratory conditions, both parents were found to contribute to the care of young during the whole observation period (21 days from parturition) divided into four rearing periods (stages): days 2–6, 7–11, 12–16 and 17–21, respectively. All pairs exhibited permanent nest cohabitation. Paternal activities included nest construction, food caching, huddling over, brooding and grooming the young. There was slight sex differences in total time spent in the nest, but males spent alone in the nest more time than did females. Total time of pup grooming in females was commonly greater than in males. Besides, frequency of manipulations with bedding and bringing nest material to the nest in females were greater than in males. However, the rate of parental activity of males in pup grooming during 3rd stage as well as in manipulations with bedding during 4th stage was found to be similar to that one of females. Besides, males were more active in parental retrieving than females. In L. brandti the biparental care of young with a high direct paternal contribution seems to be associated with family group mode of life of this species. Parental care of Brandt vole is discussed in comparison with that one of other vole species.DOI: 10.15298/rusjtheriol.4.2.06

• Baverstock P. & Green B. 1975. Water recycling in lactation // Science. Vol.187. P.657-658.
• Burda H. 1990. Constraints of pregnancy and evolution of sociality in mole-rats with special reference to reproductive and social patterns in Cryptomys hottentotus (Bathiergidae, Rodentia) // Zeitschrift für Zoologische Systematik und Evolutionsforschung. Bd.28. Hf.1. P.26-39.
• Eisenberg J., Muckenhirn N. & Rudan R. 1972. The relation between ecology and social structure in primates // Science. Vol.176. P.863-874.
• Friedman M.I., Bruno J.P. & Alberts J.R. 1981. Physiological and behavioral consequences in rats of water recycling during lactation // Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology. Vol.95. P.26-35.
• Getz L.L. & Carter C.S. 1996. Prairie-vole partnership // American Scientist. Vol.84. P.56-62.
• Gromov V.S. 2001. [Behaviour of Brandt vole (Lasiopodomys brandti Radde, 1852) in captivity. 1. Social structure of family groups] // Zoologicheskii Zhurnal. T.80. No.12. P.1501-1508 [in Russian with English summary].
• Gromov V.S. 2002. [Behaviour of Brandt vole (Lasiopodomys brandti Radde, 1852) in captivity. 2. Use of space and social organization in large open enclosures] // Zoologicheskii Zhurnal. T.81. No.1. P.1-6 [in Russian with English summary].
• Gromov V.S. 2003. [Territorial structure and social organization in Brandt vole (Lasiopodomys brandti) under semi-natural conditions] // Zoologicheskii Zhurnal. T.82. No.7. P.852-861 [in Russian with English summary].
• Kleiman D.G. 1977. Monogamy in mammals // Quarterly Review of Biology. Vol.52. P.39-69.
• Libhaber N. & Eilam D. 2004. Parental investment in social voles varies and is relatively independent of litter size // Journal of Mammalogy. Vol.85. P.748-755.
• Lonstein J.S. & De Vries G.J. 1999. Comparison of the parental behaviour of pair-bonded female and male prairie voles (Microtus ochrogacter) // Physiology and Behavior. Vol.66. P.33-40.
• McGuire B. & Novak M. 1984. A comparison of maternal behaviour in the meadow vole (Mictotus pennsylvanicus), prairie vole (M. ochrogaster) and pine vole (M. pinetorum) // Animal Behaviour. Vol.32. P.1132-1141.
• Oliveras D. & Novak M. 1986. A comparison of paternal behavior in the meadow vole, Microtus pennsylvanicus, the pine vole, Microtus pinetorum, and prairie vole, Microtus ochrogaster // Animal Behaviour. Vol.34. P.519-526.
• Shi D., Hai S., Zheng S. & Zhang Z. 1998. Studies of social behaviour in colonies of Brandt's vole (Microtus brandti) // International Conference on Rodent Biology and Management. October 5-9, 1998. Beijing, China. Abstracts of Papers. P.71.
• Smorkatcheva A.V. 1999. The social organization of the mandarin vole, Lasiopodomys mandarinus, during the reproductive period // Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde. Vol.64. P.344-355.
• Smorkatcheva A.V. 2001. [On the distribution and ecology of the mandarin vole, Lasiopodomys mandarinus in Buryatiya] // Trudy Zoologicheskogo Instituta RAN. T.288. P.188-204 (in Russian with English summary).
• Smorkatcheva A.V. 2003. Parental care in the captive mandarin vole, Lasiopodomys mandarinus // Canadian Journal of Zoology. Vol.8. P.1-7.
• Smorkatcheva A.V., Aksenova T.G. & Zorenko T.A. 1990. [The ecology of Lasiopodomys mandarinus (Rodentia, Cricetidae) in the Transbaikal area] // Zoologicheskii Zhurnal. T.69. No.1. P.115-124 [in Russian with English summary].
• Stern J.M. & Johnson S.K. 1990. Ventral somatosensory determinants of nursing behaviour in Norway rats: 1. Effect of variations in the quality of pup stimuli // Physiology and Behavior. Vol.47. P.993-1011.
• Thomas J.A. & Birney E.C. 1979. Parental care and mating system of the prairie vole, Microtus ochrogaster // Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology. Vol.5. P.171-186.
• Wan X., Wang M., Zhong W. & Wang G. 1998. The social structure and mating system of the Brandt vole (Microtus brandti) // International Conference on Rodent Biology and Management. October 5-9, 1998. Beijing, China. Abstracts of Papers. P.89.
• Zöphel U. 1999. Social organization of the vole Microtus brandti inhabiting steppes of Central Asia // Proceedings of 3rd European Congress of Mammalogy. May 29-June 2, 1999. Finland. P.242.