Martina Emde

Biology 327 Sec. 3

Small Mammal Final Draft

Introduction:

To be able to understand the structure of ecosystems and their impact on the various

species living in their habitats is an important skill for people to have. As most people know,

there are many different species found in different environments; for example, you wouldnt find

a polar bear living in the Sahara Desert. As our understanding of these different species increases

it becomes clear that to fully understand a species it must be clearly understood how the species

interacts with its environment and other species around it, whether it be where that species lives

or what it does to protect itself from others in the same environment (Coppeto et al. 2006). In an

environment in which humans live, small mammals like mice and other rodents are seen as pests

and often killed in the urban setting. But we dont know as much about the relationships and

roles that small mammals play in a more rural environment that is less inhabited by humans.

By studying and observing the habitats of small mammals we can learn what factors

greatly contribute to the population and distribution of small mammals found on Smoot Hill.

Cover from predators under trees or areas with higher canopy cover could control where many of

the small mammals primarily live (Fateux et. al., 2012). Small mammals see things like the road

as having a barrier effect, so finding small mammals near the road would not be a common

occurrence (McGregor et. at., 2008). Small mammals also might be more likely to be found in

areas in which they are able to find all of the resources they need like food, water and shelter in

their surroundings (Andrn, 1994). In our experiment, we hypothesized that there would be more
small mammals further from the road, more small mammals closer to the nearest water source,

and more small mammals where the percent of canopy cover was higher.

Methods:

For this experiment, there were a number of various procedures taken to collect data on

small mammals at Smoot Hill (N46.81822 W117.23795). Smoot Hill is a small, rural summit

area near Albion, WA in Whitman county. There is a small creek located next to the road that

runs along the edge of Smoot Hill.

Setting Up Track Plates:

The first step was to set up track plates in multiple locations. To set the track plates up,

two pieces of paper were put on both edges of the track plate and food was put in the middle. To

be able to track the small mammals in the area, two lines of paint were put on the boarders of the

food, so that if a small mammal came through, they would step in the paint and transfer it on to

the paper on the edges.

Distance from Track Plates to Road:

To see if the distance from the track plates to the road impacted the amount of small

mammals in that area, the distances were measured with meter tape. The distance from the first

track plate to the road was measured using the meter tape; for the second track plate, 10 meters

were added to the distance between the first track plate and the road. The distance of the third

track plate was measured by adding 10 meters to the distance between the second plate and the

road (the fourth and fifth plates were also measured using this same method).

Distance to Nearest Water Source:

 The distances from the track plates to the water source were measured with meter tape.

For the first plate, the distance between the road and the nearest water source was measured, and

then added to the distance between the road and the first track plate. For the second track plate,

10 meters were added on to the distance from the first track plate to the water source (the third,

fourth, and fifth plate were also measured using this same method).

Percent of Canopy Cover:

To see how much canopy was covering the track plates, a picture was taken facing

upwards towards the sky at each track plate. Once the picture was taken on the phone, it was

analyzed to see approximately what percentage of the picture was clear sky and what percentage

of the picture was canopy cover.

Statistical Analysis:

To analyze the data we collected, we performed a chi-squared analysis using an ordinal

logistic regression; and if there were no tracks found in the track plates we denoted that as 0, if

there was one set of tracks found we denoted that as 1, if there was two sets of tracks found we

denoted that as 2, etc.

Results:

After 24 hours, we collected the various track plates to observe the different tracks that

were found on the plates.

Distance from Track Plate to Road:

From the data collected (Figure 1), the distances that were further from the road and

located further into the summit area of Smoot Hill had a higher amount of small mammals pass

through the track plates (SE = 0.0421, X2 = 8.92, P-Value = 0.0028), which was significant.
Distance to Nearest Water Source:

The distance between the track plates to the nearest water source was also significant (SE

= 0.0329, X2 = 7.49, P-Value = 0.0062) because the data (Figure 2) proved that small mammals

were found further from the nearest water source.

Percent of Canopy Cover:

The collected data (SE = 0.0170, X2 = 5.19, P-Value = 0.0227) proved that percent of

canopy cover at each track plate was not significant (Figure 3).

Discussion:

The results showed that the distance from each of the track plates to the road was

significant which supported our hypothesis because there were more small mammal tracks in the

track plates that were further away from the road and more deep into the more rural part of

Smoot Hill. This may be partially due to the fact that many forest habitats have been altered by

humans (Kelt et. al., 2015). Because the road is a form of urbanization created by humans, the

small mammals have learned to stay away due to the different danger aspects that are usually

associated with humans (habitat fragmentation and viewed as being pests).

As for the distance to the nearest water source, the results were significant because they

showed that there were more small mammals further away from the water source. However, this

did not support our hypothesis. This may be because to small mammals, roads are seen as a

barrier (Redon et. al., 2015), and because there was a road between the small creek and the area

of Smoot Hill the small mammals lived, they most likely did not choose to venture past the road.
 The percentage of canopy cover over each of the track plates did not prove to have any

sort of significance towards the population of small mammals in that area, which did not support

our hypothesis. This may be due to the fact that there were not enough track plates to collect data

from. We found that the small mammals did not seem to venture as close to the nearby water

source as we hypothesize, which is most likely due to the fact that there was a road in between

the field where the mammals were living and the stream. Because the small mammals viewed the

road as a barrier they were not able to cross, they potentially could have found another nearby

water source that was more accessible. As for our hypothesis of the percent of canopy cover

having an effect on the small mammals, we may not have found significant data based on the

type of canopy that was measured. Most of the canopy cover that was measured consisted mostly

of pine trees and their branches. If, instead, we measured the canopy coverage again, it should be

measured closer to the ground versus from our height since the mices habitat is much closer to

the ground. Having more track plates and spreading the plates out to reach a larger charity of the

environment would be a constructive change that could be made. By having more plates in

different areas, we could potentially observe where another nearby water source is located, as

well as observing if canopy cover makes a large impact in different locations.

Overall, the different habitual characteristics of Smoot Hill did not seem to have an

impact on the small mammal populations. Therefore, we can reject our hypotheses that small

mammal populations will be higher in areas closer to a water source and that they will be higher

in areas with a higher percent of canopy coverage. From this, we can conclude that human

populations still make an impact on small mammal populations and ecosystems by constructing

roads or cutting down foliage and canopy coverage, even in more rural environments that small

mammals live in.

Figures:

Figure 1 Figure 2
Smooth(track sum)
2.5
Smooth(Distance from Road)

2.0
2.0

Amount of Species per Trackplate

1.5 1.5
Amount of Species per Trackplate

1.0 1.0

0.5
0.5

0.0
0.0

-0.5
20 40 60 80 100 120
-0.5 Distance to Nearest Water Source (m)

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Distance to Road (m)

The figure displays the positive relationship This figure displays the positive relationship
between the amount of small mammals found between mammals and their distance away
and their distance from the road (SE = from the nearest water source (SE = 0.0329;
0.0421; X2 = 8.92; P-Value = 0.0028). X2 = 7.49; P-Value = 0.0062)
Figure 3

2.5

2.0
Amount of Species per Trackplate

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.5
-20 0 20 40 60 80 100
% Canopy Cover

This figure displays that there was no distinct

relationship between the percent of canopy
cover and the amount of small mammals
found (SE = 0.0170; X2 = 5.19; P-Value =
0.0227)
Andrn, Henrik. (1994, Dec.). Effects of Habitat Fragmentation on Birds and Mammals in

Landscapes with Different Proportions of Suitable Habitat: A Review. Oikos, 71(3), 355-

366.

Coppeto, Kelt, Van Vuren, Wilson, Bigelow, Seth. (2006). Habitat Associations of Small

Mammals at Two Spatial Scales in The Northern Sierra Nevada. Journal of Mammalogy.

87(2), 402-413.

Fauteux, Imbeau, Drapeau, Mazerolle. (2006). Small Mammal Responses to Coarse Woody

Debris Distribution at Different Spatial Scales in Managed and Unmanaged Boreal

Forests. Forest Ecology and Management. 266, 194-205.

Kelt, Van Vuren, Johnson, Wilson, Innes, Jesmer, Ingram, Smith, Bigelow, Burnett, Stine.

(2013). Small Mammals Exhibit Limited Spatiotemporal Structure in Sierra Nevada

Forests. Journal of Mammology. 94(6), 1197-1213.

McGregor, Bender, Fahrig. (2008). Do Small Mammals Avoid Roads Because of the Traffic?

Journal of Applied Ecology. 45(1), 117-123.

Redon, Le Viol, Jiguet, Machon, Scher, Kerbiriou. (2015, Jan.). Road Network in an Agrarian

Landscape: Potential Habitat, Corridor or Barrier for Small Mammals? Acta Oecologica.

62, 58-65.