Premium
Food niche overlap and ecological separation in a multi‐species community of shrews in the Siberian taiga
Author(s) -
Churchfield Sara,
Sheftel B. I.
Publication year - 1994
Publication title -
journal of zoology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.915
H-Index - 96
eISSN - 1469-7998
pISSN - 0952-8369
DOI - 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1994.tb06059.x
Subject(s) - predation , biology , shrew , generalist and specialist species , ecology , niche , insectivora , foraging , taiga , range (aeronautics) , invertebrate , niche differentiation , guild , taxon , ecological niche , habitat , materials science , composite material
An investigation of the feeding habits and prey availability in a community of seven species of shrew (Insectivora: Soricidae) inhabiting the taiga of Central Siberia was carried out with the aim of quantifying levels of niche overlap and elucidating modes of ecological separation amongst these coexisting species. All species took a wide range of invertebrate prey, and overlap in the numbers of shared prey taxa was high, but differences in dietary composition of certain taxa reduced overlap between most species. Small species fed almost exclusively on small arthropods, mostly Araneae, Chilopoda and Coleoptera, while medium and large‐sized species took high proportions of oligochaetes. Prey were mostly taken in proportions approximately equal to their availability, although certain prey appeared to be selected. All shrews took prey in a range of sizes, and the high dietary occurrence of small invertebrates reflected their availability and high encounter rate in field samples. Dietary occurrence of small prey was negatively correlated, and large prey positively correlated, with body size of shrew. Smaller shrews were predominantly ground‐surface foragers while larger species were more subterranean, with body size and dietary occurrence of soil prey being positively correlated. Differences in prey size and foraging mode reduced niche overlap between shrew species of widely differing sizes. Each shrew species did not occupy a separate, well‐defined food niche. Instead, the community was sub‐divided into three functional groups: large and small species which tended towards specialization with relatively low levels of overlap, and intermediate, generalist species with higher levels of overlap.