IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v13y2002i2p216-223.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prey size, prey nutrition, and food handling by shrews of different body sizes

Author

Listed:
  • Leszek Rychlik
  • Elżbieta Jancewicz

Abstract

We tested some predictions relating metabolic constraints of foraging behavior and prey selection by comparing food handling and utilization in four sympatric shrew species: Sorex minutus (mean body mass = 3.0 g), S. araneus (8.0 g), Neomys anomalus (10.0 g), and N. fodiens (14.4 g). Live fly larvae, mealworm larvae, and aquatic arthropods were offered to shrews as small prey (body mass <0.1 g). Live earthworms, snails, and small fish were offered as large prey (>0.3 g). The larvae were the high-nutrition food (>8 kJ/g), and the other prey were the low-nutrition food (<4 kJ/g). The smallest shrew, S. minutus, utilized (ate + hoarded) <30% of offered food, and the other species utilized >48% of food. The larger the shrew, the more prey it ate per capita. However, highly energetic insect larvae composed 75% of food utilized by S. minutus and only >40% of the food utilized by the other species. Thus, inverse relationships appeared between shrew body mass and mass-specific food mass utilization and between shrew body mass and mass-specific food energy utilization: the largest shrew, N. fodiens, utilized the least food mass and the least energy quantity per 1 g of its body mass. Also, the proportion of food hoarded by shrews decreased with increase in size of shrew. With the exception of S. araneus, the size of prey hoarded by the shrews was significantly larger than the size of prey eaten. Tiny S. minutus hoarded and ate smaller prey items than the other shrews, and large N. fodiens hoarded larger prey than the other shrews. Copyright 2002.

Suggested Citation

  • Leszek Rychlik & Elżbieta Jancewicz, 2002. "Prey size, prey nutrition, and food handling by shrews of different body sizes," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 13(2), pages 216-223, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:13:y:2002:i:2:p:216-223
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:13:y:2002:i:2:p:216-223. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.