Study

Feeding responses to predator-based repellents in the mountain beaver (Aplodontia rufa)

  • Published source details Epple G., Mason J.R., Aronov E., Nolte D.L., Hartz R.A., Kaloostian R., Campbell D. & Smith A.B. (1995) Feeding responses to predator-based repellents in the mountain beaver (Aplodontia rufa). Ecological Applications, 5, 1163-1170.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use predator scent to deter crop damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict

Action Link
Terrestrial Mammal Conservation
  1. Use predator scent to deter crop damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study (year not stated) on captive animals from Washington State, USA (Epple et al. 1995) found that coyote Canis latrans urine was more effective at deterring food consumption by mountain beavers Aplodontia rufa than were four synthetic compounds. In two-choice feeding trials, the quantity of coyote urine-soaked food removed by male beavers (7 g) was lower than that of water-soaked food removed (14 g). The same pattern held for females (coyote urine: 1 g; water: 7 g). A3-Isopentenyl methyl sulfide (IMS) did not affect food choice when compared to an untreated “blank” (IMS: 8–11 g; blank: 7 g), nor did 2,2-dimethylthietane (DMT) (DMT: 7–13 g; blank: 10–14 g). A mix of 2-propylthietane and 3-propyl-l,2-dithiolane (PT/PDT) reduced food retrieval (PT/PDT: 14 g; blank: 18 g) but the response was not apparent during longer (5 day) exposure (PT/PDT: 31 g; blank: 35 g). Twelve wild-caught mountain beavers (six male and six female) were held in captivity for several months prior to the experiment. Trials were run as choice tests between bowls 25 cm apart. Food remaining after one or two hours was weighed. Each beaver was used twice for each choice experiment.

    (Summarised by: Nick Littlewood)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust