Content uploaded by Rimvydas Juškaitis
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Rimvydas Juškaitis
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Use of nestboxes by the common dormouse (Muscardinus avellanarius L.) in Lithuania
... In Lithuania, beech trees are absent from hazel dormouse habitats [1]. Here, Juškaitis (1997) [37] found that hazel leaves are often used as a nest material, while beech leaves are not. Furthermore, hazel leaves are used in high proportions in England, according to Morris et al. (1990) [34] and Bracewell and Downs (2017) [35], and also in Belgium, according to Verbeylen et al. (2017) [36]. ...
... In Lithuania, beech trees are absent from hazel dormouse habitats [1]. Here, Juškaitis (1997) [37] found that hazel leaves are often used as a nest material, while beech leaves are not. Furthermore, hazel leaves are used in high proportions in England, according to Morris et al. (1990) [34] and Bracewell and Downs (2017) [35], and also in Belgium, according to Verbeylen et al. (2017) [36]. ...
... In this study, F-nests were the second most apparent type, followed by L-and G-nests in both time periods. F-nests being frequent in nest boxes was also found in studies by Juškaitis (1997) [37] and Zaytseva (2006) [25]. The study byČanády (2015) [26] was carried out on natural nests in the vegetation, while this study investigates nests from nest boxes. ...
Hazel dormice (Muscardinus avellanarius) construct summer nests for resting and breeding. The nests are built directly in the vegetation, in tree hollows, or in nest boxes. The availability of nest materials and vegetation coverage may affect the likelihood of finding hazel dormice at a location. The aim of the study is: (1) To investigate the preferences of hazel dormice for nesting materials today compared to four decades ago. (2) To investigate hazel dormice preferences for vegetation coverage at nest sites. In total, 148 hazel dormouse summer nests from the Bidstrup forests in Zealand (Denmark), were analysed. Of these, 82 were collected in the period A: 1980–1985 and 66 were collected in B: 2019–2020. In total 26 different nest materials were found. Beech was the major nest material in both periods, and Jacob’s selectivity index indicates that beech is selected for as nesting material and that hazel dormice may travel to collect beech leaves. Nests from period A contained more beech (W = 1521, p < 0.05) and less oak (W = 1304, p < 0.01) compared to nests from period B. Vegetation analysis showed that coverage of shrubs higher than 2 m above ground (W = 1.5, p = 0.07) may be of great importance for hazel dormice.
... Tree cavities are one of the most important habitat features for hazel dormice as they are used as secure nest and resting sites (Bright and Morris 1992;Juškaitis 1997Juškaitis , 2005. Especially in managed forests, hazel dormice frequently use nest boxes as artificial substitutes for tree cavities and many studies on the ecology of this species as well as monitoring programmes and conservation measures rely on nest boxes (Bright et al. 2006, Büchner et al. 2017Juškaitis 1997Juškaitis , 2005Juškaitis , 2014Morris et al. 1990;Williams et al. 2013). ...
... Tree cavities are one of the most important habitat features for hazel dormice as they are used as secure nest and resting sites (Bright and Morris 1992;Juškaitis 1997Juškaitis , 2005. Especially in managed forests, hazel dormice frequently use nest boxes as artificial substitutes for tree cavities and many studies on the ecology of this species as well as monitoring programmes and conservation measures rely on nest boxes (Bright et al. 2006, Büchner et al. 2017Juškaitis 1997Juškaitis , 2005Juškaitis , 2014Morris et al. 1990;Williams et al. 2013). The method, however, is costly and requires considerable effort. ...
... Although it is well known that occupation of nest boxes by hazel dormice can be negatively affected by other species due to competition or predation (overview in Juškaitis 2014; Juškaitis and Büchner 2013), to date there has not been any systematic investigation of whether spatial competition has an impact on the occupancy ratio of either nest boxes or nest tubes by hazel dormice. As both methods are widely used to detect, investigate, monitor and/or capture dormice (Chanin and Gubert 2011;Juškaitis 1997;Morris et al. 1990;Williams et al. 2013), insights into this topic would have practical significance (a) for selecting the right device for use in hazel dormouse studies and (b) for interpreting the results obtained. ...
Nest boxes and nest tubes are widely used to survey and monitor hazel dormice (Muscardinus avellanarius). A two-year study was conducted in order to compare the performance of the two devices. In one year hazel dormice clearly preferred nest tubes over nest boxes but preferred nest boxes over nest tubes in the other year. The preference for one or other device was mainly influenced by competition for nest boxes with Apodemus mice, which preferred nest boxes over nest tubes during one year when they were abundant. This has to be considered when comparing performance of methods.
... On this basis monthly survival rates can easily be calculated: Different studies indicate that 95% of the local dormouse population can be recorded by conducting regular nestbox checks every two weeks (Morris et al. 1990, Juškaitis 1997, Büchner 1998. ...
... Checking nestboxes for animals and their signs is an established and simple method to survey hazel dormouse populations (Chanin & GuBert 2011, VogeL et al. 2012, Juškaitis & Büchner 2013. By checking boxes frequently during the right time of the year, most animals present can be encountered (Morris et al. 1990, Juškaitis 1997, Büchner 1998. Therefore, nest box controls can be a simple basis for an estimation of the success of translocations. ...
The hazel dormouse (Muscardinus avellanarius) is a European Protected Species and for this reason, hazel dormice are protected from deliberate killing, injury or disturbance and its sites and resting places are also protected. During development projects impacts on hazel dormouse individuals and populations should be avoided. If avoidance is not possible measures of mitigation and compensation have to be implemented. In many cases the only suitable measure to prevent disturbance, killing or injury of individuals is the translocation of hazel dormice to another suitable habitat. The success of translocations has so far been rarely documented. To assess the success of translocations, the natural mortality of hazel dormice has to be considered as well as the likelihood of finding specific individuals during the proposed action. How these data affect the assessment of translocation success is calculated based on published data on seasonal survival rates of different cohorts and of unpublished monthly encounter probabilities of a population of marked animals. Depending on the time between the translocation event and the subsequent monitoring controls the number of hazel dormice likely to be alive can be low. For this reason, success cannot be evaluated with our method if the sample size is too small.
... Collectively, these results lead to management recommendations for the placement of nestboxes and site management that build on previous research that focused on wider habitat and nestbox design , Juškaitis 1997, Madikiza et al. 2010. In particular, given footpath effects, larger and less visited woodlands should be preferable sites for nestbox placement. ...
1. The severe decline of hazel dormice ( Muscardinus avellanarius ) is well documented and has led to increased legislative protection both in the UK and across Europe. Conservation measures for this species often include provision of nestboxes as a mitigation or enhancement technique after development projects. Previous research has offered some insights into how to select suitable general locations for nestboxes, but where to best place individual boxes to promote occupancy is less well understood. We hypothesised microhabitat variables related to proximity to food sources and nest building material will affect nestbox occupancy by dormice and should be considered when placing individual boxes within a selected site. 2. To assess individual nestbox occupancy by hazel dormice, 76 microhabitat variables were collected from 45 occupied and unused nestboxes in a deciduous woodland in Berkshire,UK. Variables were then used to predict probability of nestbox occupancy (observed from 2017 to 2021) using Random Regression models. 3. Results reveal nestboxes were more likely to be occupied by hazel dormice in sites with higher local cover and abundance of hazel trees ( Corylus avellana ), greater overall tree abundance but not fully closed canopies (best around 80-85%), more hawthorn ( Crataegus monogyna ) and honeysuckle ( Lolium periclymenum ), and when located further from footpaths. 4. Our results build on previous literature on habitat preferences of hazel dormice and importantly provide insight into relevant microhabitat variables that offer recommendations for where to place individual nestboxes to promote occupancy and facilitate recovery of hazel dormice.
... Het uitgangspunt tijdens voorliggend onderzoek is dan ook dat het gewicht van een zender de grens van 5% lichaamsgewicht niet mag overschrijden en dat de zender het dier niet mag hinderen in het natuurlijk gedrag. Het gewicht van een hazelmuis is, zeker tijdens de opvetperiode net voor de winter, erg variabel (Juškaitis 2001). De meeste individuen wegen circa 20 gram in het najaar, hetgeen betekent dat een zender circa 1 gram mag wegen. ...
The hazel dormouse (Muscardinus avellanarius) is a very rare species in the Netherlands and is protected both in the Netherlands and at European level. The species is listed as 'Endangered' on the national Red List and has declined in distribution by 46% since 1950. Its current distribution area is confined to the southernmost part of the Netherlands in the Province of Limburg and consists of two to three forest complexes. Due to a relatively slow reproduction and their vulnerability during winter, hazel dormouse populations are vulnerable to changes in their environment. The greatest threat to the sustainable survival of hazel dormouse populations in the Netherlands is further fragmentation and loss of habitat. Forest management is essential to maintain hazel dormouse habitat. However, carrying out large-scale management activities in autumn in hazel dormouse habitat can result in the death of adult animals and nests with young. In addition, it is likely that mortality occurs in winter as a result of large-scale management activities in the forest and forest edges, when animals are hibernating on the forest floor. In accordance with the Dutch code of conduct for nature management 2016-2021, no work can be carried out in hazel dormouse habitat between 1 March and 1 December because hazel dormice are then present in the habitat. It was only from 1 December onwards that management activities were carried out on woods and woodland edges, such as cutting down and removing woody plants, because then the hazel dormice were 'out of sight'. The forest (edge) managers are in a dilemma in the management period, because of the short time window in which forest edge management could be carried out and as a consequence of management activities, an unknown part of the hazel dormouse population diminishes in the winter months. Therefore, there is an urgent need for more knowledge on the behaviour of hazel dormice in the period before and during hibernation. The research objectives underlying this study relate to:
1) acquiring insight into the autumn behaviour of hazel dormice,
2) determining where and how hazel dormice hibernate and how far do they hibernate from their home ranges in autumn,
3) determining to what extent hedgerows and forest edges are important for hibernation,
4) determining what the implications of the previous objectives are for forest (edge) management, and
5) formulating an advice for an optimal management period of hazel dormouse habitat.
The research took place in the autumn (early October to early January) of 2018 and 2019. For this purpose, 4 and 20 hazel dormice were tagged with Holohil BD-2C collar transmitters, respectively. These transmitters had a specified weight of 1.1 grams and a battery life of 70 days at a pulse rate of 15 pulses per minute. The hazel dormice were tracked at least once a week in 2018 and at least twice a week in 2019. After tracking, the GPS position was determined and data on vegetation cover were collected. From winter nests, data on vegetation cover, crown cover, soil substrate and slope angle were collected in a hierarchical way to prevent spatial autocorrelation.
During the survey period in autumn after tagging, hazel dormice dispersed an average of 183.4 m, with a maximum of 770 m. The longest distance dispersed in one night through a hedgerow was 350 m. The peak of activity was determined in October and November. Three times an open meadow was crossed and at least ten hazel dormice crossed an asphalted road where there are no overhanging trees present. Mixed-effect regression shows that the probability of moving from a ground nest in autumn was higher with more precipitation. The significant interaction between precipitation and sudden temperature changes shows that the probability of movement decreases with sudden temperature decreases. Nine of the 24 hazel dormice were predated. Two of these were preyed upon by a tawny owl, four by wood mouse or yellow-necked mouse, and three transmitters disappeared without a trace from the study area. The first winter nest (hibernaculum) was found on 7 November in both 2018 and 2019. On average, the first winter nests were constructed on 18 November. In total, 15 hazel dormice constructed a winter nest in the forest, three in a forest edge and three in a hedgerow. It was noticeable that the majority of winter nests was found in the leaf litter and covered with leaves on the sparsely vegetated woodland floor. The winter nests were found up to 120 m and on average 29 m deep in the forest from the forest edge. The animals in the winter nests were on average 75.2 m from the home range in the autumn. The forests where winter nests were found consisted only of broad-leaved trees. Variables influencing the choice of winter nest site were slope angle (preference for larger slope angle) and crown cover (preference for higher percentage of crown cover). It is assumed that this improves drainage and cover around the winter nest. Multivariate analysis showed that the vegetation cover at the winter site was significantly different from that in autumn. The winter nests are compact, not perfectly round, but somewhat flattened and consist mainly of interwoven grass or bark with occasional leaves. The entrance/exit to an occupied winter nest appears to be a sort of plug of about 2-3 cm thick of the same grass material as the nest, which the animal has pulled inside. Hazel dormice hibernate the winter here in solitary. After removing the transmitters, the animals had lost an average of -12% in body weight.
The present study shows that the management period partly coincides within the most vulnerable period for the hazel dormouse. The hazel dormice hibernate (in torpor) on the forest floor and are unable to flee, awakening from torpor takes up to 15-20 minutes. Based on this research, new rules of thumb have been drawn up for the management and the period in which it needs to take place. In principle, no management may take place in hazel dormouse habitats in the vulnerable period that applies per type of hazel dormouse habitat (forest, copse, forest edge & road verge and wooded bank & shrubbery hedge). If it is still planned to work in the vulnerable period while hazel dormice are present, or if hazel dormice can be expected to be found (checked by an expert and after consultation of the NDFF and NEM archive), then a permit from the Nature Conservation Act is necessary. If the presence of hazel dormice is not considered likely based on previous research, then it is permitted to work in hazel dormouse habitat during the vulnerable period. In the latter case, the decision trees drawn up then guide the scale of management and the management period.
... Mean body mass of males in August was 19 g and of females was 18 g which were similar to those reported by Juškaitis & Büchner (2010). In accordance with data from Lithuania (Juškaitis 2001) and Belgium (Verbeylen et al. 2017), we found sex-specific differences in body mass in September. The lower mass of adult females may negatively influence their winter survival (Juškaitis 2008). ...
Studies of Muscardinus avellanarius (Linnaeus, 1785) predominantly originate from the edges of its European range and therefore are not easily extrapolated to alpine habitats. Thus, we surveyed a population in the Triebener Moos (Styria/Austria) from 2012 to 2018 using 100 dormouse nest-tubes at 4 study plots. In total, 113 dormice were captured and measured. Overall sex-ratio among adults was even and body mass increased from May to September. Our results show highest population densities in August and in September varying annually between 1.73 and 3.98 individuals per hectare. Annual percentage of nest tubes used by M. avellanarius averaged 31%, with a high inter-annual variation in nest-tube occupancy. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) showed that the number of occupied nest tubes decreased with declining diversity of food plants and increasing tree cover.
... martens Martes sp. or raccoons Procyon lotor) (e.g. Juškaitis 1995, 1997, 1999, 2006, Sorace et al. 1998, Sarà et al. 2005; for an overview, see Juškaitis & Büchner 2013, Juškaitis 2014). ...
This experiment with nest box entrances of different sizes and shapes shows that bank voles, wood mice and yellow-necked wood mice cannot be excluded if common dormice have to be let in. Great tits can be excluded with rectangular as well as circular entrances. If also well-fattened common dormice have to be let in, blue tits can only be excluded with a rectangular entrance, and the advised height is 15 mm.
(mind the layout mistake: the line between test 2 and test 3 of rectangle should be between rectangle and circle)
... In the past the invention of novel methods has always advanced our understanding about dormice and their biology. Prominent examples are the search for hazel nuts opened by hazel dormice (Muscardinus avellanarius) that became one of the most commonly used methods to map the distribution of this species (Bright et al. 1996, 2006, Büchner et al. 2009) or the setup of nest boxes (and later nest tubes) that is now the standard method to detect, investigate, monitor and/or capture dormice (morris et al. 1990, Juškaitis 1997, chanin & guBert 2011, WiLLiams et al. 2013. ...
Nest boxes and nest tubes are widely used for surveys, for both research and development purposes, to detect and survey hazel dormice (Muscardinus avellanarius). In order to compare the performance of the two devices for translocations a study was conducted where hazel dormice had the choice between nest boxes and nest tubes. Hazel dormice preferred nest tubes over nest boxes but escaped more often from nest tubes than from nest boxes during checking. We conclude that nest boxes are the better choice for translocations as they offer the better escape ratio over nest tubes.
... Die letzten Nachweise der Haselmaus aus dem Raum nördlich des Schaalsees stammten vom Anfang des 20. Jahrhunderts (Schulz 1968 (Morris et al. 1990;Juškaitis 1997;Büchner 1998). Keine andere Nachweismethode ist derzeit beschrieben, die ähnliche Effizienz aufweist. ...
... Vyskytuje sa vo vtáčích búdkach hlavne v hniezdnom období a v čase, keď si vyhľadáva miesta na zimný spánok (Krištín 1994). Podrobnejší výskum ekológie tohto druhu v podmienkach brezovo-smrekových a smrekovo-dubových lesov s pomocou búdok prebieha v Litve (Juškaitis 1995(Juškaitis , 1997a(Juškaitis , 1999. Pri týchto štúdiách bola zistená aj kompetícia pri obsadzovaní búdok medzi spomínanými druhmi, a taktiež ich kompetícia s rôznymi druhmi dutinových vtáčích hniezdičov (Juškaitis 1995, Juškaitis 1997b, Marsh & Morris 2000. ...
Occupation and use of wooden nestboxes by mammals in Šúr National Nature Reserve (SW Slovakia) Occupation and use of wooden nestboxes by mammals was studying from 1996 till 2002 in National Nature Reserve Šúr (southwestern Slovakia). Nestboxes were situated in two study plots: alder fen wood (n = 12–60) and Biological station of Comenius University (edge of a termophilous oak forest) (n = 13–38). Three species of mammals were found to be occupied nestboxes: Apodemus flavicollis, Muscardinus avellanarius and Pipistrellus sp. Most frequent species was yellow-necked mouse. Using of nestboxes by this species differed between studied years. Most individuals were found during period October 1998 – March 1999 and they occupied nestboxes in Biological station, solely. In October 1998, 25 % of nestboxes were occupied by this species in this plot. Average number of individuals in one occupied nestbox was 1.67. Dormice used nestboxes on both study plots. Whilst mice were found mostly in autumn and winter period, dormice occupied boxes occasionally during whole year. In one case a hibernating individual and in two cases female with cubs was found. Both species were found to be destroying bird eggs in two cases.
Radiotracking was used to investigate the movements of dormice at different times during the summer, in an area of coppice-with-standards woodland, a habitat traditionally associated with this species. The dormice were shown to be wholly arboreal in their activity, foraging in different strata of their three-dimensional habitat, as different food sources became seasonally available. Nest sites were located and both sexes were found to travel only short distances from them, implying that this species probably has a low potential for dispersal. Males normally travelled further than females each night and had larger home ranges, within which activity was usually concentrated in small areas associated with a particular food resource. The findings are discussed in relation to woodland management and distribution surveys.
Nestboxes, with their entrance holes facing inwards, were fixed to trees in deciduous woodland in Somerset. Their use by dormice Muscardinus avellanarius L. was monitored monthly through three summers, 1986–1988. At the principal study site, more than 60% of the boxes had been found by dormice by the end of the first summer and the dormice themselves had been recorded in more than 40% of them. Trapping revealed that numbers of dormice present in areas with nestboxes were greater than in similar areas without boxes. Nestboxes thus appear to support enhanced populations and offer a means of assisting the conservation of this species. Dormice successfully reared young in the boxes, which also provided a means of access for basic studies on biology of this scarce and poorly known British mammal.
Etude d'une population de Muscardins (Muscardinus avellanarius) lors du repos journalier (Mammalia, Gliridae) Revue Suisse Zoo1 Ecology and reproduction of Gliridae (Mammalia) in Northern Moravia Overnighting of birds in nestboxes during post-breeding period
- F Catzeflis
- J Gaisler
- V Halas
- M Homolka
CATZEFLIS, F. 1984: Etude d'une population de Muscardins (Muscardinus avellanarius) lors du repos journalier (Mammalia, Gliridae). Revue Suisse Zoo1. 91 (4), 851-860. GAISLER, J., HaLAs, V. & HOMOLKA, M. 1977: Ecology and reproduction of Gliridae (Mammalia) in Northern Moravia. Folia zoologica. 26 (3) 213-228. JUSKAITIS, R. 1986: Overnighting of birds in nestboxes during post-breeding period. - In: Bird ecology in Lithuanian SSR. Vilnius, 3, 150-159. (in Russian). JUSKAITIS, R. 1993: On Common dormouse (Muscardinus avellanarius L.) feeding in Lithuania
Haselmause in Vogelnistkasten
- Z Wasilewski
PIELOWSKI, Z. & WASILEWSKI, A. 1960: Haselmause in Vogelnistkasten. Z. Saugetierkd. 25 (1-2),
74-80.
Untersuchungen zur Biologie der Haselmaus (Muscardinus avellanarius L.) im Siidharz
SCHULZE, W. 1973: Untersuchungen zur Biologie der Haselmaus (Muscardinus avellanarius L.)
im Siidharz. Arch. Naturschutz und Landschaftforsch. 13 (2), 107-121.
Relations between Common dormouse (Muscardinus avellanarius) and other occupants of bird nest-boxes in Lithuania
JUSKAITIS, R. 1995: Relations between Common dormouse (Muscardinus avellanarius) and other
occupants of bird nest-boxes in Lithuania. Folia zoologica. 44(4), 289-296.
Zur Verbreitung, Haufigkeit und Okologie der Haselmaus (Muscardinus avellanarius ) im Westerzgebirge
MOCKEL, R. 1988: Zur Verbreitung, Haufigkeit und Okologie der Haselmaus (Muscardinus avellanarius ) im Westerzgebirge. Saugetierkd. Inf., 2 (12), 569-588.
Zum Vorkommen und zur Biologie von Haselmaus (Muscardinus avellanarius L.) und Siebenschlafer (Glis glis L.) in Vogelkasten im Siidharz der DDR
SCHULZE, W. 1986: Zum Vorkommen und zur Biologie von Haselmaus (Muscardinus avellanarius L.) und Siebenschlafer (Glis glis L.) in Vogelkasten im Siidharz der DDR. Saugetierkd.
Inf., 2 (10), 341-348.
Beitrage zur Okologie und Biologie der Haselmaus (Mus cardinus avellanarius) im Alpenvorland
WACHTENDORF, W., 1951: Beitrage zur Okologie und Biologie der Haselmaus (Mus cardinus
avellanarius) im Alpenvorland. ZooL Jahrb., Abt. Syst. 80 (3/4), 189-204.