Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 210

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Cyclic dynamics in field vole populations and generalist predation

Open access
Lambin, Xavier, Petty, Steve J., Mackinnon, James L.·2000·Journal of Animal Ecology

Abstract

Summary: 1. A geographical gradient in the relative impact of generalist and specialist predators on small rodent populations has been hypothesized to be responsible for the gradient in cyclicity found in Fennoscandia. Population oscillations resulting from weasel–vole interactions are said to be dampened by the increasing stabilizing impact of generalist predators in southern Fennoscandia resulting from: (i) a greater abundance and diversity of predators sustained by alternative prey; (ii) the absence of significant snow cover leading to constant exposure of voles to generalist predators; and (iii) a heterogeneous habitat that makes dispersing voles more vulnerable to predators. 2. Changes in the abundance of field voles (Microtus agrestis L.) in a man‐made spruce forest in northern England were recorded during 1984–98 using sign indices at 14–18 sites calibrated with capture–recapture estimates of vole density. 3. Field vole populations exhibited cyclic dynamics which were in many ways similar to those reported from Fennoscandia, including population declines taking place during the breeding season and long periods with no recovery in numbers following population crashes. 4. The density dependence structure of the time series was explored by means of partial autocorrelation functions, which suggested second‐order density dependence. Analyses based on two density estimates per year (spring and autumn) reveal significant negative values for lags of 1, 1·5 and 2 years, suggesting that the time‐lag might be somewhat shorter than 2 years. 5. Estimates of predation on field voles by red foxes and tawny owls at high vole density were above the value predicted for this site and for the whole generalist predator community by a published model assuming that predation by generalist predators stabilizes vole populations. However, empirical estimates of the parameter used both for designing and testing the model are inherently imprecise. 6. A qualitative evaluation of the three variables (see 1) correlated to the Fennoscandian gradient and assumed to contribute to variations in generalist predation pressure did not support the hypothesis that low predation rates by generalist predators are necessary for vole dynamics to be dominated by the destabilizing impact of weasel–vole interactions. The specialist/generalist predation hypothesis must therefore be modified to account for the regular population cycles occurring in northern Britain.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2656.2000.00380.x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 210

Metadata

Authors
Lambin, X., Petty, S. J., & Mackinnon, J. L.
Venue
Journal of Animal Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-01
Volume
69
Issue
1
Pages
106-119
ISSN
  • 0021-8790 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2656
OpenAlex
W2080107849
Cited by
210
References
0
FWCI
21.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cyclic dynamics in field vole populations and generalist predation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2656.2000.00380.x
The paper
Lambin, X., Petty, S. J., & Mackinnon, J. L. (2000). Cyclic dynamics in field vole populations and generalist predation. Journal of Animal Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2656.2000.00380.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.