References

• Adler G.H., Wilson M.L. & Derosa M.J. 1987. Effects of adults on survival and recruitment of Peromyscus leucopus // Canadian Journal of Zoology. Vol.65. P.2519–2544.
• Ahroon J.K. & Fidura F.G. 1976. The influence of the male on maternal behaviour in the Mongolian gerbil (Meriones unguiculatus) // Animal Behaviour. Vol.24. P.372–375.
• Anderson P.K. 1989. Dispersal in rodents: A resident fitness hypothesis. Provo, UT: American Society of Mammologists. 289 p.
• Bashenina N.V. 1962. [The ecology of the common vole and some features of its geographic variability.] Мoscow: Moscow State University. 307 p. [In Russian]
• Bashenina N.V. & Meyer M.N. 1994. [Postnatal period. Growth // The common vole: Sibling species.] Moscow: Nauka Publ. P.242–245. [In Russian]
• Bashenina N.V., Meyer M.N. & Zorenko T.A. 1994. [Development // The common vole: Sibling species.] Moscow: Nauka Publ. P.253–266. [In Russian]
• Blumstein D.T. & Armitage K.B. 1998. Life history consequences of social complexity: a comparative study of ground-dwelling sciurids // Behavioral Ecology. Vol.9. P.8–19.
• Bujalska G. 1994. Female and male territoriality in the bank vole // Jarman P.J. & Rossitier A. (eds.). Animal societies: Individuals, interactions and organization. Kyoto: Kyoto Univ. Press. P.56–69.
• Bujalska G. & Saitoh T. 2000. Territoriality and its consequences // Polish Journal of Ecology. Vol.48. Suppl. P.37–49.
• Calhoun J.B. 1962. The ecology and sociology of the Norway rat. Bethesda, Maryland. 264 p.
• Cantoni D. & Brown R.E. 1997. Paternal investment and reproductive success in the California mouse, Peromyscus californicus // Animal Behaviour. Vol.54. P.377–386.
• Curtis J.T., Liu Y., Aragona B.J. & Wang Z. 2007. Neural regulation of social behavior in rodents // Wolff J.O. & Sherman P.W. (eds.). Rodent Societies: An Ecological & Evolutionary Perspective. Chicago: Chicago Univ. Press. P.185–194.
• De Jonge G. 1983. Aggression and group formation in the voles Microtus agrestis, M. arvalis and Clethrionomys glareolus in relation to intra- and interspecific competition // Behaviour. Vol.84. P.1–73.
• Dudley D. 1974a. Paternal behaviour in the California mouse, Peromyscus californicus // Behavioral Biology. Vol.11. P.247–252.
• Dudley D. 1974b. Contributions of parental care to the growth and development of the young Peromyscus californicus // Behavioral Biology. Vol.11. P.155–156.
• Eisenberg J.F. 1966. The social organization of mammals // Handbook of Zoology Vol.10. P.1–192.
• Elwood R.W. & Broom D.M. 1978. The influence of litter size and parental behaviour on the development of Mongolian gerbil pups // Animal Behaviour. Vol.26. P.438–454.
• Emlen S.T. 1991. Evolution of cooperative breeding in birds and mammals // Krebs J.R. & Davies N.B. (eds.). Behavioral Ecology. London: Blackwell. P.301–337.
• Emlen S.T. 1994. Benefits, constraints and the evolution of the family // Trends in Ecology and Evolution. Vol.9. P.282–284.
• Gerling S. & Yahr P. 1979. Effect of the male parent on pup survival in Mongolian gerbils // Animal Behaviour. Vol.27. P.310–311.
• Gromov V.S. 2008. [The spatial-and-ethological population structure in rodents.] Moscow: KMK Press. 582 p. [In Russian]
• Gromov V.S. 2011a. Pair-bonding and parental care in cricetid rodents: A comparative study // Acta Theriologica. Vol.56. P.23–33.
• Gromov V.S. 2011b. Biparental care, tactile stimulation, and evolution of sociality in rodents // Journal of Evolutionary Biology Research. Vol.3. P.33–43.
• Gromov V.S. 2011c. Parental care, tactile stimulation and sociality evolution in rodents: Behavioural, physiological and developmental aspects. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publ. 104 p.
• Gromov V.S. 2013. [Parental care in rodents: Ethological, physiological and evolutionary aspects.] Moscow: KMK Press. 338 p. [In Russian]
• Gromov V.S. 2014a. Complicated social structure and the evolution of sociality in rodents: Cooperation as the main promoting factor. // Watson P. (ed.). Social Behavior: Evolutionary Pathways, Environmental Influences and Impairments. NY: Nova Science Publ. P.71–119.
• Gromov V.S. 2014b. The early experience of tactile stimulation and its behavioral consequences related to socialization in mammals // Jaworski J.A. (ed.). Advances in Sociology Research. NY: Nova Science Publ. P.1–28.
• Gromov V.S. 2018. The evolution of sociality in rodents: Environments and selective forces promoting grouping. LAP Lambert Acad. Publ. 163 p.
• Gromov V.S. 2020a. Paternal care in rodents: Ultimate causation and proximate mechanisms // Russian Journal of Theriology. Vol.19. No.1. P.1–20.
• Gromov V.S. 2020b. [Relationship between the social structure and potential reproductive success in muroid rodents (Rodentia, Myomorpha)] // Povolzhskii Journal of Ecology. No.1. P.15–30. [In Russian]
• Gromov V.S. & Osadchuk L.V. 2013. Parental care and testosterone in males of the bank vole (Myodes glareolus): Sensitization and androgenic stimulation of paternal behavior // Biology Bulletin. Vol.40. P.114–118.
• Gromov V.S. & Voznesenskaya V.V. 2013. Care of young, aggressiveness, and secretion of testosterone in male rodents: A correlation analysis // Biology Bulletin. Vol.40. P.463–470.
• Gubernick D.J., Wright S.L. & Brown R.E. 1993. The significance of father’s presence for offspring survival in the monogamous California mouse, Peromyscus californicus // Animal Behaviour. Vol.46. P.539–546.
• Gubernick D.J. & Teferi T. 2000. Adaptive significance of male parental care in a monogamous mammal // Proceedings of Royal Society (Lond.). Ser.B. Vol.267. P.147–150.
• Hamilton W.D. 1964. The genetical evolution of social behavior // Journal of Theoretical Biology. Vol.7. P.1–52.
• Hartung T.G. & Dewsbury D.A. 1979. Paternal behavior of six species of muroid rodents // Behavioral and Neural Biology. Vol.26. P.446–478.
• Hoogland J.L. 1995. The black-tailed prairie dog: Social life of a burrowing mammal. Chicago: Chicago Univ. Press. 285 p.
• Kleiman D.G. 1977. Monogamy in mammals // Quarterly Review of Biology. Vol.52. P.39–69.
• Klippel J.A. 1979. Does the male gerbil parent (Meriones unguiculatus) contribute to pup mortality: A reply // Animal Behaviour. Vol.27. P.311–312.
• Krebs J., Lambin X. & Wolff J.O. 2007. Social behavior and self-regulation in murid rodents // Wolff J.O. & Sherman P.W. (eds.). Rodent Societies: An Ecological & Evolutionary Perspective. Chicago: Chicago Univ. Press. P.173–184.
• Kurland J.A. & Gaulin S.J.C. 1984. The evolution of male parental investment: effects of genetic relatedness and feeding ecology on the allocation of reproductive effort // Taub D.W. (ed.). Primate paternalism. NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold. P.259–308.
• Lacey E.A. 2004. Sociality reduces individual direct fitness in a communally breeding rodent, the colonial tuco-tuco (Ctenomys sociabilis) // Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. Vol.56. P.449–457.
• Lacey E.A. & Sherman P.W. 1997. Cooperative breeding in naked mole rats: Implications for vertebrate and invertebrate sociality // Solomon N.G. & French J.A. (eds.). Cooperative Breeding in Mammals. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. P.267–301.
• Lacey E.A. & Sherman P.W. 2007. The ecology of sociality in rodents // Wolff J.O. & Sherman P.W. (eds.). Rodent Societies: An Ecological & Evolutionary Perspective. Chicago: Chicago Univ. Press. P.243–254.
• Lonstein J.S. & De Vries G.J. 1999. Comparison of the parental behavior of pair-bonded female and male prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) // Physiology & Behavior. Vol.66. P.33–40.
• McCarty R. & Southwick C.H. 1977. Patterns of parental care in two cricetid rodents, Onychomys torridus and Peromyscus leucopus // Animal Behaviour. Vol.25. P.945–948.
• McGuire B. & Bemis W.E. 2007. Parental care // Wolff J.O. & Sherman P.W. (eds.). Rodent Societies: An Ecological & Evolutionary Perspective. Chicago: Chicago Univ. Press. P.231–242.
• McGuire B. & Novak M. 1984. A comparison of maternal behaviour in the meadow vole (Mictotus pennsylvanicus), prairie vole (M. ochrogaster) and pine vole (M. pinetorum) // Animal Behaviour. Vol.32. P.1132–1141.
• Nunes S. 2007. Dispersal and philopatry // Wolff J.O. & Sherman P.W. (eds.). Rodent Societies: An Ecological & Evolutionary Perspective. Chicago: Chicago Univ. Press. P.150–162.
• Salo A.L. & French J.A. 1989. Early experience, reproductive success, and development of parental behaviour in Mongolian gerbils // // Animal Behaviour. Vol.38. P.693–702.
• Schradin C. & Pillay N. 2005. The influence of the father on offspring development in the striped mouse // Behavioral Ecology. Vol.16. P.450–455.
• Sokal R.R. & Rohlf F.J. 1995. Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research. 3rd ed. NY: Freeman and Co. 582 p.
• Solomon N.G. 1991. Current indirect fitness benefits associated with philopatry in juvenile prairie voles // Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. Vol.29. P.277–282.
• Solomon, N.G. 1993. Body size and social preferences of male and female prairie vole, Microtus ochrogaster // Animal Behaviour. Vol.45. P.1031–1033.
• Solomon N.G. 2003. A reexamination of factors influencing philopatry in rodents // Journal of Mammalogy. Vol.84. P.1182–1197.
• Solomon N.G. & Keane B. 2007. Reproductive strategies in female rodents // Wolff J.O. & Sherman P.W. (eds.). Rodent Societies: An Ecological & Evolutionary Perspective. Chicago: Chicago Univ. Press. P.42–56.
• Trivers R.L. 1972. Parental investment and sexual selection // Campbell B. (ed.). Sexual selection and descent of man. Chicago: Aldine. P.139–179.
• Wang Z.X. & Novak M.A. 1994a. Alloparental care and the influence of father presence on juvenile prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster // Animal Behaviour. Vol.47. P.282–288.
• Wang Z.X. & Novak M.A. 1994b. Parental care and litter development in primiparous and multiparous prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) // Journal of Mammalogy. Vol.75. P.18–23.
• Wolff J.O. 1994. More on juvenile dispersal in mammals // Oikos. Vol.71. P.349–352.
• Wynne-Edwards K.E. & Lisk R.D. 1989. Differential effects of paternal presence on pup survival in two species of dwarf hamsters (Phodopus sungorus and Phodopus campbelli) // Physiology & Behavior. Vol.45. P.465–469.
• Xia X. & Millar J.S. 1988. Paternal behavior by Peromyscus leucopus in enclosures // Canadian Journal of Zoology. Vol.66. P.1184–1187.
• Ylönen H. & Viitala J. 1985. Social organization of an enclosed winter population of the bank vole Clethrionomys glareolus // Annales Zoologici Fennici. Vol.22. P.353–358.
• Zorenko T.A. 1979. [The population structure of the common vole Microtus arvalis Pall. // Population dynamics and behavior of vertebrates in Latvian Republic.] Riga. P.79–101. [In Russian]

Download PDF