Fogle, Chad L.

Fogle, Ned E.

English

ScholarWorks@UARK

Journal of the Arkansas Academy of ScienceVolume 13 Article 101959The Ecological Relationship Between theOccurrence of Squirrel Leaf-Nests in DifferentTypes of Oak Forest HabitatsNed E. FogleUniversity of Arkansas, FayettevilleChad L. FogleUniversity of Arkansas, FayettevilleFollow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaasPart of the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology CommonsThis article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able toread, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking priorpermission from the publisher or the author.This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academyof Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact scholar@uark.edu, ccmiddle@uark.edu.Recommended CitationFogle, Ned E. and Fogle, Chad L. (1959) "The Ecological Relationship Between the Occurrence of Squirrel Leaf-Nests in DifferentTypes of Oak Forest Habitats," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 13 , Article 10.Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol13/iss1/10THE ECOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THEOCCURRENCE OF SQUIRREL LEAF-NESTSINDIFFERENT TYPES OFOAK FOREST HABITATSNed E. FogleChad L. FogleUniversity of ArkansasIIn the extensive upland and floodplain, hardwoodorests of Arkansas are found tht fox squirrelSoiurus niger Linnaeus) and the £ray squirrelSciurus carolinens is Graelin), probably two of theost sought after game animals in the state.It was the opinion that there was a very notice—ble relationship between the different types ofpland mixed-oak forest and the numbers of fox andray squirrel leaf-nests, 1which may be used as anndex to squirrel populat ion(l), appearing therein,t was recognized that here was an unusual oppor-unity of study. In order to more closely corre-ate this theory, an attempt was made in the for-ulation of this paper: a comparative study betweenhe woody vegetation of two mixed-oak forest plots,ne being in xeric upland forest and the other inmesic type situation, with the corresponding oc-urrence of squirrel leaf-nests in these areas.LOCATION AND SIZEThe areas chosen for this study were two 50 acreplots located (Fig. l) in the Lake Wedington areaof Washington and southern Benton counties, Arkan-sas. These areas had been already established andmapped previously fora squirrel leaf-nest study(3)and were labeled Areas No. 1 and No. 4. For theThe writers wish to express their thanks to Dr.E. E. Dale, Assistant Professor of Botany, for hisvery helpful suggestions in the prepara tion of thispaper, to the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission forthe squirrel leaf-nest census figures, and to allothers who gave helpful information.I^Nests constructed of leaves or sticks in limbs,t in cavities of trees.75Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 195976ARKANSAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCEiIIIITwin MountainsToSiloam SpringsBenton Co*Washington Co.Fayette-ville? WedingtonTo LincolnFigure 1« A map of the Wedington area inWashington and southern Benton Counties,Arkansas, showing the location of Areas Aand B.76Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol13/iss1/10SQUIRREL LEAF NESTSturpose of this paper, "A" has been substituted foro. 1 and "B" for No. 4, and all future mention tohese areas will be Areas A and B.METHODSA systematic— random plan was used in samplingthe trees in the areas by first mapping off therea into plots and then randomly seleoting theransects from each plot. The method of samplingmployed in this study was the "arm-length tran-ect" method, a method which makes use of ones out—tretched arms. All trees within reach while pac-ing off sixty feet are recorded; the result beingone sample quadrat, 6 X 60 feet. This method wasselected because of its ease and resulting effici-ency. A total of sixty -one transects were sam-pled in each of the two areas.IAll trees sampled were placed into size olas-es, thus obtaining a standardization of sampling,he size classes were designated 1, 2, 3> 4, and 5as follows :Diameter Breast High (DBH)Size Classes in Inches3.6 to 6.55.6 to 9.09.1 to 15.015.1 to 20.020.1 to 25-0The data were compiled in a manner similar toethods used by Curtis and Mclntosh(2). From thisata the frequencies (number of sample plots intiich a species occurs), densities (number of in—ividuals of a given species over a given area),asal areas (amount of solid tree per acre), andmportance percentage (i.P.) (average of the rela-ive frequencies, densities, and basal areas—otal 100J&—giving an index o n the importance ofspecies in a community) of all species were de-ermined. All procedures on the oensusing of squir-el leaf-nests are outlined in "Squirrel Investi-ations"(3).77Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 195978ARKANSAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCERESULTSIt was established by the 1957 squirrel leaf-nest census that there were more leaf—nests in AreaA,with 52 nests, than inArea B which had 25 nests.In the 1958 census, Area A had 60 nests as comparedto 34 nests in Area B. When the two years wereaveraged, Area A had an average of 56 nests as com-pared with 29 .5 nests in Area B.It was found that Area A had a density of 548.5trees per acre as compared to 435»6 trees per acrein Area B. There was also a noticeable differencein total basal area in that Area A had an averageof 256.14 square feet per acre as compared to 169.IOsquare feet per acre in Area B.IOne wouldnormally assume by the above figuresat Area A would have a greater basal area becausethe higher density. This was found to be true,t when the B. A. factor (average basal area inuare feet) was calculated, it was found that theA. in size olasses 1 and 2 were the same in botheas, whereas the remaining size Classes, 3> 4,d 5, in Area A had larger B. A. factors than theme classes in Area B, thus indicating that Areahad a greater number of large trees than did AreaIAn interesting and obvious factor evident whene figures of the two areas were compared, weree dominant trees (species that control and char—terize the comraunity(4 ) ) of the areas (Table I).though some of the white oak were larger* thevious dominant of Area A, in toth density andsal area, was the black oak. When the I.P. wasloulated, it was found that the black oak had agh percentage of 33.4><o. In Area B, black oakted only a 10.4^ as oomps red to a dominant 3o.5frr post oak, which had the high density and basalea. It might also be noted here that both spe-es had the highest relative frequencies in theirspective areas.IEach area had several otherspecies which ratedgh in dominance. In Area A, white oak had an I.of 22.2 and post oak 20.1. Blackjack oak hadss than 10£& with an I. P. of 9.6. This species,w in Area A, rated very high in Area B, closelyllowing post oak with an I. P. of 29.3. Otherecies of importance, but of lesser degree in Areawere white oak with an I. P. of 11.7 and blaokk with an I. P. of 10.4. Allother species of78Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol13/iss1/1079SOOJIRREL LEAF-NESTSTABLE IrHE SPECIES OF TREES, CENSUSED FROM THE SUBJECTAREAS, SHOWING THE RELATIVE FREQUENCIES, DEN-SITIES, BASAL AREAS, AND IMPORTANT PERCENTAGESIN ORDER OF MOST DOMINANT TO LEAST DOMINANT(Species Listed in Order of Dominance )Rel. Rel. Rel.Species Freq. Dens. B. A. I. P.AREA ABlack Oak 28.9 31-5 39.7 33.4( Ctuercus velut inaLam. jite Oak 21.8Querous alba L.)st Oak 20.6Querous stellataWang.;.ackjack Oak 9«5Gtuercus marilan-dica Muench.)Dogwood 7*1Cornus florida L. )roamore 2.4Plata nus oociden-talis L.~)d Maple 2.4Acer rub rum L.).Id Black Cherry 1.4Prunus s e ro tinaEhrh. )lerican Elm 1.4Ulanus americana L.)linquapin 0.9Ca s tanea ozark-ens is A she. )'ersimraon 0.9Diospyro s virgin—26.918.0 22.223.8 15.8 20.17-6 9.611.66.9 5.11.21.4 2.4 2.1o.7 1.51.41.1 2.1 1.51.2 1.21.1i.7 1.5 1.00.2 1.01.8iana L. )|.ack HickoryCarya texana 1.4 0.7 0.5 0.9I(Sarge. ) ).a ok Gum 0.9 0.4 0.3 0.5(Nyssa sylvaticaMarshT)79Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 195980ARKANSAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCETABLE I(Continued)Rel. Rel. Rel.Species Freq. Dens. B. A. I.P.AREA BPost Oak 32.7 38.6 38.1 36.5(Quercus s tella taWanTH"Blackjack Oak 28.8(Querous marilan-dica Muench. )Vhite Oak 12.2(Ctuerous alba L. )Black Oak 11.2(Q.uercus velut inaLam. jNorthern Red Oak 8.8(Quercus borealisMichv. f. )Black Hiokory 3.4(Carya texana(SargTTlSouthern Red Oak 1.0(Quercus falcataMichx. )Winged Elm 1.0(Ulmus alataMichxTJBitternut Hickory 1.0\ Carya cord iformisiTStg.T'33.2 26.0 29.310.9 12.0 11.77.7 12.3 10.4/./7.65.9 8.01.61.8 2.30.5 0.8 0.80.5 0.8 0.80.50.9 0.810th areas were less than 10l/o in frequency, den-ity, and basal area and so were not considered asnportant in dominance in these communities.CONCLUSIONSI The difference in the size relationship and num-ers of the trees in the two areas result primarilyrom the moisture factor, influenced by slope, ele-ation, light, insulation, and evaporation. Theorest in Area A, with ravines dissecting the areaeveral different ways, is in a very moist situa-80Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol13/iss1/10SauiRREL LEAF-NESTSion located immediately adjacent to the southernnd of Lake Wedington, whereas Area B inoloses theouth peak of Twin Mountains which are locatedpproximately north of the Wedington Fire Tower,ecause of the similarity of soil composition, "botheing largely composed of a gray limestone, whichs the Boone Formation (5 )» it is felt that this isf no importance.The disturbance factor in connection with therees of the two areas is considered of no impor—a nee. This factor includes lumbering and hunting,umbering is not considered too important sinceeither area has been known to have been logged fort least the last 25 years. Hunting may have someearing although it is doubtful that any correla-ion can be made since Area A, withmore leaf—nests,as a higher hunting pressure due to being moreccessible (closer to the paved road) than is Areawhich is far back in the forest.I In Area A, there is a larger percentage of whitend blaok oak than in Area B. Besides providingarge trees that make good habitats for dens forquirrels, the white oak, particularly, producesery good mast (nut crop) which squirrels relish.With the larger trees, larger number of trees,arger variety of trees, and with an increasedariety of food, Area A begins to show some meaningn correlation to number of squirrel leaf-nests>resent. Though we could hardly point to any one'actor and infer that it is the important factor,ne could state that because o f all J f the moreavorable interacting conditions of the prevailingommunity in Area A, there would be a greater abun-ance of squirrels and hence more leaf-nests thann Area B.SUMMARYII. A comparison study was undertaken to see ifhere was a correlation between the number of squir—el leaf—nests and size and species of trees in twoifferent types of mixed oak forests; one in aesic situation and the other in a xeric type.L2. Factors such as mo isture , soil, and distur-nces were taken into consideration.3. Factors such as densities, frequencies,basal areas, and importance percentages of thetrees were compared and it was found that therewere more species, they were closer together, and81Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 195982ARKANSAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCEthey had a larger over-all basal area in Area A asopposed to Area B.4. There are approximately twice as many leaf-nests in one area (Area A) as the other (Area B).5. It vras concluded that no one faotor was re-sponsible for the difference in comparative num-bers of leaf-nests, but that the interaction of allthe conditions observed were responsible for thedifferences in the two communities; the result—Area A has a more favorable habitat for squirrelsthan Area B.LITERATURE CITEDr) Allen, D. L. October 1943. Michigan Fox Squir-rel Management, Game DivisionPub. 100, GameDiv. Dept. of Conservation, Lansing, Mich.(2) Curtis, J. T. and R. P. Mclntosh. 1951. AnUpland Forest Continuum in the Prairie-For-est Border Region of Wisconsin, Ecol. 32:4'/6-496.I) Fogle, Ned E. 30 June 1958. Squirrel Inves-tigation, Annual Report, From a Forest Gameand Cooperative Research Project, PR— W— 50—R, Jointly Sponsored by the Ark. Game andFish Commission, the Univ. of Ark., and theU. S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., Unpub.I) Oosting, Henry J. 1956. The Study of PlantCommunities, W. H. Freeman and Co., San Fran-cisco .K) Geologic Atlas of U. S. Fayetteville FolioNo. 119, Dept. of the Int., U.S. Geol. Sur.82Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol13/iss1/10

The Ecological Relationship Between the Occurrence of Squirrel Leaf-Nests in Different Types of Oak Forest Habitats

UARK (University of Arkansas )

Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 13 Article 10 1959 The Ecological Relationship Between the Occurrence of Squirrel Leaf-Nests in Different Types of Oak Forest Habitats Ned E. Fogle University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Chad L. Fogle University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas  Part of the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Fogle, Ned E. and Fogle, Chad L. (1959) "The Ecological Relationship Between the Occurrence of Squirrel Leaf-Nests in Different Types of Oak Forest Habitats," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 13 , Article 10. Available at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol13/iss1/10 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact scholar@uark.edu. THE ECOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THEOCCURRENCE OF SQUIRREL LEAF-NESTSINDIFFERENT TYPES OFOAK FOREST HABITATSNed E. FogleChad L. FogleUniversity of ArkansasIIn the extensive upland and floodplain, hardwoodorests of Arkansas are found tht fox squirrelSoiurus niger Linnaeus) and the £ray squirrelSciurus carolinens is Graelin), probably two of theost sought after game animals in the state.It was the opinion that there was a very notice—ble relationship between the different types ofpland mixed-oak forest and the numbers of fox andray squirrel leaf-nests, 1which may be used as anndex to squirrel populat ion(l), appearing therein,t was recognized that here was an unusual oppor-unity of study. In order to more closely corre-ate this theory, an attempt was made in the for-ulation of this paper: a comparative study betweenhe woody vegetation of two mixed-oak forest plots,ne being in xeric upland forest and the other inmesic type situation, with the corresponding oc-urrence of squirrel leaf-nests in these areas.LOCATION AND SIZEThe areas chosen for this study were two 50 acreplots located (Fig. l) in the Lake Wedington areaof Washington and southern Benton counties, Arkan-sas. These areas had been already established andmapped previously fora squirrel leaf-nest study(3)and were labeled Areas No. 1 and No. 4. For theThe writers wish to express their thanks to Dr.E. E. Dale, Assistant Professor of Botany, for hisvery helpful suggestions in the prepara tion of thispaper, to the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission forthe squirrel leaf-nest census figures, and to allothers who gave helpful information.I^Nests constructed of leaves or sticks in limbs,t in cavities of trees.75Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 195976ARKANSAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCEiIIIITwin MountainsToSiloam SpringsBenton Co*Washington Co.Fayette-ville? WedingtonTo LincolnFigure 1« A map of the Wedington area inWashington and southern Benton Counties,Arkansas, showing the location of Areas Aand B.76Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol13/iss1/10SQUIRREL LEAF NESTSturpose of this paper, "A" has been substituted foro. 1 and "B" for No. 4, and all future mention tohese areas will be Areas A and B.METHODSA systematic— random plan was used in samplingthe trees in the areas by first mapping off therea into plots and then randomly seleoting theransects from each plot. The method of samplingmployed in this study was the "arm-length tran-ect" method, a method which makes use of ones out—tretched arms. All trees within reach while pac-ing off sixty feet are recorded; the result beingone sample quadrat, 6 X 60 feet. This method wasselected because of its ease and resulting effici-ency. A total of sixty -one transects were sam-pled in each of the two areas.IAll trees sampled were placed into size olas-es, thus obtaining a standardization of sampling,he size classes were designated 1, 2, 3> 4, and 5as follows :Diameter Breast High (DBH)Size Classes in Inches3.6 to 6.55.6 to 9.09.1 to 15.015.1 to 20.020.1 to 25-0The data were compiled in a manner similar toethods used by Curtis and Mclntosh(2). From thisata the frequencies (number of sample plots intiich a species occurs), densities (number of in—ividuals of a given species over a given area),asal areas (amount of solid tree per acre), andmportance percentage (i.P.) (average of the rela-ive frequencies, densities, and basal areas—otal 100J&—giving an index o n the importance ofspecies in a community) of all species were de-ermined. All procedures on the oensusing of squir-el leaf-nests are outlined in "Squirrel Investi-ations"(3).77Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 195978ARKANSAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCERESULTSIt was established by the 1957 squirrel leaf-nest census that there were more leaf—nests in AreaA,with 52 nests, than inArea B which had 25 nests.In the 1958 census, Area A had 60 nests as comparedto 34 nests in Area B. When the two years wereaveraged, Area A had an average of 56 nests as com-pared with 29 .5 nests in Area B.It was found that Area A had a density of 548.5trees per acre as compared to 435»6 trees per acrein Area B. There was also a noticeable differencein total basal area in that Area A had an averageof 256.14 square feet per acre as compared to 169.IOsquare feet per acre in Area B.IOne would normally assume by the above figuresat Area A would have a greater basal area becausethe higher density. This was found to be true,t when the B. A. factor (average basal area inuare feet) was calculated, it was found that theA. in size olasses 1 and 2 were the same in botheas, whereas the remaining size Classes, 3> 4,d 5, in Area A had larger B. A. factors than theme classes in Area B, thus indicating that Areahad a greater number of large trees than did AreaIAn interesting and obvious factor evident whene figures of the two areas were compared, weree dominant trees (species that control and char—terize the comraunity(4 ) ) of the areas (Table I).though some of the white oak were larger* thevious dominant of Area A, in toth density andsal area, was the black oak. When the I.P. wasloulated, it was found that the black oak had agh percentage of 33.4><o. In Area B, black oakted only a 10.4^ as oomps red to a dominant 3o.5frr post oak, which had the high density and basalea. It might also be noted here that both spe-es had the highest relative frequencies in theirspective areas.IEach area had several other species which ratedgh in dominance. In Area A, white oak had an I.of 22.2 and post oak 20.1. Blackjack oak hadss than 10£& with an I. P. of 9.6. This species,w in Area A, rated very high in Area B, closelyllowing post oak with an I. P. of 29.3. Otherecies of importance, but of lesser degree in Areawere white oak with an I. P. of 11.7 and blaokk with an I. P. of 10.4. Allother species of78Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol13/iss1/1079SOOJIRREL LEAF-NESTSTABLE IrHE SPECIES OF TREES, CENSUSED FROM THE SUBJECTAREAS, SHOWING THE RELATIVE FREQUENCIES, DEN-SITIES, BASAL AREAS, AND IMPORTANT PERCENTAGESIN ORDER OF MOST DOMINANT TO LEAST DOMINANT(Species Listed in Order of Dominance )Rel. Rel. Rel.Species Freq. Dens. B. A. I. P.AREA ABlack Oak 28.9 31-5 39.7 33.4( Ctuercus velut inaLam. jite Oak 21.8Querous alba L.)st Oak 20.6Querous stellataWang.;.ackjack Oak 9«5Gtuercus marilan-dica Muench.)Dogwood 7*1Cornus florida L. )roamore 2.4Plata nus oociden-talis L.~)d Maple 2.4Acer rub rum L.).Id Black Cherry 1.4Prunus s e ro tinaEhrh. )lerican Elm 1.4Ulanus americana L.)linquapin 0.9Ca s tanea ozark-ens is A she. )'ersimraon 0.9Diospyro s virgin—26.918.0 22.223.8 15.8 20.17-6 9.611.66.9 5.11.21.4 2.4 2.1o.7 1.51.41.1 2.1 1.51.2 1.21.1i.7 1.5 1.00.2 1.01.8iana L. )|.ack HickoryCarya texana 1.4 0.7 0.5 0.9I(Sarge. ) ).a ok Gum 0.9 0.4 0.3 0.5(Nyssa sylvaticaMarshT)79Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 195980ARKANSAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCETABLE I(Continued)Rel. Rel. Rel.Species Freq. Dens. B. A. I.P.AREA BPost Oak 32.7 38.6 38.1 36.5(Quercus s tella taWanTH"Blackjack Oak 28.8(Querous marilan-dica Muench. )Vhite Oak 12.2(Ctuerous alba L. )Black Oak 11.2(Q.uercus velut inaLam. jNorthern Red Oak 8.8(Quercus borealisMichv. f. )Black Hiokory 3.4(Carya texana(SargTTlSouthern Red Oak 1.0(Quercus falcataMichx. )Winged Elm 1.0(Ulmus alataMichxTJBitternut Hickory 1.0\ Carya cord iformisiTStg.T'33.2 26.0 29.310.9 12.0 11.77.7 12.3 10.4/./7.65.9 8.01.61.8 2.30.5 0.8 0.80.5 0.8 0.80.50.9 0.810th areas were less than 10l/o in frequency, den-ity, and basal area and so were not considered asnportant in dominance in these communities.CONCLUSIONSIThe difference in the size relationship and num-ers of the trees in the two areas result primarilyrom the moisture factor, influenced by slope, ele-ation, light, insulation, and evaporation. Theorest in Area A, with ravines dissecting the areaeveral different ways, is in a very moist situa-80Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol13/iss1/10SauiRREL LEAF-NESTSion located immediately adjacent to the southernnd of Lake Wedington, whereas Area B inoloses theouth peak of Twin Mountains which are locatedpproximately north of the Wedington Fire Tower,ecause of the similarity of soil composition, "botheing largely composed of a gray limestone, whichs the Boone Formation (5 )» it is felt that this isf no importance.The disturbance factor in connection with therees of the two areas is considered of no impor—a nee. This factor includes lumbering and hunting,umbering is not considered too important sinceeither area has been known to have been logged fort least the last 25 years. Hunting may have someearing although it is doubtful that any correla-ion can be made since Area A, withmore leaf—nests,as a higher hunting pressure due to being moreccessible (closer to the paved road) than is Areawhich is far back in the forest.IIn Area A, there is a larger percentage of whitend blaok oak than in Area B. Besides providingarge trees that make good habitats for dens forquirrels, the white oak, particularly, producesery good mast (nut crop) which squirrels relish.With the larger trees, larger number of trees,arger variety of trees, and with an increasedariety of food, Area A begins to show some meaningn correlation to number of squirrel leaf-nests>resent. Though we could hardly point to any one'actor and infer that it is the important factor,ne could state that because o f all J f the moreavorable interacting conditions of the prevailingommunity in Area A, there would be a greater abun-ance of squirrels and hence more leaf-nests thann Area B.SUMMARYII.A comparison study was undertaken to see ifhere was a correlation between the number of squir—el leaf—nests and size and species of trees in twoifferent types of mixed oak forests; one in aesic situation and the other in a xeric type.L2. Factors such as mo isture , soil, and distur-nces were taken into consideration.3. Factors such as densities, frequencies,basal areas, and importance percentages of thetrees were compared and it was found that therewere more species, they were closer together, and81Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 195982ARKANSAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCEthey had a larger over-all basal area in Area A asopposed to Area B.4. There are approximately twice as many leaf-nests in one area (Area A) as the other (Area B).5. It vras concluded that no one faotor was re-sponsible for the difference in comparative num-bers of leaf-nests, but that the interaction of allthe conditions observed were responsible for thedifferences in the two communities; the result—Area A has a more favorable habitat for squirrelsthan Area B.LITERATURE CITEDr) Allen, D. L. October 1943. Michigan Fox Squir-rel Management, Game DivisionPub. 100, GameDiv. Dept. of Conservation, Lansing, Mich.(2) Curtis, J. T. and R. P. Mclntosh. 1951. AnUpland Forest Continuum in the Prairie-For-est Border Region of Wisconsin, Ecol. 32:4'/6-496.I)Fogle, Ned E. 30 June 1958. Squirrel Inves-tigation, Annual Report, From a Forest Gameand Cooperative Research Project, PR— W— 50—R, Jointly Sponsored by the Ark. Game andFish Commission, the Univ. of Ark., and theU. S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., Unpub.I) Oosting, Henry J. 1956. The Study of PlantCommunities, W. H. Freeman and Co., San Fran-cisco .K) Geologic Atlas of U. S. Fayetteville FolioNo. 119, Dept. of the Int., U.S. Geol. Sur.82Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 13 [1959], Art. 10https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol13/iss1/10

https://scholarworks.uark.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3201&amp;context=jaas

The Ecological Relationship Between the Occurrence of Squirrel Leaf-Nests in Different Types of Oak Forest Habitats

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ScholarWorks@UARK

UARK (University of Arkansas )