|25 Year Data Files|
|25 Year Data - Microtus Main Menu|
|25 Year Procedures | Study Sites | Trapping Sessions/months | Microtus Data Files | Blarina Data Files|
Owing to the length and complexity of the study, the same one thousand number sequence was used several times during the course of the study. When we reached _999 on one sequence in a site, we selected another one thousand sequence that was not in use elsewhere in the study, nor had been used for sufficient time that no animals from that sequence marked in another site would still be alive. Even though we had to use the same sequence subsequently in the same site, the repeated one thousand sequence was changed to a ten thousand sequence so that analytical models would not thing the same number represented the same animal, even though several years later. Note also a lot animals lost toes naturally, so we often had numbers representing one toe missing (1,2,4,7, 10,20,40,70, 100,200,400,700, 1,000, 2,000, 4,000, 7,000) appearing more than once in a site and when obviously not recaptured and previously marked animals. We tried to determine which ones were "naturally" numbered and assign them a new number, or indicate represented new recruits.
During the first few months of the study we used a sequential numbering system with all sites (Alf 01, BG 06, and TG TR 12) in the one number sequence until we got into the 2,000s. Then saw this would not work, so went to assigning a separate one thousand sequence to each study site. Except that for the original BG 06 (entire site) site we used the same sequence when the site was divided into north (BG 09) and south (BG 10, 11) sites. Likewise, we used the same sequence for the various "sites" involving the east and west sites in the Phillip Tract tallgrass habitat.
Here is the number sequences that were used and in what sites and approximately times (when animals were marked, not when all animals with that number finally disappeared from the site in which marked):
l979 Comparisons of population demography of Microtus ochrogaster and M. pennsylvanicus . Acta Theriol., 24:3l9-349 (L. Getz, L. Verner, F. Cole, J. Hofmann and D. Avalos)