Introductory
WILDLIFE SPECIES: Perognathus parvus | Great Basin Pocket Mouse 



ABBREVIATION : 
PEPA

COMMON NAMES : 
   Great Basin pocket mouse


TAXONOMY : 
The scientific name of the Great Basin pocket mouse is Perognathus
parvus (Peale).  It is in the family Heteromyidae [18,19,21,26].
Subspecies of the Great Basin pocket mouse are:

P. p. bullatus Durrant and Lee
P. p. clarus Goldman
P. p. columbianus Merriam
P. p. idahoensis Goldman
P. p. laingi Anderson
P. p. lordi (Gray)
P. p. mollipilosus Coues [18,21]
P. p. olivaceus Merriam
P. p. parvus (Peale) [21]
P. p. trumbullensis Benson
P. p. yakimensis Broadbooks [18,21]

Sulentich [41] and Genoways and Brown [18] classify the yellow-eared
pocket mouse as P. p. xanthonus Grinell, a subspecies of the Great
pocket mouse.  However, Jones and others [26] classify the yellow-eared
pocket mouse as a distinct species, P. xanthonotus (Grinnell).


ORDER : 
Rodentia

CLASS : 
Mammal

FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : 
No special status

OTHER STATUS : 
The Great Basin pocket mouse has been assigned a state rank of S2* by
the Montana Natural Heritage Program [37].

*imperiled because of rarity or other factors making it very vulnerable to
 extinction


COMPILED BY AND DATE : 
C. L. Bushey, 1987


LAST REVISED BY AND DATE : 
Janet L. Howard, November 1996


AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : 
Howard, Janet L. 1996; Bushey, C. L. 1987. Perognathus parvus. In: Remainder of Citation

WILDLIFE DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
WILDLIFE SPECIES: Perognathus parvus | Great Basin Pocket Mouse 



GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : 
The Great Basin pocket mouse occurs in the Columbia River and Great
basins and adjacent lands.  It is distributed from south-central British
Columbia and eastern Washington south to southeastern California,
Nevada, and northern Arizona and east to southeastern Montana and
Wyoming [3,43].  Distribution of subspecies is [18,21]:

Perognathus parvus bullatus:  central and east-central Utah
P. p. clarus:  extreme southwestern Montana; southeastern Idaho;
   extreme north-central Utah; extreme southwestern Wyoming
P. p. columbianus:  central and southern Washington
P. p. idahoensis:  south-central Idaho
P. p. laingi:  south-central British Columbia
P. p. lordi:  extreme south-central Bristish Columbia; central and
   eastern Washington; northwestern Idaho
P. p. mollipilosus:  south-central Oregon; north-central and
   northeastern California 
P. p. olivaceus:  most of Nevada; eastern California; extreme
   southeastern Oregon; southern Idaho; western Colorado; most widely
   distributed subspecies
P. p. parvus:  southeastern Washington; central and eastern Oregon
P. p. trumbullensis:  southern Colorado; northern Arizona
P. p. yakimensis:  south-central Washington

The yellow-eared pocket mouse occurs on the eastern slope of the
Tehachipi Mountains in Kern County, California [21,43].  It is not
certain whether its distribution is disjunct or joins that of P. parvus
olivaceus [18].


ECOSYSTEMS : 
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES30 Desert shrub
FRES34 Chaparral-mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon-juniper
FRES36 Mountawin grasslands


STATES : 


    
AZ
    
CA
    
CO
    
ID
    
MT
    
NV
    
OR
    
UT
    
WA
    
WY






    
BC




BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS : 
    5  Columbia Plateau
    6  Upper Basin and Range
    7  Lower Basin and Range
    8  Northern Rocky Mountains
    9  Middle Rocky Mountains
   10  Wyoming Basin
   12  Colorado Plateau


KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS : 
   K010  Ponderosa shrub forest
   K011  Western ponderosa forest
   K023  Juniper-pinyon woodland
   K034  Montane chaparral
   K038  Great Basin sagebrush
   K040  Saltbush-greasewood
   K041  Creosotebush
   K050  Fescue-wheatgrass
   K051  Wheatgrass-bluegrass
   K055  Sagebrush steppe


SAF COVER TYPES : 
   237  Interior ponderosa pine
   238  Western juniper
   239  Pinyon-juniper
   247  Jeffrey pine


SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : 
   101  Bluebunch wheatgrass
   102  Idaho fescue
   104  Antelope bitterbrush-bluebunch wheatgrass
   105  Antelope bitterbrush-Idaho fescue
   106  Bluegrass scabland
   107  Western juniper/big sagebrush/bluebunch wheatgrass
   109  Ponderosa pine shrubland
   110  Ponderosa pine-grassland
   210  Bitterbrush
   211  Creosotebush scrub
   212  Blackbush
   301  Bluebunch wheatgrass-blue grama
   302  Bluebunch wheatgrass-Sandberg bluegrass
   303  Bluebunch wheatgrass-western wheatgrass
   304  Idaho fescue-bluebunch wheatgrass
   305  Idaho fescue-Richardson needlegrass
   306  Idaho fescue-slender wheatgrass
   307  Idaho fescue-threadleaf sedge
   309  Idaho fescue-western wheatgrass
   311  Rough fescue-bluebunch wheatgrass
   312  Rough fescue-Idaho fescue
   314  Big sagebrush-bluebunch wheatgrass
   315  Big sagebrush-Idaho fescue
   316  Big sagebrush-rough fescue
   317  Bitterbrush-bluebunch wheatgrass
   318  Bitterbrush-Idaho fescue
   320  Black sagebrush-bluebunch wheatgrass
   321  Black sagebrush-Idaho fescue
   323  Shrubby cinquefoil-rough fescue
   401  Basin big sagebrush
   402  Mountain big sagebrush
   403  Wyoming big sagebrush
   405  Black sagebrush
   406  Low sagebrush
   407  Stiff sagebrush
   408  Other sagebrush types
   412  Juniper-pinyon woodland
   413  Gambel oak
   414  Salt desert shrub
   501  Saltbush-greasewood
   506  Creosotebush-bursage
   504  Juniper-pinyon pine woodland


PLANT COMMUNITIES : 
The Great Basin pocket mouse occupies steppes and open, arid shrublands
and woodlands.  It most commonly occurs in sagebrush (Artemisia spp.),
shadscale (Atriplex confertifolia), and other desert shrub, and in
pinyon-juniper (Pinus-Juniperus spp.) woodland.  On the eastern slope of
the Cascade Range and the Sierra Nevada, it occurs in ponderosa pine (P.
ponderosa) and Jeffrey pine (P. jefferyi) woodlands [18].  Riparian
zones may have larger concentrations of Great Basin pocket mice than
upland areas [8,9].


REFERENCES : 
NO-ENTRY

BIOLOGICAL DATA AND HABITAT REQUIREMENTS
WILDLIFE SPECIES: Perognathus parvus | Great Basin Pocket Mouse 



TIMING OF MAJOR LIFE HISTORY EVENTS : 
In late fall and winter, Great Basin pocket mice remain in their burrows
in a state of torpor [33,34].  They emerge from their burrows and mate
in early spring [33,34,43].  Males emerge slightly before females.  In
south-central Washington, Great Basin pocket mice emerged from March to
April [23].  Prebreeding enlargement of ovaries and testes begins in
winter in the complete darkness of the burrow.  Following emergence from
the burrow, the lengthening photoperiod of spring apparently triggers
final enlargement and development of gonads for breeding [27].  Access
to succulent green vegetation in spring may enhance reproductive success
of females.  Captive female Great Basin pocket mice from eastern
Washingon fed lettuce and seeds had significantly larger ovaries than
control females fed only seeds.  Great Basin pocket mice remain
reproductively active through summer.  Females produce one or two
litters per year.  Most first litters are delivered in May and second
litters in August [38,43].  Reports of average litter size have ranged
from 3.9 in south-central Washington [38] to 5.6 in Nevada [20].
First-litter subadults first leave the natal burrow in early summer;
subadults from the second litter first emerge in fall.  In a 2-year
study in south-central Washington, first-litter subadults first emerged
in June, and second-litter subadults first emerged in October (1974) and
November (1975) [23].

As it signals the beginning of the breeding season, photoperiod may
often signal its end.  In the laboratory, an artificial short day-long
night summer photoperiod caused gonadal shrinkage in Great Basin pocket
mice.  A favorable diet apparently overrides this effect, however,
extending the breeding season.  In nature, Great Basin pocket mice
remain reproductively active through fall in years of favorable plant
production.  Juveniles typically breed in their second year, but
first-litter individuals may first reach breeding condition before
winter when plant productivity is high [27].


PREFERRED HABITAT : 
Great Basin pocket mice occupy open, arid terrain.  They seek friable
soil of a variety of textures for burrowing [5,22,42].

Home ranges of 7,060 to 9,630 square feet (656-895 sq m) have been
reported for Great Basin pocket mice in British Columbia.  Males may
have larger home ranges than females.  Average home ranges reported from
south-central Washington are 23,030 square feet (2,140 sq m) and 33,640
square feet (3,125 sq m) for adult males and 15,564 square feet (1,446
sq m) for adult females [38].  In big sagebrush habitat on the Malheur
National Wildlife Refuge, Oregon, home ranges of adult males were
significantly greater (p < 0.001) than home ranges of females.
Reproductively active adult males had significantly (p < 0.05) larger
home ranges than adult males with unenlarged testes.  In black
greasewood (Sarcobatus vermiculatus) habitat, however, there were no
significant differences between male and female home ranges or between
home ranges of reproductive and nonreproductive adult males [14].


COVER REQUIREMENTS : 
Great Basin pocket mice are nocturnal and use burrows for daytime cover.
They also use burrows during periods of winter and summer torpor
[30,32,38,43].  The winter burrow consists of a 3- to 6-foot- (0.9-1.8 m-)
deep tunnel leading to a chamber lined with dry vegetation.  The
summer burrow is shallow.  Except for mothers with young, the burrow is
occupied by a single individual [43].


FOOD HABITS : 
Great Basin pocket mice consume primarily seeds, but eat some green
vegetation [33,34].  Prior to production of seeds, they also consume
insects [11].  Great Basin pocket mice do not use free water [36]; they
metabolize water from food [43].  Pocket mice (Perognathus spp.) and
other heteromyids are scatterhoarders:  They cache seeds in shallow
depressions and cover the seeds with soil.  The seeds are primarily
those of grass species, and some preferred forb species.  Indian
ricegrass (Oryzopsis hymenoides) [29], cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum),
Russian-thistle (Salsola kali), [38], antelope bitterbrush (Purshia
tridentata) [16,43], pigweed (Amaranthus spp.), and mustard (Brassica
spp.) [43] seeds are important Great Basin pocket mouse food items.  In
productive years, cheatgrass seeds formed a major portion of the diet of
Great Basin pocket mice in southeastern Washington [38].

Seeds of medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) were not used by Great
Basin pocket mice in Lassen County, California, and areas with heavy
medusahead invasion were avoided [29].

Estimated seed intake of a Great Basin pocket mouse is from 4 to 10
percent of total body weight daily.  Assuming a wholly cheatgrass diet,
an individual requires 870 to 1,000 seeds per day in spring and summer,
and about 750 seeds per day in fall.  Estimated daily maintenance energy
requirement ranges from a winter low of 2.4 kilocalories (males) and 2.6
kilocalories (females) to a high of 7.0 kilocalories (males) and 6.6
kilocalories (females) in spring.  A total of about 1.8 to 2.1 ounces
(50-60 g) of seed must be cached to meet the winter energy requirement
[38].  To conserve energy when food is scarce in summer, Great Basin
pocket mice often enter a state of torpor that lasts a few hours
[23,38].

Great Basin pocket mice are fairly successful at finding buried seed
caches, even those buried by other individuals.  In a laboratory
experiment, Great Basin pocket mice found Indian ricegrass seeds 17.5
percent of the time when researchers cached seeds 1.3 centimeters below
ground; 42.5 percent of the time when seeds were cached 0.6 centimeter
below ground; and 100 percent of the time when seeds were scattered on
the soil surface [25].  


PREDATORS : 
Owls (Tytonidae and Strigidae) [43], including northern saw-whet owls
(Aegolius acadicus) [8] and burrowing owls (Speotyto cunicularia) [24],
hawks (Accipitridae) [43], coyotes (Canis latrans) [12,40], foxes (Vulpes
and Urocyon spp.), weasels and skunks (Mustelidae), and snakes
(Serpentes) [43] prey on Great Basin pocket mice.


MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : 
As scatterhoarders, Great Basin pocket mice and other heteromyids have
great ecological importance.  Some native desert plant species including
Indian ricegrass, antelope bitterbrush, and palo verde (Cercidium
microphyllum) have no seed appendanges to facilitate dispersal, and
apparently require heteromyids for seed dispersal [29].  Many seed
caches of these granivores are not consumed, and unconsumed seed in
caches has a greater probability of germinating and establishing than
does uncached seed.  McAdoo and Klebenow [32] found that Indian
ricegrass seeds from scatterhoards often had 100 percent germination.
This is probably because only seeds with filled seedcoats were cached,
and because seedcoats are often cracked and embryos germinate more
easily when seeds are handled by heteromyids.  Furthermore,
scatterhoards are not vulnerable to bird and ant granivores [29].

Schreiber [38] concluded that Great Basin pocket mice probably do not
reduce cheatgrass importance in southeastern Washington even though they
consume large numbers of cheatgrass seeds.  Surviving cheatgrass plants
have reduced competition for soil nutrients and water, and respond with
increased seed production.

Disturbance tends to favor Great Basin pocket mice, especially when the
disturbance favors growth of herbaceous species.  In Oregon, Great Basin
pocket mouse populations were greater in logged than in unlogged forest
[4].  In southern Utah, populations were larger in pinyon-juniper
(Pinus-Juniperus spp.) chained and seeded to grasses than in untreated
pinyon-juniper [1].  Grass seeding attracts Great Basin pocket mice to
scattered seed and later, to new herbaceous growth [2].

Light- to moderate-intensity livestock grazing apparently does not
reduce Great Basin pocket mouse numbers.  In Nevada, populations were
actually larger in riparian zones grazed by cattle than in ungrazed
riparian zones [9].  In northwestern Nevada, Oldemeyer and Allen-Johnson
[35] found no significant differences between in Great Basin pocket
mouse abundance on ungrazed sites and on an allotment subjected to
a light-to-moderate-use deferred grazing system.


REFERENCES : 

FIRE EFFECTS AND USE
WILDLIFE SPECIES: Perognathus parvus | Great Basin Pocket Mouse 



DIRECT FIRE EFFECTS ON ANIMALS : 
Fire has little direct effect on fossorial mammals in their burrows
[22].  Since Great Basin pocket mice are mostly active at night at all
times of the year, and tend to aestivate during the hot, dry periods
when wildfire usually occurs, fire probably has little direct impact on
Great Basin pocket mice.


HABITAT RELATED FIRE EFFECTS : 
Great Basin pocket mice tend to converge on recent burns.  They were
adundant in early stages of plant succession following wildfire in a big
sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) community in Washoe County, Nevada.
Great Basin pocket mice comprised 67 percent of all rodents present on
burned sites and 55 percent of all rodents present on unburned sites
(averaged over postfire years 1-3) [29].  In a short-term study in Lava
Beds National Park, California,  Great Basin pocket mice were most
adundant on burned sites following June prescribed burning of a western
juniper (Juniperus occidentalis)-antelope bitterbrush-curlleaf mountain
mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius) community.  During the first 2
postfire months, 26 Great Basin pocket mice were trapped on the burn and
16 were trapped on the unburned control.  By September, Great Basin
pocket mouse use of burned and unburned areas was about equal (13 and 12
trappings, respectively) [15].

Great Basin pocket mouse populations can increase greatly when fire is
followed by favorable precipitation the next growing season.  A wildfire
in pristine big sagebrush/bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata)
on 13 August, 1973, was followed by above-average precipitation (330 mm
in 1974 compared to 120 mm in 1973) and high plant productivity in 1974.
The Great Basin pocket mouse population had been censused prior to the
wildfire.  The numer of individuals trapped on transects in 1973 and 1974
was [22]:
                                     
        1973             1974
     __________________________
     June:  20*       June:  15
      Oct:   4         Oct: 150
      Nov:   0         Nov: 130
     __________________________
     *prefire census 

Prescribed fire apparently slightly reduced Great Basin pocket mouse
adundance in a singleleaf pinyon-Utah juniper (Pinus monophylla-
Juniperus osteosperma) community in east-central Nevada.  Average number
of Great Basin pocket mice caught on transects was [31]:

                                             Burn 
                    Burned     Unburned     ecotone                   
___________________________________________________
postfire year 1      0.5         0.8          ---
postfire year 2      1.3         1.8          1.3
___________________________________________________

Cheatgrass:  Fire in cheatgrass can favor Great Basin pocket mice when
fire is followed by above-average precipitation.  On the Columbia River
plain of south-central Washington, Brandt and Rickard [6] found Great
Basin pocket mouse numbers were greater in recently burned areas (3
years since wildfire) dominated almost exclusively by cheatgrass than in
big sagebrush-cheatgrass areas.  Great Basin pocket mouse numbers were
greatest, however, in antelope bitterbrush-Indian ricegrass communities.
Numbers were probably greatest in the native plant community because
cheatgrass production is unpredictable.  Although it is often high, it
can be very low in dry years.  Gano and Rickard [16] found Great Basin
pocket mice had greater long-term survival rates in shrub-native grass
stands than in cheatgrass stands.  Following a 1963 wildfire that burned
10,095 acres (4,038 ha) of an antelope bitterbrush-big sagebrush
community in south-central Washington, and a 1973 repeat wildfire that
consumed even more acreage, burned areas become dominated by cheatgrass.
From 1974 to 1979, a Great Basin pocket mouse population on the burn
showed greater year-to-year fluctuation than a population on the
unburned control.  By spring 1978, Great Basin pocket mice were
estimated to be 3 times more adundant on unburned areas than on burned
areas.  In 1978, following a year of low plant productivity due to
drought, 15 Great Basin pocket mice were trapped on the unburned
control, while only one individual was trapped on the burn [16].

Eight years after wildfire on the Doyle Wildlife Management Area near
Reno, Nevada, the burned area was dominated by cheatgrass, skeleton weed
(Lygodesmia spinosa), buckwheat (Eriogonum nudum), and desert peach
(Prunus andersonii).  Unburned areas were dominated by antelope
bitterbrush, big sagebrush, and desert peach.  Great Basin pocket mouse
density was greater on unburned areas than on burned areas.  Fifteen
individuals were trapped on an unburned area, while only one individual
was trapped on the burn [10].



FIRE USE : 



REFERENCES : 
NO-ENTRY

REFERENCES
WILDLIFE SPECIES: Perognathus parvus | Great Basin Pocket Mouse 



REFERENCES : 

 .  Baker, M. F.; Frischknecht, N. C. 1973. Small mammals increase on
       recently cleared and seeded juniper rangeland. Journal of Range
       Management. 26(2): 101-103.  [5754]

 .  Benson, Patrick C. 1979. Land use and wildlife with emphasis on raptors.
       [Ogden, UT]: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
       Intermountain Region. 32 p. On file with: U.S. Department of
       Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire
       Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT.  [17208]

 .  Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals,
       reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's
       associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO:
       U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p. 
       [434]

 .  Black, H. C.; Hooven, E. H. 1974. Response of small-mammal communities
       to habitat changes in western Oregon. In: Black, Hugh C., ed. Wildlife
       and forest management in the Pacific Northwest: Proceedings of a
       symposium; 1973 September 11-12; Corvallis, OR. Corvallis, OR: Oregon
       State University, School of Forestry, Forest Research Laboratory:
       177-186.  [8005]

 .  Black, Hal L.; Frischknecht, Neil C. 1971. Relative abundance of mice on
       seeded sagebrush-grass range in relation to grazing. Res. Note INT-147.
       Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
       Forest and Range Experiment Station. 8 p.  [25566]

 .  Brandt, C. A.; Rickard, W. H. 1994. Alien taxa in the North American
       shrub-steppe four decades after cessation of livestock grazing and
       cultivation agriculture. Biological Conservation. 68(2): 95-105. 
       [23456]

 .  Brown, James H.; Heske, Edward J. 1990. Control of a desert-grassland
       transition by a keystone rodent guild. Science. 250: 1705-1707.  [25569]

 .  Cannings, Richard J. 1987. The breeding biology of northern saw-whet
       owls in southern British Columbia. In: Nero, Robert W.; Clark, Richard
       J.; Knapton, Richard J.; Hamre, R. H., eds. Biology and conservation of
       northern forest owls: Symposium proceedings; 1987 February 3-7;
       Winnipeg, MB. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-142. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department
       of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
       Experiment Station: 193-198.  [17939]

 .  Clary, Warren P.; Medin, Dean E. 1992. Vegetation, breeding bird, and
       small mammal biomass in two high-elevation sagebrush riparian habitats.
       In: Clary, Warren P.; McArthur, E. Durant; Bedunah, Don; Wambolt, Carl
       L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on ecology and management of
       riparian shrub communities; 1991 May 29-31; Sun Valley, ID. Gen. Tech.
       Rep. INT-289. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
       Intermountain Research Station: 100-110.  [19103]

.  Clements, Charlie D.; Young, James A. 1996. Influence of rodent
       predation on antelope bitterbrush seedlings. Journal of Range
       Management. 49(1): 31-34.  [26571]

.  Dunigan, P. F. X., Jr.; Lei, W.; Rickard, W. H. 1980. Pocket mouse
       population response to winter precipitation and drought. Northwest
       Science. 54(4): 289-295.  [26866]

.  Edwards, Loren Lee. 1975. Home range of the coyote in southern Idaho.
       Pocatello, ID: Idaho State University. 36 p. Thesis.  [21493]

.  Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
       Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p.  [905]

.  Feldhamer, George A. 1979. Home range relationships of three rodent
       species in southeast Oregon. Murrelet. 60: 50-57.  [26867]

.  Frenzel, R. W.; Starkey E. E.; Black, H. C. 1979. Effects of prescribed
       burning on small-mammal communities in Lava Beds National Monument,
       California. In: Linn, Robert M., ed. Proceedings, 1st conference on
       scientific research in the National Parks: Vol. 1; 1976 November 9-12;
       New Orleans, LA. National Park Service Transactions and Proceedings No.
       5. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park
       Service: 287-292.  [970]

.  Gano, K. A.; Rickard, W. H. 1982. Small mammals of a
       bitterbrush-cheatgrass community. Northwest Science. 56(1): 1-7.  [990]

.  Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others].
       1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range
       ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
       Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p.  [998]

.  Williams, Daniel F.; Genoways, Hugh H.; Braun, Janet K. 1993. Taxonomy.
       In: Genoways, Hugh H.; Brown, James H., eds. Biology of the
       Heteromyidae. Special Publication No. 10. [Place of publication
       unknown]: The American Society of Mammalogists: 38-196.  [26868]

.  Hafner, John C.; Hafner, Mark S. 1983. Evolutionary relationships of
       Heteromyid rodents. Great Basin Naturalist. 7: 3-29.  [26869]

.  Hall, E. Raymond. 1946. Mammals of Nevada. Berkeley, CA: University of
       California Press. 710 p.  [13688]

.  Hall, E. Raymond. 1981. The mammals of North America. 2nd ed. Volume I.
       New York: John Wiley & Sons. 600 p.  [26447]

.  Hedlund, J. D.; Rickard, W. H. 1981. Wildfire and the short-term
       response of small mammals inhabiting a sagebrush-bunchgrass community.
       Murrelet. 62: 10-14.  [1114]

.  Hedlund, J. D.; Rogers, L. E. 1980. Great Basin pocket mice (Perognathus
       parvus) in the vicinity of radioactive waste management areas. Northwest
       Science. 54(2): 153-159.  [26871]

.  Henny, Charles J.; Blus, Lawrence J. 1981. Artificial burrows provide
       new insight into burrowing owl nesting biology. Raptor Research. 15(3):
       82-85.  [26112]

.  Johnson, Terrell K.; Jorgensen, Clive D. 1981. Ability of desert rodents
       to find buried seeds. Journal of Range Management. 34(4): 312-314. 
       [5059]

.  Jones, J. Knox, Jr.; Hoffmann, Robert S.; Rice, Dale W.; [and others].
       1992. Revised checklist of North American mammals north of Mexico, 1991.
       Occasional Papers No. 146. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech University, The
       Museum. 6 p.  [22160]

.  Kenagy, G. J.; Barnes, B. M. 1984. Environmental and endogenous control
       of reproductive function in the Great Basin pocket mouse Perognathus
       parvus. Biology of Reproduction. 31: 637-645.  [26870]

.  Kuchler, A. W. 1964. United States [Potential natural vegetation of the
       conterminous United States]. Special Publication No. 36. New York:
       American Geographical Society. 1:3,168,000; colored.  [3455]

.  Longland, William S. 1994. Seed use by desert granivores. In: Monsen,
       Stephen B.; Kitchen, Stanley G., compilers. Proceedings--ecology and
       management of annual rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech.
       Rep. INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
       Service, Intermountain Research Station: 233-237.  [24288]

.  Maser, Chris; Thomas, Jack Ward; Anderson, Ralph G. 1984. Wildlife
       habitats in managed rangelands--the Great Basin of southeastern Oregon:
       The relat. of terrestrial vertebrates to plant communities: Part 2.
       Appendices. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-172. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of
       Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range
       Experiment Station; Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior,
       Bureau of Land Management. 237 p.  [1544]

.  Mason, Robert B. 1981. Response of birds and rodents to controlled
       burning in pinyon-juniper woodlands. Reno, NV: University of Nevada. 55
       p. Thesis.  [1545]

.  McAdoo, J. Kent; Klebenow, Donald A. 1979. Native faunal relationships
       in sagebrush ecosystems. In: The sagebrush ecosystem: a symposium:
       Proceedings; 1978 April; Logan, UT. Logan, UT: Utah State University,
       College of Natural Resources: 50-61.  [1562]

.  O'Farrell, Michael J. 1978. Home range dynamics of rodents in a
       sagebrush community. Journal of Mammalogy. 59(4): 657-668.  [1788]

.  O'Farrell, Thomas P.; Olson, Richard J.; Gilbert, Richard O.; Hedlund,
       John D. 1975. A population of Great Basin pocket mice, Perognathus
       parvus, in the shrub-steppe of south-central Washington. Ecological
       Monographs. 45: 1-28.  [26872]

.  Oldemeyer, John L.; Allen-Johnson, Lydia R. 1988. Cattle grazing and
       small mammals on the Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada. In:
       Szaro, Robert C.; Severson, Kieth E.; Patton, David R., technical
       coordinators. Management of amphibians, reptiles, and small mammals in
       North America: Proceedings of the symposium; 1988 July 19-21; Flagstaff,
       AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-166. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
       Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
       Station: 391-398.  [7128]

.  Price, M. V.; Brown, J. H. 1983. Patterns of morphology and resource use
       in North American desert rodent communities. Great Basin Naturalist
       Memoirs. 7: 117-134.  [25706]

.  Reichel, J. D. 1996. Montana animal species of special concern.
       [Unpublished list]. Helena, MT: Montana Natural Heritage Program. 11 p. 
       [26873]

.  Schreiber, R. Kent. 1978. Bioengergetics of the Great Basin pocket
       mouse, Perognathus parvus. Acta Theriologica. 23(32): 469-487.  [26874]

.  Shiflet, Thomas N., ed. 1994. Rangeland cover types of the United
       States. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management. 152 p.  [23362]

.  Springer, Joseph Tucker. 1982. Movement patterns of coyotes in south
       central Washington. Journal of Wildlife Management. 46(1): 191-200. 
       [25117]

.  Sulentich, J. M. 1983. The systematics and evolution of the Perognathus
       parvus species group in southern California. Long Beach, CA: California
       State University. 85 p. Thesis.  [27111]

.  Verner, Jared; Boss, Allan S., tech. coords. 1980. California wildlife
       and their habitats: western Sierra Nevada. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-37.
       Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific
       Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 439 p.  [10237]

.  Whitaker, John O., Jr. 1980. National Audubon Society field guide to
       North American mammals. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. 745 p.  [25194]

Related categories for Wildlife Species: Perognathus parvus | Great Basin Pocket Mouse