DOI: 10.5061/dryad.dz08kps2v
title: Data from: Parentage of 920 gray-sided voles (Myodes rufocanus) born in a 3-ha outdoor enclosure between September 1992 and May 1994

description: This dataset provides the estimated birth location, sex, assigned parents,
 and estimated birth and death dates of 920 gray-sided voles (Myodes
 rufocanus) born in a 3-ha outdoor enclosure in Sapporo, Japan between
 September 1992 and May 1994, as well as capture–recapture data for 30
 trapping sessions. We introduced 22 males and 25 females from several
 natural populations into the enclosure in late September 1992. Individuals
 in the enclosure were captured using live traps every two weeks until late
 April 1994, except for periods with deep snow cover. The location, body
 weight, and reproductive status of each vole were monitored throughout the
 study period. Complementary trapping was performed within the home ranges
 of breeding females to mark juveniles as early as possible. Upon first
 capture, each individual was marked by toe clipping for subsequent
 identification, and the cut toes were used as DNA samples. For each
 individual, candidate parents were selected based on female reproduction
 history and capture points, and then parentage was determined using
 genotypes at 3–5 microsatellite loci with the CERVUS program. The results
 show that individuals born in the enclosure (N = 920) were derived from
 215 litters, among which multiple males sired 51 litters. We used this
 database to elucidate the promiscuous mating system and
 inbreeding-avoidance mechanism of the gray-sided vole and to develop a new
 method for estimating the frequency of multiple-male mating. This dataset
 will contribute to future behavioral ecological research on this and other
 small mammal species.
description: On
 29 September 1992, 47 individuals (22 males and 25 females) from seven
 natural gray-sided vole populations were introduced into a 3-ha (200 m ×
 150 m) outdoor enclosure established in a secondary forest in Sapporo,
 Japan (42°59’03”N 141°23’14”E; Figure 1). These founders were chosen to
 maximize heterozygosity at three microsatellite loci. Until 27 April 1994,
 we conducted 3-day capture–mark–recapture surveys every two weeks using
 live traps set at 300 trap stations in a 20 × 15-grid pattern with 10-m
 spacing, except during periods of deep snow cover. Traps were set at 0900
 h and checked at 1400 h and 2000 h every day; all traps were closed after
 the check at 2000 h. Through these surveys, we continuously monitored the
 location, weight, and reproductive status of each individual in the
 enclosure. Complementary trapping was also performed within the home
 ranges of breeding females to mark juveniles as early as possible (~20
 days after birth). On first capture, each individual was marked by toe
 clipping for subsequent identification, and the clipped toes were used as
 DNA samples. For all individuals born within the enclosure, both parents
 were determined based on female reproduction history (i.e., timing of
 pregnancy and lactation), home range location, and genotypes at 3–5
 microsatellite loci. After identifying parents, we comprehensively
 estimated dates of birth for all litters based on female reproduction
 history, the palpation of pregnant females on capture, and first capture
 dates and weights of juveniles. The day after the final capture was
 designated the estimated death date, unless the exact date of death was
 known. The potential
 predators within the enclosure included snakes
 (<em>Elaphe
 </em>spp.), Ural owls (<em>Strix
 urelensis</em>), sables (<em>Martes zibellina</em>), red foxes (<em>Vulpes vulpes</em>), and cats (<em>Felis catus</em>). Parentage was genetically established for all
 captured voles, except for one immigrant and two litters derived from
 sisters with identical genotypes at five microsatellite loci. For these
 two litters, the mothers of the offspring (<em>N</em> = 8)
 were determined based on their weights and trapping locations at first
 capture. The male was considered an intruder from outside the enclosure
 because it had unique microsatellite allele combinations compared with all
 possible candidate mothers. No mismatch alleles were observed among all
 combinations of assigned parents and offspring (<em>N</em> =
 920). The first and last litters from which juveniles were successfully
 weaned during the study period were estimated to have been produced on 19
 October 1992 and 15 October 1993, respectively. Individuals born within
 the enclosure (<em>N</em> = 920) were derived from 215
 litters, among which 51 litters had multiple paternity. The male intruder
 (M23032/DNA# 901) was excluded from the parentage estimation dataset
 (vole_data.csv) because it did not sire any offspring in the
 enclosure. Our
 paternity estimation results were verified using the CERVUS v3.0 program
 (Kalinowski et al., 2007). The CERVUS analysis supported our paternity
 assignment for almost all offspring, i.e., the assigned father had the
 highest score among all candidates. However, in 2.7% of all offspring
 (25/920), the males assigned as fathers were found to have positive but
 lower scores according to CERVUS, indicating that they were not the most
 likely fathers for these offspring. For the 25 inconsistent cases, an
 additional genotyping of five to six microsatellite loci was performed.
 The results revealed that in 23 of these cases, the most likely father, as
 designated by CERVUS, showed allele mismatches with the offspring,
 therefore confirming 99.8% (918/920) of our initial paternity estimates
 were correct. However, in both of the remaining cases, the offspring
 showed allele mismatches with the previously assigned fathers.
 Consequently, we adopted the CERVUS analysis results for these two
 offspring, which showed no mismatched alleles at any of the 10 loci
 examined.  <strong>Reference</strong>
 Kalinowski, S. T., Taper, M.
 L., & Marshall, T. C. (2007). Revising how the computer program
 CERVUS accommodates genotyping error increases success in paternity
 assignment. <em>Molecular Ecology, 16</em>, 1099–1106.
 doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03089.x
description: # Parentage of 920 gray-sided voles (*Myodes rufocanus*) born in a 3-ha
 outdoor enclosure between September 1992 and May 1994 This dataset was
 compiled as the result of an investigation of the mating system of
 gray-sided voles (*Myodes rufocanus*) within a 3-ha outdoor enclosure from
 September 1992 to May 1994. The data (vole_data.csv) included information
 on estimated birth locations, assigned parents, and estimated birth and
 death dates for 920 individuals born within the enclosure. They were
 derived from 215 litters, among which 51 litters had multiple paternity.
 It was also accompanied with capture and recapture data of all individuals
 for 30 trapping sessions (capture_data.csv), which were conducted for 3
 days every 2 weeks, except for periods with deep snow cover, using live
 traps set at 300 trap stations in a 20 × 15-grid pattern with 10-m spacing
 (Figure_1.png). Traps were set at 0900 h and checked at 1400 h and 2000 h
 every day; all traps were closed after the check at 2000 h. The location
 of capture, body weight, and reproductive status of each vole were
 recorded throughout the study period. Details of the methods used to
 assign parents were provided in our previous publications (Ishibashi &
 Saitoh, 2008a, 2008b; Ishibashi et al., 1998; Ishibashi et al., 1995).
 Because a few initial errors in parentage have been corrected in this
 database, the descriptions provided in Ishibashi and Saitoh (2008b) are
 the most useful for understanding the procedure used to establish
 parentage. ## Header Information **For "vole_data.csv"** *
 **IDvole**: Identification number (ID) of each vole, assigned by toe
 clipping. Prefixes “F” and “M” denote females and males, respectively. *
 **DNA#**: ID of each DNA sample, originating from the sampling tube
 number. Missing numbers indicate that tubes with these numbers were not
 used in sample collection, with the exception of DNA# 901 (IDvole:
 M23032), which belonged to an intruder from outside the enclosure and was
 excluded from the dataset. * **Sex**: 0: Female; 1: Male. *
 **Natalsite_X** and **Natalsite_Y**: Estimated activity center (a weighted
 average of capture points) for the mother at or around the offspring birth
 date. For example, the natal site of IDvole F11014 (DNA# 401) was located
 at the X, Y coordinate code 7.8-6.8, based on a 20 × 15 trap-station grid
 arrangement (Figure_1.png). * **IDmother**: Identity of the assigned
 mother. Founders introduced into the enclosure were assigned numbers lower
 than 400. * **IDfather**: Identity of the assigned father. Founders
 introduced into the enclosure were assigned numbers lower than 400. *
 **Datecopu**: Estimated copulation date (Y/M/D), which was assumed to be
 19 days before the estimated birth date. * **Datebirth**: Estimated birth
 date (Y/M/D). * **Datedeath**: The day after the last capture, selected
 for convenience (Y/M/D). * **Lifespan**: Duration (days) between the
 estimated birth and death dates. * **IDrepro**: Tentative litter serial
 number (range: 1–215). * **Spmp**: 0: Offspring from a single-paternity
 litter; 1: Offspring from a multiple-paternity litter. * **IDmp**:
 Tentative serial number for a multiple-paternity litter (range: 1–51).
 Offspring from a single-paternity litter were assigned IDmp = 0. *
 **Remarks**: Notable information on the individual. **For
 "capture_data.csv"** * **Serial#**: Tentative serial number
 assigned for convenience (range: 1–4,166). * **IDsession**: Number of the
 trapping session, where 0 indicates the introduction of founders (range:
 0–30). * **Date**: Date (Y/M/D) of the first day of a 3-day trapping
 session, or of founder introduction (for IDsession = 0). Associated with
 IDsession numbers 0–30. * **IDvole**: ID of each vole, assigned by toe
 clipping. * **DNA#**: ID of each DNA sample, originating from the sampling
 tube number. * **Sex**: 0: Female; 1: Male. * **Datebirth**: Estimated
 birth date (Y/M/D). * **Age**: Age (days). * **BW**: Body weight (g). *
 **Repro1**: Diagnosis of reproductive state #1. In females, determined by
 the presence (3), unclear status (2), or absence (1) of the vaginal
 opening. In males, determined by the presence (3), unclear status (2), or
 absence (1) of testicular drop. * **Repro2**: Diagnosis of reproductive
 state #2. In females, classified as pregnant (3), unclear (2), or not
 pregnant (1). * **Repro3**: Diagnosis of reproductive state #3. In
 females, classified as lactating (3), unclear (2), or not lactating (1). *
 **Site1**: Capture point on the afternoon of the first day of trapping.
 For example, Site1 = 215 indicates that the vole was captured at a trap
 set at point 02-15 on the afternoon of the first day. * **Site2**: Capture
 point on the night of the first day. * **Site3**: Capture point on the
 afternoon of the second day. * **Site4**: Capture point on the night of
 the second day. * **Site5**: Capture point on the afternoon of the third
 day. * **Site6**: Capture point on the night of the third day. *
 **Site7**, **Site8**, and **Site9**: Second or third capture point during
 a round of trap checks. Voles often entered a trap just after release. *
 **CapNo**: Number of captures during a trapping session. * **ActCent_X**
 and **ActCent_Y**: Estimated coordinates of the activity center during a
 trapping session. * **HRL**: Home range length, determined as the largest
 geographical distance between two capture points. * **Remarks**: Notable
 information on the individual. ## Figure Caption **Figure_1.png** Diagram
 of the experimental enclosure. Dots indicate trap stations located at 10-m
 intervals in the X and Y directions (*N* = 300). Dotted line indicates an
 old forest path. The undergrowth consisted of two bamboo species, *Sasa
 senanensis* (no shading) and *S. kurilensis* (irregular shading). An open
 area at the center of the enclosure was created by cutting bamboos
 (rectangular shaded area). The positions of four trap stations (01-01,
 01-15, 20-01, and 20-15) are indicated as reference points. Asterisk
 indicates point 7.8-6.8. ## References * Ishibashi, Y., & Saitoh, T.
 (2008a). Effect of local density of males on the occurrence of multimale
 mating in the gray-sided vole (*Myodes rufocanus*). Journal of Mammalogy,
 89, 388–397. doi:10.1644/07-MAMM-A-036.1 * Ishibashi, Y., & Saitoh, T.
 (2008b). Role of male-biased dispersal in inbreeding avoidance in the
 grey-sided vole (*Myodes rufocanus*). Molecular Ecology, 17, 4887–4896.
 doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2008.03969.x * Ishibashi, Y., Saitoh, T., Abe, S.,
 & Yoshida, M. C. (1998). Kin-related social organization in a winter
 population of the vole *Clethrionomys rufocanus*. Researches on Population
 Ecology, 40, 51–59. doi:10.1007/BF02765221 * Ishibashi, Y., Saitoh, T.,
 Abe, S., & Yoshida, M. C. (1995). Polymorphic microsatellite DNA
 markers in the grey red-backed vole *Clethrionomys rufocanus bedfordiae*.
 Molecular Ecology, 4, 127–128. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.1995.tb00200.x