Southeastern Naturalist
H.A. Czech, A.A. Bohlman, and W.B. Sutton
2017 Vol. 16, No. 3
464
2017 SOUTHEASTERN NATURALIST 16(3):464–472
New Records for Sorex hoyi (American Pygmy Shrew) in
Alabama
Helen A. Czech1,*, Allison A. Bohlman1, and William B. Sutton2
Abstract – We report the first records of Sorex hoyi (American Pygmy Shrew) for Lawrence
County, AL. We discovered 5 specimens in a specimen lot stored at Alabama A&M
University. The shrews were incidental captures collected from pitfall traps used to study
amphibian and reptile communities in the William B. Bankhead National Forest. A follow-
up survey at the same sites during December 2015 resulted in the capture of 1 adult
American Pygmy Shrew. Surveys at additional sites in Madison, Lawrence, and Winston
counties, AL, during 2015–2016 yielded no further specimens. These records are 120 km
southwest of the nearest records in Jackson County, AL, and expand the known southernmost
edge of the geographic range by 35 km.
Introduction
Sorex hoyi Baird (American Pygmy Shrew) is one of the smallest mammals
in North America and also one of the least known, despite a distribution that
includes Alaska and much of Canada and the Eastern US (Long 1974, Whitaker
and Hamilton 1998). The subspecies S. h. winnemana (Preble) (Southern Pygmy
Shrew) inhabits an area from southern Illinois to northeastern Alabama (Diersing
1980, Laerm et al. 1996), where it is uncommon, but occurs in a wide range of
habitats and at elevations from <5 m to >1600 m (Webster and Spivey 2001). Although
the subspecies is considered a habitat generalist, it is most often collected
in moderate to xeric early successional stage sites with upland hardwood, mixed
pine–hardwood, or intensely managed yellow pine communities (Laerm et al.
2000). At the southernmost periphery of its distribution, the species is considered
rare and poorly understood.
In Alabama, the Southern Pygmy Shrew is listed as a species of greatest conservation
need, with a protection ranking of priority 2 (P2; high conservation
concern), due to its limited state-wide range and rarity (ADCNR-DWFF 2016).
First collected in Alabama in 1995 (Laerm et al. 1996), the species was known only
from northeastern Jackson County, where it had been detected at sites between
336 m and 534 m in elevation, and in deciduous forest communities with canopies
dominated by Quercus spp. (oaks), Acer spp. (maples), Carya spp. (hickories), and
Liriodendron tulipifera L. (Yellow-Poplar). Understory trees included Vaccinium
spp., Viburnum spp., Oxydendrum arboreum (L.) DC. (Sourwood), Cornus florida
L. (Flowering Dogwood), Cercis canadensis L. (Eastern Redbud), and Sassafras
1Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, 100 Drake Drive, Room 101 ARC
Building, Alabama A&M University, Normal, AL 35762. 2Department of Agricultural and
Environmental Sciences, Tennessee State University, Nashville, TN 37209. *Corresponding
author - helen.czech@aamu.edu.
Manuscript Editor: Andrew Edelman
Southeastern Naturalist
465
H.A. Czech, A.A. Bohlman, and W.B. Sutton
2017 Vol. 16, No. 3
albidum (Nutt.) Nees (Sassafras) (Felix et al. 2009, Laerm et al. 1996, Moss 2015).
Soils ranged from riparian sand (Moss 2015) to well-drained stony and gravelly
loam or clays (Felix et al. 2009). Most were captured within the current boundary
of the James D. Martin–Skyline Wildlife Management Area.
Researchers have continued to detect Southern Pygmy Shrews in Jackson County;
the most recent collections were made in 2014 (Hitch et al. 2008, Moss 2015,
NCSM 2015). Surveys have yielded too few specimens of this species to be able
to estimate habitat associations (Hitch et al. 2008, Moss 2015). Due to the lack of
knowledge regarding the status and distribution of the Southern Pygmy Shrew in
Alabama, we sought to determine if the species was present elsewhere in the state
by examining specimens and performing field surveys in regions where habitats
were similar to those of Jackson County.
Field-site Descriptions
We conducted sampling in Madison, Lawrence, and Winston counties, AL. This
region of Alabama experiences yearly temperatures ranging from an average low of
10 °C to an average high of 22 °C. The average yearly precipitation is about 1450
mm (SERCC 2012).
Sites in Lawrence and Winston counties were within the William B. Bankhead
National Forest (BNF) (34º20'24''N, -87º20'24''W). The 140,126-ha forest
is in the Dissected Plateau ecoregion of the Southwestern Appalachians (Griffith
et al. 2001) and in the Warrior Basin physiographic region of the Cumberland
Plateau. The terrain is strongly sloping, with occasional sandstone cliffs, steepsided
gorges, and elevations nearing 300 m. About half of the BNF is composed
of hardwood forests dominated by oaks and hickories and the other half by Pinus
taeda L. (Loblolly Pine). Mixed mesophytic forests composed of maples, Fagus
grandifolia Ehrh. (American Beech), Tsuga canadensis (Eastern Hemlock), and
Yellow-Poplar are in coves, along streams, and on north- and east-facing slopes
(Gaines and Creed 2003).
Sites in Madison County were within the Plateau Escarpment Ecoregion of the
Southwestern Appalachians and the Eastern Highland Rim ecoregion of the Interior
Plateau (Griffith et al. 2001) and included the Jackson County Mountains physiographic
region of the Cumberland Plateau and the Tennessee Valley physiographic
region of the Highland Rim. Sites were near the city of Huntsville, AL (34º43'48''N,
-86º35'6''W). Terrain in the Cumberland Plateau region is strongly shaped by underlying
karst geology, and is steeply sloping with limestone outcroppings and
elevations nearing 500 m. Forests have canopies dominated by oaks, hickories, and
maples as well as Fraxinus spp. (ash), and Juniperus virginiana L. (Eastern Red
Cedar). Mixed mesophytic forests composed of maples, Aesculus spp. (buckeyes)
and Tilia spp. (basswoods) are in coves and on sheltered north- and east-facing
slopes. Terrain in the Highland Rim region is rolling, with elevations nearing 300
m, and is dominated by row-crop and pasture agriculture.
Southeastern Naturalist
H.A. Czech, A.A. Bohlman, and W.B. Sutton
2017 Vol. 16, No. 3
466
Methods
We examined small-mammal specimens stored at Alabama A&M University
(AAMU) prior to field sampling. The specimens were collected during
2005–2008 from 15 sites in Lawrence County and 4 sites in Jackson County. We
identified shrew specimens to genus by counting the number of upper unicuspid
teeth, as seen in lateral and ventral views (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). We
did not identify to species shrews of the cryptic genus Blarina or mice of the
genus Peromyscus because our study sites were in a region where the ranges of
B. carolinensis (Bachman) (Southern Short-tailed Shrew) and B. brevicauda
(Say) (Northern Short-tailed Shrew) potentially overlap (Best and Dusi 2014)
and P. leucopus (Rafinesque) (White-footed Mouse) and P. gossypinus (Le Conte)
(Cotton Mouse) overlap. These pairs cannot be reliably separated without using
DNA sequencing. We distinguished Southern Pygmy Shrews from other longtailed
Sorex shrews by the miniscule size of their 3rd and 5th upper unicuspids (Diersing
1980, Junge and Hoffman 1981).
We surveyed Madison County, which was not represented among the specimens,
during April–October 2015 using 250 2-L pitfall traps. We employed small traps
to exclude non-target Murids. Traps were distributed equally across 5 sites with
upland forest, cove forest, Loblolly Pine, and field habitat types represented at each
site. We opened pitfall traps for 4 consecutive nights and checked traps daily. We
placed a moistened sponge, cotton batting, and a mixture of sunflower seeds, dried
mealworms, and dog kibble in each trap to provide water, shelter, and food (Shonfield
et al. 2013). We photographed, identified, and measured all small-mammal
captures and collected, identified, and deposited mortalities at AAMU.
We surveyed 16 sites in Lawrence County using fifty-four 19-L pitfall traps. We
placed 18 traps in stands of Loblolly Pine, 6 in pine-hardwood, 6 in oak-hickory,
and 24 in riparian forest. We also utilized sixteen 19-L pitfall traps installed at 4
sites in Winston County. Four traps were in stands of oak–hickory, 4 in Loblolly
Pine, and 8 in riparian forest. We opened arrays during May–July 2015, December
2015, June–August 2016, and December 2016. We followed the same trapping
protocols as for sites in Madison County.
Results
A collection dated April 2008 from Lawrence County contained 5 adult Southern
Pygmy Shrews. The shrews were incidentally captured in pitfall traps that
were being used for a study examining the effects of differing intensities of timber
harvesting and prescribed burning on amphibian and reptile communities (Sutton
2010). Four were captured in Loblolly Pine stands that were 20–50 years of age
with south–southwest-facing aspects, and 1 was captured in a pine–hardwood stand
with a northwest-facing aspect. Sites were at 269–279 m elevation. The Loblolly
Pine stands were on a 3-y burn rotation; the most recent treatments occurred in
2007 and 2012. Harvesting of timber in the stands ranged from none to a partial
removal that occurred in 2006.
Southeastern Naturalist
467
H.A. Czech, A.A. Bohlman, and W.B. Sutton
2017 Vol. 16, No. 3
We resurveyed these 4 sites in December 2015 and captured 1 adult Southern
Pygmy Shrew in 96 trap-nights in a lightly harvested Loblolly Pine stand with
under- and midstory canopies dominated by Acer rubrum L. (Red Maple) and
underlain by sandy loam soil. The site had a southwest-facing aspect and an elevation
of 277 m. The mean total length of the shrews (n = 6) captured in Lawrence
County was 64 mm ± 0.2 SE (range = 56–74 mm), which is smaller than had been
previously reported for the Southern Pygmy Shrew. Researchers have found similar
trends with other peripheral populations of shrews (Felix et al. 2009), and the
decrease in size may be due to a combination of the size of available food and the
presence of heterospecific soricids (Huggins and Kennedy 1989). We also captured
2 short-tailed shrews during this trapping period. No Southern Pygmy Shrews were
captured at the other 12 sites in Lawrence County during 274 trap-nights or at
sites in Winston County during 160 trap-nights. We captured 4 short-tailed shrews,
2 Sorex longirostris Bachman (Southeastern Shrew), 13 Peromyscus spp. (deer
mice), 1 Ochrotomys nuttalli (Harlan) (Golden Mouse), and 1 Scalopus aquaticus
(L.) (Eastern Mole).
Our Madison County surveys yielded no Southern Pygmy Shrews during 6965
trap-nights. We captured 22 individuals of 3 shrew species including 15 short-tailed
shrews, 1 Southeastern Shrew, and 6 Cryptotis parva Say (North American Least
Shrew). The latter 2 shrew species had not been previously documented in the
county. Cricetid captures included 2 Microtus pinetorum (Le Conte) (Woodland
Vole) and 1 M. ochrogaster (Wagner) (Prairie Vole).
Mortality rates for shrews were between 33% and 100%, with the lowest rates
among North American Least Shrews and highest among Sorex spp. The mortality
rate for all species captured during the study was greatest in traps that flooded following
heavy rainfall.
Discussion
The archived specimens we examined during this study were incidental captures
found in traps set to capture amphibians, reptiles, and insects. We recommend that
researchers consider identifying small-mammal bycatch present in pitfall traps
(and vice versa). Edwards and Jones (2014) and Pearce et al. (2005) explored these
issues and suggested techniques for preventing bycatch, when preferred. Bycatch
data could assist with the discovery of populations of rare and uncommon species.
These data would be integral to the larger goal of conserving and managing smallmammal
species biodiversity in the southern Appalachians. There remain large
gaps in the known ranges of many small mammals (Campbell et al. 2010) and a
continued need for biotic surveys in the southeastern US (Felix et al. 2009).
Our records for the Southern Pygmy Shrew are 120 km southwest of those in
Jackson County and expand the southernmost edge of the range by 35 km (Fig. 1).
Although the habitat composition and elevation of sites in the BNF differ from
those found in Jackson County, the Southern Pygmy Shrew is a well-documented
habitat generalist found at a wide range of elevations. However, because surveys in
Madison County failed to detect the species, the population in the BNF may have
Southeastern Naturalist
H.A. Czech, A.A. Bohlman, and W.B. Sutton
2017 Vol. 16, No. 3
468
a disjunct distribution. Much of the trapping in Madison County took place when
S. hoyi may not have been active above ground due to thermal and moisture limits
(Best and Dusi 2014, Feldhamer et al. 1993) which could have resulted in no captures.
Additionally, we did not trap during November–March, which is when the
subspecies was almost exclusively captured in western Kentucky and Tennessee
(Feldhamer et al. 1993). In Alabama and Georgia, Southern Pygmy Shrews were
captured during all months, with peak captures occurring in June, September, and
November, which is similar to what was observed by McCay et al. (1998) in Georgia
and North Carolina. These records suggest that patterns of Southern Pygmy
Shrew activity vary across the southeastern US and may be site- or region-specific.
Laerm et al. (1999) cautioned against making assumptions regarding the distribution
of poorly known and uncommon soricids, and Laerm et al. (1994) considered
the Southern Pygmy Shrew to be widespread, but nowhere abundant. However,
nonfederal forests in Alabama are highly fragmented (Li et al. 2009), and the region
located between Jackson County and the BNF experienced a 100–600% net
Figure 1. Distributional records for Sorex hoyi (American Pygmy Shrew) in Alabama and
adjacent regions. Locations obtained from digitized museum records, state-record databases,
and this study are depicted. The white circles with black centers indicate new records
reported in this study from Alabama A&M University collections and pitfall traps. Black
circles indicate records obtained from the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural
Resources, the Georgia Museum of Natural History, the North Carolina State Museum of
Natural Sciences, the Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History, the Tennessee Department
of Environment and Conservation, and the University of Tennessee-Chattanooga,
Mammals Collection, Natural History Museum.
Southeastern Naturalist
469
H.A. Czech, A.A. Bohlman, and W.B. Sutton
2017 Vol. 16, No. 3
addition of urban areas during the period 1982–2010 (Rahman 2014). Therefore,
the Southern Pygmy Shrew population in the BNF may be isolated and at the periphery
of the geographic range of the species. Local populations of small-sized
Sorex spp. are hypothesized to be highly vulnerable to extirpation (Hanski 1994),
and even when a species is geographically widespread, peripheral populations can
be valuable for conservation (Lesica and Allendorf 1995). Genetic and morphological
analysis could elucidate if the population is distinct.
The Southern Pygmy Shrew is a species of high conservation concern in Alabama;
thus, it is important to have an accurate understanding of the distribution,
habitat use, and abundance of the species (ADCNR-DWFF 2016). In the southern
Appalachians, negative impacts to Southern Pygmy Shrew populations have not
been found following low-intensity restorative and fuel-reducing prescribed burns
and partial timber harvests (Ford and Rodrigue 2001, Ford et al. 1999, Greenberg
et al. 2007). However, forest disturbances, such as high-intensity prescribed burns
and clearcutting, and ground-disturbing actions such as road creation and patch
cuts, may have a serious impact on Pygmy Shrew populations (Beauvais and Mc-
Cumber 2006, Greenberg et al. 2007) due to their short life span of ~1 year, low
reproductive rate of a single litter (Long 1974), home ranges of less than 0.5 ha, and
low dispersal rates (Beauvais and McCumber 2006). In Montana, 2–3-month-old
Pygmy Shrews captured in sites with complete overstory removal showed increased
morphological variations in their lower mandibles (Badyaev and Foresman 2004).
This stress-induced change may be beneficial when habitat alterations change the
composition of local prey and the novel jaw morphology allows for the exploitation
of previously unavailable prey.
Since the early 2000s, the US Forest Service (USFS) has managed the BNF with
the immediate goal of reducing fuel loads and treating areas damaged by Dendroctonus
frontinalis Zimmermann (Southern Pine Beetle) and with the long-term goal
of restoring forest and plant community types that were once common throughout
the region. To meet these goals, thinning and prescribed burning have been used
along with the restoration of Pinus echinata Mill. (Shortleaf Pine)–Andropogoninae
spp. (bluestem grasses) woodlands (Addor and Birkhoff 2004). Prescribed
burning and heavy and light thinning occurred at sites in the BNF where Southern
Pygmy Shrews were captured. Sites are also located in areas where the management
goal is hardwood restoration. More research is needed to assess the impacts of these
activities on the life history, abundance, and distribution of this Alabama species of
high conservation concern.
Acknowledgments
We thank field technician Jessica Billings. Patience Knight was invaluable during
trap installation. H. Howell, R. Borthwick, K. Burns, and AAMU undergraduate students
provided assistance in the field. We greatly appreciate W. Stone for facilitating the grantapplication
process and research activities. This material is based upon work supported by
the Alabama Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries Cooperative Endangered Species
Conservation Fund under Traditional Section 6 Grant Project 183, the National Science
Southeastern Naturalist
H.A. Czech, A.A. Bohlman, and W.B. Sutton
2017 Vol. 16, No. 3
470
Foundation under HBCU-UP Grant No. TIP-1437001, and through the Department of Biological
and Environmental Sciences at AAMU. Thank you to Y. Wang and C. Schweitzer for
granting access to and use of trapping arrays, A. Cantrell for site suggestions, L. Gardner
and K. Ward for access to specimens, and N. Sharp for identification verification. We are
grateful to the Georgia Museum of Natural History (N. Castleberry and B. Freeman) for
sharing data on specimens. We thank the Forever Wild Land Trust Program, the Land Trust
of North Alabama (A. Prewett), and the AAMU Winfred A. Thomas Agricultural Research
Station (E. Cebert) for allowing research to be performed on their properties. Dawn Lemke
and D. Andy Scott provided helpful comments on an early draft. This research was conducted
under the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources collecting
permits #8202, 8172, 8855, and 8918.
Literature Cited
Addor, M.L., and J. Birkhoff. 2004. Bankhead National Forest health and restoration initiative:
Final report. National Resources Leadership Institute. Ra leigh, NC. 61 pp.
Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources - Division of Wildlife and
Freshwater Fisheries (ADCNR-DWFF). 2016. Alabama Wildlife Action Plan. Available
online at http://www.outdooralabama.com/sites/default/files/AL%20SWAP%20FINAL
%20POST- REVIEW%2004-22-2016.pdf. Accessed 4 April 2017.
Badyaev, A.V., and K.R. Foresman. 2004. Evolution of morphological integration. I. Functional
units channel stress-induced variation in shrew mandibles. American Midland
Naturalist 163:868–879.
Beauvais, G.P., and J.M. McCumber. 2006. Pygmy Shrew (Sorex hoyi): A technical conservation
assessment. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. 33 pp. Available
online at http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/pygmyshrew.pdf. Accessed
29 September 2014.
Best, T.L., and J.L. Dusi. 2014. Mammals of Alabama. The University of Alabama Press,
Tuscaloosa, AL. 520 pp.
Campbell, J.W., M.T. Mengak, S.B. Castleberry, and J.D. Mejia. 2010. Distribution and
status of uncommon mammals in the Southern Appalachian Mountains. Southeastern
Naturalist 9:275–302
Diersing, V.E. 1980. Systematics and evolution of the Pygmy Shrew (subgenus Microsorex)
of North America. Journal of Mammalogy 61:76–101.
Edwards, K.E., and J.C. Jones. 2014. Trapping efficiency and associated mortality of incidentally
captured small mammals during herpetofaunal surveys of temporary wetlands.
Wildlife Society Bulletin 38:530–535.
Feldhamer, G.A., R.S. Klann, A.S. Gerard, and A.C. Driskell. 1993. Habitat partitioning,
body size, and timing of parturition in Pygmy Shrews and associated soricids. Journal
of Mammalogy 74:403–411.
Felix, Z., L.J. Gatens, Y. Wang, and C.J. Schweitzer. 2009. First records of the Smokey
Shrew (Sorex fumeus) in Alabama. Southeastern Naturalist 8:750–753.
Ford, W.M., and J.L. Rodrigue. 2001. Soricid abundance in partial overstory-removal harvests
and riparian areas in an industrial forest landscape of the central Appalachians.
Forest Ecology and Management 152:159–168.
Ford, W.M., M.A. Menzel, D.W. McGill, J. Laerm, and T.S. McCay. 1999. Effects of
community-restoration fire on small mammals and herpetofauna in the southern Appalachians.
Forest Ecology and Management 114:233–243.
Southeastern Naturalist
471
H.A. Czech, A.A. Bohlman, and W.B. Sutton
2017 Vol. 16, No. 3
Gaines, G.D., and J.W. Creed. 2003. Forest health and restoration project. National forests
in Alabama, Bankhead National Forest. Franklin, Lawrence, and Winston counties,
Alabama. Final environmental impact statement. Management Bulletin R8-MB 110B.
353 pp.
Greenberg, C.H., S. Miller, and T.A. Waldrop. 2007. Short-term response of shrews to prescribed
fire and mechanical fuel-reduction in a Southern Appalachian upland hardwood
forest. Forest Ecology and Management 243:231–236.
Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, S. Lawrence, G. Martin, A. Goddard, V.J.
Hulcher, and T. Foster. 2001. Ecoregions of Alabama and Georgia, (color poster with
map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs; map scale 1:1,700,000). US
Geological Survey Reston, VA.
Hanski, I. 1994. Population biological consequences of body size in Sorex. Pp. 15–26, In
J.F. Merritt, G.L. Kirkland Jr., and R.K. Rose (Eds.). Advances in the Biology of Shrews.
Carnegie Museum of Natural History Special Publication 18. Pitt sburgh, PA. 458 pp.
Hitch, A.T., J.B. Grand, S.L. Allen, and N.W. Sharp. 2008. Habitat use and distributions of
birds, small mammals, and herpetofauna on the J.D. Martin Skyline Wildlife Management
Area, Jackson County, Alabama. Final Report. ALCFRWU Publication T-03-01-1.
USGS, Alabama Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, and Auburn University,
Auburn, AL. 79 pp + appendices.
Huggins, J.A., and M.L. Kennedy. 1989. Morphologic variation in the Masked Shrew (Sorex
cinereus) and the Smokey Shrew ( S. fumeus). American Midland Naturalist 122:11–25.
Junge, J.A., and R.S. Hoffman. 1981. Annotated key to the long-tailed shrews (genus Sorex)
of the United States and Canada, with notes on the middle-American Sorex. Occasional
Papers of the Museum of Natural History, the University of Kansas 94:1–48.
Laerm, J., W.M. Ford, and D.C. Weinand. 1994. Additional records of the Pygmy Shrew,
Sorex hoyi winnemana Preble (Insectivora: Soricidae), in Western North Carolina. Brimleyana
21:91–96.
Laerm, J., L. Lepardo, T. Gaudin, N. Monteith, and A. Szymczak. 1996. First records of
the Pygmy Shrew, Sorex hoyi winnemana Preble (Insectivora: Soricidae), in Alabama.
Journal of the Alabama Academy of Science 67:43–48.
Laerm, J., W.M. Ford, T.S. McCay, M.A. Menzel, L.T. Lepardo, and J.L. Boone. 1999.
Soricid communities in the Southern Appalachians. Pp. 177–193, In R.P. Eckerlin (Ed.).
Proceedings of the Appalachian Biogeography Symposium. Virginia Museum of Natural
History Special Publication 7. Martinsville, VA. 257 pp.
Laerm, J., W.M. Ford, M.A. Menzel, and T.S. McCay. 2000. Analysis of distribution and
habitat associations of Sorex hoyi winnemana in the southern Appalachians. Pp. 17–26,
In B.R. Chapman and J. Laerm (Eds.). Proceedings of the Fourth Colloquium on Conservation
of Mammals in the Southeastern United States. Occasional Papers of the North
Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences and the North Carolina Biological Survey. Vol.
12. North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, Raleigh, NC. 92 pp.
Lesica, P., and F.W. Allendorf. 1995. When are peripheral populations valuable for conservation?
Conservation Biology 9:753–760.
Li, M., C. Huang, Z. Zhu, H. Shi, H. Lu, and S. Peng. 2009. Assessing rates of forest change
and fragmentation in Alabama, USA, using the vegetation-change tracker model. Forest
Ecology and Management 257:1480–1488.
Long, C.A. 1974. Microsorex hoyi and Microsorex thompsoni. Mammalian Species 33:1–4.
McCay, T.S., M.A. Menzel, J. Laerm, and L.T. Lepardo. 1998. Timing of partition of three
long-tailed shrews (Sorex spp.) in the southern Appalachians. American Midland Naturalist
139:394–397.
Southeastern Naturalist
H.A. Czech, A.A. Bohlman, and W.B. Sutton
2017 Vol. 16, No. 3
472
Moss, J.L. 2015. Ecological distribution of shrews in the Cumberland Plateau of Alabama.
M.Sc. Thesis. Auburn University, Auburn, AL. 64 pp.
North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences (NCSM). 2015. Mammalogy Collection Database
search results: Sorex hoyi. Available online at http://collections.natural sciences.
org/ResultsMammals.aspx? QS=sorex+hoyi. Accessed 6 March 2017.
Pearce, J.L., D. Schuurman, K.N. Barber, and M. Larrivée. 2005. Pitfall-trap designs to
maximize invertebrate captures and minimize captures of nontarget vertebrates. Canadian
Entomologist 137:233–250.
Rahman, M. 2014. Growth of Alabama urban areas and its impact on changing environmental
dynamics. M.Sc. Thesis. Auburn University, Auburn, AL. 95 pp.
Shonfield, J., R. Do, R.J. Brooks, and A.G. McAdam. 2013. Reducing accidental shrew
mortality associated with small-mammal livetrapping. I: An inter- and intrastudy analysis.
Journal of Mammalogy 94:745–753.
Southeast Regional Climate Center (SERCC). 2012. Historical climate summaries for
Alabama. Available online at http://www.sercc.com/climateinfo/historical/historical_
al.html. Accessed 16 January 2017.
Sutton, W.B. 2010. Herpetofaunal response to thinning and prescribed burning in the southeastern
pine–hardwood forests. Ph.D. Dissertation. Alabama A&M University, Normal,
AL. 285 pp.
Webster, W.D., and P.B. Spivey. 2001. Pygmy Shrew, Sorex hoyi (Insectivora: Soricidae) in
North Carolina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Societ y 117:29–35.
Whitaker, J.O., Jr., and W.J. Hamilton. 1998. Mammals of the Eastern United States. Cornell
University Press, Ithaca, NY. 583 pp.