106 Troy A. Ladine and Angela Ladine 



percent cover measurements correlated positively along the first principal com- 

 ponent. Vertical stems correlated along the second principal component with the 

 two smaller stem categories correlating positively and the larger stem categories 

 correlating negatively. Logs were correlated to the third principal component 

 with all but LOGS>15 correlated positively. For the 5-m 2 scale, the first princi- 

 pal component was correlated positively to all cover measurements and 

 STEMSO-5, and negatively to STEMS 10- 15. The second principal component 

 was correlated positively to LOGSO-5 and LOGS5-10. The third principal com- 

 ponent was correlated positively to STEMS5-10 and STEMS>15 and LITTER, 

 and correlated negatively to LOGS 10- 15 and LOGS>15. For the 10-m 2 scale, the 

 first principal component was correlated positively to STEMS 10- 15, LOGSO-5, 

 and LITTER, and correlated negatively to COVER0 and COVER 1. The second 

 principal component was correlated positively to LOGS5-10, LOGS10-15, and 

 LOGS>15. The third principal component was correlated positively to COVER 1 

 and STEMS5-10, and correlated negatively to STEMSO-5, and STEMS>15. 



Correct classification of sites with captures was poor for all scales: 1 m 

 ~ 46.7%; 5 m~ 56.7%; 10 m ~ 40.0%. Classification of sites where no captures 

 occurred was better at all three scales: 1 m — 70.0%; 5 m — 98.3%; 10 m - 

 76.7%. Variables selected for discriminating between capture and no-capture 

 sites were different for each scale. LITTER, and LOGS>15 were selected for the 

 1-m 2 scale. STEMS10-15, 2 m COVER, and LOGS>15 cm were selected at the 

 5-m 2 scale. LOGS10-15, 2 m COVER, STEMSO-5, and LITTER were selected 

 at the 10-m 2 scale. 



DISCUSSION 



Members of the genus Peromyscus exhibit habitat generality, at least on 

 a local scale, and often occur across a broad range of habitats within a small geo- 

 graphic area (Kirkland 1976, Batzli 1977, Sullivan 1979, Van Home 1981, 

 Martell 1983, Adler et al. 1984). There are conflicting reports concerning rela- 

 tionship between density of P. leucopus and habitat type (Klein 1960, Stickel and 

 Warbach 1960, Getz 1961, Bongiorno and Pearson 1964, Kaufman and Fleharty 

 1974). Density in our study was within the reported ranges for the species (see 

 Lackey et al. 1985). Findings of our study at the 5-m 2 scale, in concurrence with 

 Kaufman and Fleharty (1974), suggest a relationship between number of stems 

 10-15 cm and captures of P. leucopus. However, this relationship was not 

 observed at the 10-m 2 scale. A relationship between logs 10-15 cm and captures 

 of P. leucopus was observed at the 10-m 2 scale. These finding are similar to those 

 of Getz (1961). Although relationships were observed between two of the select- 

 ed habitat variables and captures of P. leucopus, lack of significant relationships 

 between other variables for all scales appears to reflect the habitat generality of 

 the species. 



