Northern Limits of Southeastern Shrew 57 



sumably all S. I. longirostris, and Lewis (1943) caught one, in second 

 growth bottomland deciduous forest with deep leaf litter, numerous 

 decaying logs, and a dense overgrowth of honeysuckle. We have several 

 specimens from honeysuckle tangles in windfall openings in young pine 

 plantations, and Lewis (1943) had one from dense sedge and grass 

 beside a small pond in a pine plantation. Four captures were in second 

 growth mixed pine-hardwood forest with leaf litter but scant herbaceous 

 cover. 



Only three captures were in older forest: one in Vaccinium and 

 herbs in deciduous forest on a steep, rocky bluff (Lewis 1943), another 

 in dry upland mixed woodland with deep leaf litter and a cover of Vac- 

 cinium, and a third in mixed bottomland forest with deep litter and a 

 lush growth of herbs and grass. 



In summary, almost all of our habitat records for S. I. longirostris 

 are for disturbed situations: cultivated fields, abandoned fields, thickets 

 of saplings and shrubs, and young forest. Only 3 of 40 records pertain 

 to older forest. Another common thread through most of the records is 

 a dense ground cover of grass, sedge, herbs, or honeysuckle. There is no 

 evident preference for upland or lowland, dryness or moisture, type of 

 old-field, or type of young forest. 



French (1980a,b) reviewed published ecological information on S. /. 

 longirostris throughout its range and noted that it has been found in 

 habitats varying from planted fields to dry upland hardwood forest to 

 moist floodplain forest. He observed (1980b:2) that, "In all habitats 5. /. 

 longirostris has been most often associated with a heavy ground cover 

 of grasses, sedges, rushes, blackberry, Japanese honeysuckle and/ or 

 thick mats of decaying leaves." The majority of S. I. longirostris 

 reported by Tuttle (1964) in Tennessee and by Rose (1980) in southern 

 Indiana were taken in association with honeysuckle. 



Since S. I. longirostris has been found in so many kinds of habitat, 

 it may be that the microhabitat represented by honeysuckle or equally 

 dense ground cover is more important to the shrew than is the major 

 habitat type. Preference for disturbed habitats may also reflect the need 

 for dense ground cover. Such a microhabitat presumably would supply 

 shelter from both nocturnal and diurnal predators, primarily raptorial 

 birds, and also would provide a microclimate suitable for both the 

 shrew and its largely invertebrate food supply. 



Very likely Sorex /. longirostris has benefited from the vast destruc- 

 tion of forests and habitat alteration that has occurred in the past 300 

 years in the southeastern United States. As has been suggested for sev- 

 eral other species (Pagels 1980), it would not be surprising to find that 

 this shrew is more abundant and widespread today than it was before 

 the European settlement of this region. 



