Skip to main content
. 2003 Jul;9(7):846–852. doi: 10.3201/eid0907.030044

Table 1. Trapping efficiency/environment/species in the total of capturesa.

Env TN C E% Md Of Od St Aa No Hb Cl Mm Rr Ca
NW 288 27 9.4 - 1 7 10 6 2 - 1 - - -
RB 1,010 172 17.0 - 55 4 24 11 14 - 1 63 - -
PD 1,420 44 3.1 1 19 1 7 - 2 - - 11 - 3
WE 265 14 5.2 - 2 - 8 - 2 2 - - - -
BB 680 57 8.4 1 11 1 23 4 10 - - 7 - -
AG 190 50 26.3 - 9 6 9 2 6 - 1 17 - -
SH 1,198 268 22.4 1 93 2 117 11 13 - - 30 - 1
AW
179
40
22.3
1
4
1
-
-
3
-
-
29
2
-
T
5,230
672
12.8
4
194
22
198
34
52
2
3
157
2
4
Sp% 0.6 28.9 3.3 29.5 5.1 7.7 0.3 0.4 23.4 0.3 0.6

aEnv, environments; TN, trapping nights; C, captures; E, efficiency; NW, natural woods; RB, road borders; PD, peridomestic; WE, wetlands; BB, brook borders; AG, agroecosystems; SH, shrublands; AW, artificial woods; T, totals; Sp%, species %; Md, Monodelphis dimidiate; Of, Oligoryzomys flavescens; Od, O. delticola; St, Scapteromys tumidus; Aa, Akodon azarae; n, Necromys obscurus; Hb, Holochilus brasiliensis; Cl, Calomys laucha; Mm, Mus musculus; Rr, Rattus rattus; Ca, Cavia aperea.