GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • Casazza, Michael L.  (9)
  • Hartman, C. Alex  (9)
  • 1
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Elsevier BV ; 2021
    In:  Environmental Pollution Vol. 273 ( 2021-03), p. 115808-
    In: Environmental Pollution, Elsevier BV, Vol. 273 ( 2021-03), p. 115808-
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0269-7491
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: Elsevier BV
    Publication Date: 2021
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 280652-6
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2013037-5
    SSG: 12
    SSG: 14
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Ecology and Evolution, Wiley, Vol. 12, No. 9 ( 2022-09)
    Abstract: Nest predation is the main cause of nest failure for ducks. Understanding how habitat features influence predator movements may facilitate management of upland and wetland breeding habitats that reduces predator encounter rates with duck nests and increases nest survival rates. For 1618 duck nests, nest survival increased with distance to phragmites ( Phragmites australis ), shrubs, telephone poles, human structures, and canals, but not for four other habitat features. Using GPS collars, we tracked 25 raccoons ( Procyon lotor ) and 16 striped skunks ( Mephitis mephitis ) over 4 years during waterfowl breeding and found marked differences in how these predators were located relative to specific habitat features; moreover, the probability of duck nests being encountered by predators differed by species. Specifically, proximity to canals, wetlands, trees, levees/roads, human structures, shrubs, and telephone poles increased the likelihood of a nest being encountered by collared raccoons. For collared skunks, nests were more likely to be encountered if they were closer to canals, trees, and shrubs, and farther from wetlands and human structures. Most predator encounters with duck nests were attributable to a few individuals; 29.2% of raccoons and 38.5% of skunks were responsible for 95.6% of total nest encounters. During the central span of duck nesting (April 17–June 14: 58 nights), these seven raccoons and five skunks encountered 〉 1 nest on 50.8 ± 29.2% (mean ± SD) and 41.5 ± 28.3% of nights, respectively, and of those nights individual raccoons and skunks averaged 2.60 ± 1.28 and 2.50 ± 1.09 nest encounters/night, respectively. For collared predators that encountered 〉 1 nest, a higher proportion of nests encountered by skunks had evidence of predation (51.9 ± 26.6%) compared to nests encountered by raccoons (22.3 ± 17.1%). Because duck eggs were most likely consumed as raccoons and skunks opportunistically discovered nests, managing the habitat features those predators most strongly associated with could potentially reduce rates of egg predation.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2045-7758 , 2045-7758
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2635675-2
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    In: Waterbirds, Waterbird Society, Vol. 45, No. 1 ( 2022-11-11)
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1524-4695
    Language: Unknown
    Publisher: Waterbird Society
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2159270-6
    SSG: 12
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: The Journal of Wildlife Management, Wiley, Vol. 82, No. 5 ( 2018-07), p. 1014-1025
    Abstract: We recorded nest predators at 44% of 147 dabbling duck nests monitored in 2015 and 2016 at Grizzly Island Wildlife Area, Suisun March California, USA. Our results indicate that predator type and behavior can influence female behavior and nest fate, and that management actions that reduce the effectiveness of raccoons and skunks encountering waterfowl nests may benefit these nesting populations.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0022-541X , 1937-2817
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2066663-9
    SSG: 12
    SSG: 23
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    In: Ecology and Evolution, Wiley, Vol. 9, No. 9 ( 2019-05), p. 5490-5500
    Abstract: For ground‐nesting waterfowl, the timing of egg hatch and duckling departure from the nest may be influenced by the risk of predation at the nest and en route to wetlands and constrained by the time required for ducklings to imprint on the hen and be physically able to leave the nest. We determined the timing of hatch, nest departure, and predation on dabbling duck broods using small video cameras placed at the nests of mallard ( Anas platyrhynchos ; n  = 26), gadwall ( Mareca strepera ; n  = 24), and cinnamon teal ( Anas cyanoptera ; n  = 5). Mallard eggs began to hatch throughout the day and night, whereas gadwall eggs generally started to hatch during daylight hours (mean 7.5 hr after dawn). Among all species, duckling departure from the nest occurred during daylight (98%), and 53% of hens typically left the nest with their broods 1–4 hr after dawn. For mallard and gadwall, we identified three strategies for the timing of nest departure: (a) 9% of broods left the nest the same day that eggs began to hatch (6–12 hr later), (b) 81% of broods left the nest the day after eggs began to hatch, and (c) 10% of broods waited 2 days to depart the nest after eggs began to hatch, leaving the nest just after the second dawn (27–42 hr later). Overall, eggs were depredated at 10% of nests with cameras in the 2 days prior to hatch and ducklings were depredated at 15% of nests with cameras before leaving the nest. Our results suggest that broods prefer to depart the nest early in the morning, which may best balance developmental constraints with predation risk both at the nest and en route to wetlands.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2045-7758 , 2045-7758
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2019
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2635675-2
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Wiley ; 2020
    In:  Ecology and Evolution Vol. 10, No. 5 ( 2020-03), p. 2513-2529
    In: Ecology and Evolution, Wiley, Vol. 10, No. 5 ( 2020-03), p. 2513-2529
    Abstract: Nest attendance is an important determinant of avian reproductive success, and identifying factors that influence the frequency and duration of incubation recesses furthers our understanding of how incubating birds balance their needs with those of their offspring. We characterized the frequency and timing (start time, end time, and duration) of incubation recesses for mallard ( Anas platyrhynchos ) and gadwall ( Mareca strepera ) hens breeding in Suisun Marsh, California, USA, and examined the influences of day of year, ambient temperature at the nest, incubation day, and clutch size on recess frequency and timing using linear mixed models. Mallard, on average, took more recesses per day (1.69 ± 0.80, mean ± standard deviation) than did gadwall (1.39 ± 0.69), and 45% of mallard nest‐days were characterized by two recesses, while only 27% of gadwall nest‐days were characterized by two recesses. Mallard morning recesses started at 06:14 ± 02:46 and lasted 106.11 ± 2.01 min, whereas mallard afternoon recesses started at 16:39 ± 02:11 and lasted 155.39 ± 1.99 min. Gadwall morning recesses started at 06:30 ± 02:46 and lasted 91.28 ± 2.32 min, and gadwall afternoon recesses started at 16:31 ± 01:57 and lasted 192.69 ± 1.89 min. Mallard and gadwall started recesses earlier in the day with increasing ambient temperature, but later in the day as the season progressed. Recess duration decreased as the season progressed and as clutch size increased, and increased with ambient temperature at the nest. The impending darkness of sunset appeared to be a strong cue for ending a recess and returning to the nest, because hens returned to their nests earlier than expected when recesses were expected to end after sunset. Within hens, the timing of incubation recesses was repeatable across incubation days and was most repeatable for mallard afternoon recesses and on days in which hens took only one recess. Hens were most likely to be away from nests between 04:00 and 07:00 and between 16:00 and 19:00; therefore, investigators should search for nests between 07:00 and 16:00. Our analyses identified important factors influencing incubation recess timing in dabbling ducks and have important implications for nest monitoring programs.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2045-7758 , 2045-7758
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2020
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2635675-2
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 7
    In: Ecology and Evolution, Wiley, Vol. 11, No. 6 ( 2021-03), p. 2862-2872
    Abstract: Nesting birds must provide a thermal environment sufficient for egg development while also meeting self‐maintenance needs. Many birds, particularly those with uniparental incubation, achieve this balance through periodic incubation recesses, during which foraging and other self‐maintenance activities can occur. However, incubating birds may experience disturbances such as predator or human activity which interrupt natural incubation patterns by compelling them to leave the nest. We characterized incubating mallard Anas platyrhynchos and gadwall Mareca strepera hens’ responses when flushed by predators and investigators in Suisun Marsh, California, USA. Diurnal incubation recesses initiated by investigators approaching nests were 63% longer than natural diurnal incubation recesses initiated by the hen (geometric mean: 226.77 min versus 142.04 min). Nocturnal incubation recesses, many of which were likely the result of predators flushing hens, were of similar duration regardless of whether the nest was partially depredated during the event (115.33 [101.01;131.68] minutes) or not (119.62 [111.96;127.82] minutes), yet were 16% shorter than natural diurnal incubation recesses. Hens moved further from the nest during natural diurnal recesses or investigator‐initiated recesses than during nocturnal recesses, and the proportion of hen locations recorded in wetland versus upland habitat during recesses varied with recess type (model‐predicted means: natural diurnal recess 0.77; investigator‐initiated recess 0.82; nocturnal recess 0.31). Hens were more likely to take a natural recess following an investigator‐initiated recess earlier that same day than following a natural recess earlier that same day, and natural recesses that followed an investigator‐initiated recess were longer than natural recesses that followed an earlier natural recess, suggesting that hens may not fulfill all of their physiological needs during investigator‐initiated recesses. We found no evidence that the duration of investigator‐initiated recesses was influenced by repeated visits to the nest, whether by predators or by investigators, and trapping and handling the hen did not affect investigator‐initiated recess duration unless the hen was also fitted with a backpack‐harness style GPS–GSM transmitter at the time of capture. Hens that were captured and fitted with GPS–GSM transmitters took recesses that were 26% longer than recesses during which a hen was captured but a GPS–GSM transmitter was not attached. Incubation interruptions had measurable but limited and specific effects on hen behavior.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2045-7758 , 2045-7758
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2021
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2635675-2
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 8
    In: Ecology and Evolution, Wiley, Vol. 11, No. 12 ( 2021-06), p. 7292-7301
    Abstract: Incubating birds must balance the needs of their developing embryos with their own physiological needs, and many birds accomplish this by taking periodic breaks from incubation. Mallard ( Anas platyrhynchos ) and gadwall ( Mareca strepera ) hens typically take incubation recesses in the early morning and late afternoon, but recesses can also take place at night. We examined nocturnal incubation recess behavior for mallard and gadwall hens nesting in Suisun Marsh, California, USA, using iButton temperature dataloggers and continuous video monitoring at nests. Fourteen percent of all detected incubation recesses ( N  = 13,708) were nocturnal and took place on 20% of nest‐days ( N  = 8,668). Video monitoring showed that hens covered their eggs with down feathers when they initiated a nocturnal recess themselves as they would a diurnal recess, but they left the eggs uncovered in 94% of the nocturnal recesses in which predators appeared at nests. Thus, determining whether or not eggs were left uncovered during a recess can provide strong indication whether the recess was initiated by the hen (eggs covered) or a predator (eggs uncovered). Because nest temperature decreased more rapidly when eggs were left uncovered versus covered, we were able to characterize eggs during nocturnal incubation recesses as covered or uncovered using nest temperature data. Overall, we predicted that 75% of nocturnal recesses were hen‐initiated recesses (eggs covered) whereas 25% of nocturnal recesses were predator‐initiated recesses (eggs uncovered). Of the predator‐initiated nocturnal recesses, 56% were accompanied by evidence of depredation at the nest during the subsequent nest monitoring visit. Hen‐initiated nocturnal recesses began later in the night (closer to morning) and were shorter than predator‐initiated nocturnal recesses. Our results indicate that nocturnal incubation recesses occur regularly (14% of all recesses) and, similar to diurnal recesses, most nocturnal recesses (75%) are initiated by the hen rather than an approaching predator.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2045-7758 , 2045-7758
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2021
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2635675-2
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 9
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Oxford University Press (OUP) ; 2018
    In:  The Condor Vol. 120, No. 4 ( 2018-11), p. 739-750
    In: The Condor, Oxford University Press (OUP), Vol. 120, No. 4 ( 2018-11), p. 739-750
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0010-5422 , 1938-5129
    Language: English
    Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 215921-1
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2066173-3
    SSG: 12
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...