Making sense of scents: Effects of odour on survival of simulated duck nests

Journal of Avian Biology

Volumn 28, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 31-37

  Clark, Robert G ^a   Wobeser, Bruce K ^a  

^a ENVIRONMENT CANADA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANAS; ANAS PLATYRHYNCHOS; ANAS SP.; ANSER; AVES; GALLUS GALLUS; PLATYRHYNCHOS;

MALLARD; NEST PREDATION; ODOUR; SURVIVAL;

EID: 0030613121     PISSN: 09088857     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3677091     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Clark, R. G. and Nudds, T. D. 1991. Habitat patch size and duck nesting success: the crucial experiments have not been performed. - Wildl. Soc. Bull. 19: 534-543.
2. Erikstad, K. E., Blom, R. and Myrberget, S. 1982. Territorial hooded crows as predators on willow ptarmigan nests. - J. Wildl. Manage. 46: 109-114.
3. Esler, D. and Grand, J. B. 1993. Factors influencing depredation of artificial duck nests. - J. Wildl. Manage. 57: 244-248.
4. Gloutney, M. L., Clark, R. G., Afton, A. D. and Huff, G. H. 1993. Timing of nest searches for upland-nesting waterfowl. - J. Wildl. Manage. 57: 597-601.
5. Götmark, F. 1992. The effects of investigator disturbance on nesting birds. - Current Ornithol. 9: 63-104.
6. Guyn, K. L. and Clark, R. G. 1996. Cover characteristics and success of natural and artificial duck nests. - J. Field Ornithol., in press.
7. Hammond, M. C. and Forward, W. R. 1956. Experiments on causes of duck nest predation. - J. Wildl. Manage. 20: 243-247.
8. Hudson, P. J., Dobson, A. P. and Newborn, D. 1992. Do parasites make prey more vulnerable to predation? Red grouse and parasites. - J. Anim. Ecol. 61: 681-692.
9. Johnson, D. H. 1979. Estimating nest success: the Mayfield method and an alternative. - Auk 96: 651-661.
10. Keith, L. B. 1961. A study of waterfowl ecology on small impoundments in southeastern Alberta. - Wildl. Monogr. 6.
11. Livezey, B. C. 1980. Effects of selected observer-related factors on fates of duck nests. - Wildl. Soc. Bull. 8: 123-128.
12. Mayfield, H. F. 1975. Suggestions for calculating nest success. - Wilson Bull. 87: 255-261.
13. McDougall, P. and Milne, H. 1978. The anti-predator function of defecation on their own eggs by female Eiders. -Wildfowl 29: 55-59.
14. Petit, K. E., Petit, L. J. and Petit, D. R. 1989. Fecal sac removal: do the pattern and distance of dispersal affect the chance of nest predation? - Condor 91: 479-482.
15. SAS Institute 1990. SAS/STAT user's guide. - Cary, NC.
16. Storaas, T. 1988. A comparison of losses in artificial and naturally occurring capercaillie nests. - J. Wildl. Manage. 52: 123-126.
17. Swennen, C. 1968. Nest protection of eiderducks and shovelers by means of faeces. - Ardea 56: 248-258.
18. Townsend, G. H. 1966. A study of waterfowl nesting on the Saskatchewan River delta. - Can. Field-Nat. 80: 74-88.
19. Whelan, C. J., Dilger, M. L., Robson, D., Hallyn, N. and Dilger, S. 1994. Effects of olfactory cues on artificial-nest experiments. - Auk 111: 945-952.
20. Willebrand, T. and Marcström, V. 1988. On the danger of using dummy nests to study predation. - Auk 105: 378-379.
21. Zar. J. H. 1984. Biostatistical analysis. - Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.