Spatial and temporal dynamics of turtle nest predation: Edge effects

Oikos

Volumn 99, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 538-544

  Kolbe, Jason J ^a,b   Janzen, Fredric J ^a  

^a IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EDGE EFFECT; NEST PREDATION; SPATIOTEMPORAL ANALYSIS; TURTLE;

AMPHIBIA; CHRYSEMYS PICTA; REPTILIA; TESTUDINES;

EID: 0036954525     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0706.2002.11853.x     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Andrén, H. 1992. Corvid density and nest predation in relation to forest fragmentation: a landscape perspective. - Ecology 73: 794-804.
2. Andrén, H. and Angelstam, P. 1988. Elevated predation rates as an edge effect in habitat islands: experimental evidence. - Ecology 69: 544-547.
3. Angelstam, P. 1986. Predation on ground-nesting birds' nests in relation to predator densities and habitat edge. - Oikos 47: 365-373.
4. Báldi, A. 1999. Microclimate and vegetation edge effects in a reedbed in Hungary. - Biodiversity Conserv. 8: 1697-1706.
5. Boose, E. R., Boose, E. F. and Lezberg, A. L. 1998. A practical method for mapping trees using distance measurements. - Ecology 79: 819-827.
6. Burke, V. J., Rathburn, S. L., Bodie, J. R. and Gibbons, J. W. 1998. Effect of density on predation rate for turtle nests in a complex landscape. - Oikos 83: 3-11.
7. Cagle, K. D., Packard, G. C., Miller, K. and Packard, M. J. 1993. Effects of the microclimate in natural nests on development of embryonic painted turtles, Chrysemys picta. Funct. Ecol. 7: 653-660.
8. Donovan, T. M., Jones, P. W., Annand, E. M. and Thompson, F. R. 1997. Variation in local-scale edge effects: mechanisms and landscape context. - Ecology 78: 2064-2075.
9. ESRI Inc. 1998. ArcView GIS Version 3.1. - Redlands, CA.
10. Gates, J. E. and Gysel, L. W. 1978. Avian nest dispersion and fledging success in field-forest ecotones. - Ecology 59: 871-883.
11. Janzen, F. J. 1994. Vegetational cover predicts the sex ratio of hatchling turtles in natural nests. - Ecology 75: 1593-1599.
12. Janzen, F. J. and Paukstis, G. L. 1991. Environmental sex determination in reptiles: ecology, evolution, and experimental design. - Quart. Rev. Biol. 66: 149-179.
13. Johnson, R. G. and Temple, S. A. 1990. Nest predation and brood parasitism of tallgrass prairie birds. - J. Wildlife Man. 54: 106-111.
14. Luck, G. W., Possingham, H. P. and Paton, D. C. 1999. Bird responses at inherent and induced edges in the Murray Mallee, South Australia. 2. Nest predation as an edge effect. - Emu 99: 170-175.
15. Martin, T. E. 1988. On the advantage of being different: nest predation and the coexistence of species. - PNAS 85: 2196-2199.
16. Møller, A. P. 1989. Nest site selection across field-woodland ecotones: the effect of nest predation. - Oikos 56: 240-246.
17. Murcia, C. 1995. Edge effects in fragmented forests: implications for conservation. - Trends Ecol. Evol. 10: 58-62.
18. Niemuth, N. D. and Boyce, M. S. 1997. Edge-related nest losses in Wisconsin pine barrens. - J. Wildlife Man. 61: 1234-1239.
19. Packard, G. C., Miller, K., Packard, M. J. and Birchard, G. F. 1999. Environmentally induced variation in body size and condition in hatchling snapping turtles (Chelydra serpentina). - Can. J. Zool. 77: 278-289.
20. Page, G. W., Stenzel, L. E., Winkler, D. W. and Swarth, G. W. 1983. Spacing out at Mono Lake: breeding success, nest density and predation in the snowy plover. - Auk 100: 13-24.
21. Pasitschniak-Arts, M. and Messier, F. 1995. Risk of predation on waterfowl nests in the Canadian prairies: effects of habitat edges and agricultural practices. - Oikos 73: 347-355.
22. Pasitschniak-Arts, M., Clark, R. G. and Messier, F. 1998. Duck nesting success in a fragmented prairie landscape: is edge effect important? - Biol. Conserv. 85: 55-62.
23. Paton, P. W. C. 1994. The effect of edge on avian nest success: how strong is the evidence? - Conserv. Biol. 8: 17-26.
24. Ratti, J. T. and Reese, K. P. 1988. Preliminary test of the ecological trap hypothesis. - J. Wildlife Man. 52: 484-491.
25. SAS Institute Inc. 1997. JMP user's guide, Version 3.2. - SAS Institute, Cary, NC.
26. Schluter, D. 1988. Estimating the form of natural selection on a quantitative trait. - Evolution 42: 849-861.
27. Sokal, R. R. and Rohlf, F. J. 1995. Biometry. - W. H. Freeman.
28. Suarez, A. V., Pfennig, K. S. and Robinson, S. K. 1997. Nesting success of a disturbance-dependent songbird on different kinds of edges. - Conserv. Biol. 11: 928-935.
29. Temple, S. A. 1987. Predation on turtle nests increases near ecological edges. - Copeia 1987: 250-252.
30. Turner, M. G. 1989. Landscape ecology: the effect of pattern on process. - Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 20: 171-197.
31. Weisrock, D. W. and Janzen, F. J. 1999. Thermal and fitness-related consequences of nest location in painted turtles (Chrysemys picta). - Funct. Ecol. 13: 94-101.
32. Wilcove, D. S. 1985. Nest predation in forest tracts and the decline of migratory songbirds. - Ecology 66: 1211-1214.
33. Winter, M., Johnson, D. H. and Faaborg, J. 2000. Evidence for edge effects on multiple levels in tallgrass prairie. Condor 102: 256-266.
34. Yahner, R. H. 1988. Changes in wildlife communities near edges. - Conserv. Biol. 2: 333-399.
35. Yahner, R. H. and Wright, A. L. 1985. Depredation on artificial ground nests: effects of edge and plot age. - J. Wildlife Man. 49: 508-513.