Adaptive nest clustering and density-dependent nest survival in dabbling ducks

Oikos

Volumn 123, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 239-247

  Ringelman, Kevin M ^a   Eadie, John M ^a   Ackerman, Joshua T ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b U S GEOLOGICAL SURVEY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; DENSITY DEPENDENCE; FORAGING BEHAVIOR; NEAREST NEIGHBOR ANALYSIS; NEST PREDATION; NEST SITE; SITE SELECTION; SPATIOTEMPORAL ANALYSIS; SURVIVAL; WATERFOWL;

ANAS; ANAS PLATYRHYNCHOS; ANAS STREPERA; ANATIDAE;

EID: 84892677971     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00851.x     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Ackerman J. T. 2002. Of mice and mallards: positive indirect effects of coexisting prey on waterfowl nest success. Oikos 99: 469-480.
2. Ackerman J. T. et al. 2003. The influence of partial clutch depredation on duckling production. J. Wildlife Manage. 67: 576-587.
3. Ackerman J. T. et al. 2004. Is predation on waterfowl nests density dependent? Tests at three spatial scales. Oikos 107: 128-140.
4. Ackerman J. T. et al. 2006. Effectiveness of spinning-wing decoys varies among dabbling duck species and locations. J. Wildlife Manage. 70: 799-804.
5. Andrén H. 1991. Predation - an overrated factor for over- dispersion of birds nests. Anim. Behav. 41: 1063-1069.
6. Arnold T. W. 2010. Uninformative parameters and model selection using Akaike's information criterion. J. Wildlife Manage. 74: 1175-1178.
7. Baddeley A. and Turner R. 2005. Spatstat: an R package for analyzing spatial point patterns. J. Stat. Software 12: 1-42.
8. Brook B. W. and Bradshaw C. J. A. 2006. Stength of evidence for density dependence in abundance time series of 1198 species. Ecology 87: 1445-1451.
9. Burnham K. P. and Anderson D. R. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. - Springer.
10. Butler M. A. and Rotella J. T. 1998. Validity of using artificial nests to assess duck-nest success. J. Wildlife Manage. 62: 163-171.
11. Caro T. 2005. Antipredator defenses in birds and mammals. - Univ. of Chicago Press.
12. Clark P. J. and Evans F. C. 1954. Distance to nearest neighbor as a measure of spatial relationships in populations. Ecology 35: 445-453.
13. Clark R. G. and Wobeser B. K. 1997. Making sense of scents: effects of odour on survival of simulated duck nests. J. Avian Biol. 28: 31-37.
14. Duebbert H. F. and Lokemoen J. T. 1976. Duck nesting in fields of undisturbed grass-legume cover. J. Wildlife Manage. 40: 39-49.
15. Gloutney M. L. et al. 1993. Timing of nest searches for upland nesting waterfowl. J. Wildlife Manage. 57: 597-601.
16. Greenwood R. J. et al. 1995. Factors associated with duck nest success in the prairie pothole region of Canada. Wildlife Monogr. 128: 1-57.
17. Gunnarsson G. and Elmberg J. 2008. Density-dependent nest predation - an experiment with simulated mallard nests in contrasting landscapes. Ibis 150: 259-269.
18. Gunnarsson G. et al. 2013. Density dependence in ducks: a review of the evidence. Eur. J. Wildlife Res 59: 305-321.
19. Hines J. E. and Mitchell G. J. 1983. Gadwall nest-site selection and nesting success. J. Wildlife Manage. 47: 1063-1071.
20. Hixon M. A. and Carr M. H. 1997. Synergistic predation, density dependence and population regulation in marine fish. Science 277: 946-949.
21. Hoekman S. T. et al. 2002. Sensitivity analyses of the life cycle of midcontinent mallards. J. Wildlife Manage. 66: 883-900.
22. Johnson D. H. 1979. Estimating nest success: the Mayfield method and an alternative. Auk 96: 651-661.
23. Johnson D. H. et al. 1989. Importance of individual species of predators on nesting success of ducks in the Canadian Prairie Pothole Region. Can. J. Zool. 67: 291-297.
24. Klett A. T. et al. 1986. Techniques for studying nest success of ducks in upland habitats in the Prairie Pothole Region. - US Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publ. 158.
25. Klett A. T. et al. 1988. Duck nest success in the prairie pothole region. J. Wildlife Manage. 52: 431-440.
26. Krementz D. G. et al. 1989. Model-based estimates of annual survival rate are preferable to observed maximum lifespan statistics for use in comparative life-history studies. Oikos 56: 203-208.
27. Krementz D. G. et al. 1997. Sources of variation in waterfowl survival rates. Auk 114: 93-102.
28. Larivière S. and Messier F. 1998. Effect of density and nearest neighbors on simulated waterfowl nests: can predators recognize high-density nesting patches. Oikos 83: 12-20.
29. Larivière S. and Messier F. 2001a. Space-use patterns by female striped skunks exposed to aggregations of simulated duck nests. Can. J. Zool. 79: 1604-1608.
30. Larivière S. and Messier F. 2001b. Temporal patterns of predation of duck nests in the Canadian prairies. Am. Midl. Nat. 146: 339-344.
31. Lima S. L. 2009. Predators and the breeding bird: behavioral and reproductive flexibility under the risk of predation. Biol. Rev. 84: 485-513.
32. Major R. E. and Kendal C. E. 1996. The contribution of artificial nest experiments to understanding avian reproductive success: a review of methods and conclusions. Ibis 138: 298-307.
33. Mayfield H. F. 1975. Suggestions for calculating nest success. Wilson Bull. 87: 456-466.
34. McLandress M. R. et al. 1996. Nesting biology of mallards in California. J. Wildlife Manage. 60: 94-107.
35. Montgomerie R. D. and Weatherhead P. J. 1988. Risks and rewards of nest defense by parent birds. Q. Rev. Biol. 63: 167-187.
36. Murray D. L. et al. 2010. Temporal shift in density dependence among North American breeding duck populations. Ecology 91: 571-581.
37. Padysakova E. et al. 2010. Predation on simulated duck nests in relation to nest density and landscape structure. Wildlife Res. 37: 597-603.
38. Pasitschniak-Arts M. and Messier F. 1995. Predator identification at simulated waterfowl nests using inconspicuous hair catchers and wax-filled eggs. Can. J. Zool. 73: 984-990.
39. Phillips M. L. et al. 2003. Predator selection of prairie landscape features and its relation to duck nest success. J. Wildlife Manage. 67: 104-114.
40. Pieron M. R. and Rohwer F. C. 2010. Effects of large-scale predator reduction on nest success of upland nesting ducks. J. Wildlife Manage. 74: 124-132.
41. Ringelman K. M. and Stupaczuk M. J. 2013. Dabbling ducks increase nest defense after partial clutch loss. Condor 115: 290-297.
42. Ringelman K. M. et al. 2012. Density-dependent nest predation in waterfowl: the relative importance of nest density versus nest dispersion. Oecologia 169: 695-702.
43. Robel R. J. et al. 1970. Relationship between visual obstruction measurements and weight of grassland vegetation. J. Range Manage. 23: 295-297.
44. Sæther B.-E. et al. 2008. Geographical gradients in the population dynamics of North American prairie ducks. J. Anim. Ecol. 77: 869-882.
45. Sargeant A. B. et al. 1998. Interpreting evidence of depredation of duck nests in the prairie pothole region. - US Geol. Surv., Northern Prairie Wildlife Reseach Center.
46. Seymour A. S. et al. 2003. Factors influencing the nesting success of lapwings Vanellus vanellus and behavior of red foxes Vulpes vulpes in lapwing nesting sites: lapwing nest predation was negatively correlated to nest density, while lapwing alarm duration in response to foxes was positively correlated with the number of lapwing broods present. Bird Study 50: 39-46.
47. Seymour A. S. et al. 2004. Potential effects of reserve size on incidental nest predation by red foxes Vulpes vulpes. Ecol. Modell. 175: 101-114.
48. Shaffer T. L. 2004. A unified approach to analyzing nest success. Auk 121: 526-540.
49. Tinbergen N. et al. 1967. An experiment on spacing-out as a defence against predation. Behaviour 28: 307-321.
50. Vickery W. L. and Nudds T. D. 1984. Detection of density-dependent effects on annual duck censuses. Ecology 65: 96-104.
51. Viljugrein H. et al. 2005. Density dependence in North American ducks. Ecology 86: 245-254.
52. Weller M. W. 1956. A simple field candler for waterfowl eggs. J. Wildlife Manage. 43: 111-113.
53. Williams C. K. 2012. Accounting for wildlife life-history strategies when modeling stochastic density-dependent populations: a review. J. Wildlife Manage. 77: 4-11.