Wetlands in the Upper Mississippi River and Great Lakes Region (UMRGLR) must annually sustain populations of migrating waterfowl from the mid‐continent of North America. We used multi‐stage sampling to estimate plant and invertebrate food biomasses (kg/ha) for ducks in 3 wetland habitat types at 6 stop‐over locations in the UMRGLR during 2006 and 2007. Total biomass was greatest in palustrine emergent (PEM; ${\bar {x}}$ = 208 kg/ha, SE = 23, median = 120), followed by palustrine forested (PF; ${\bar {x}}$ = 87 kg/ha, SE = 7; median = 43), and lacustrine–riverine (LR; ${\bar {x}}$ = 52 kg/ha, SE = 7; median = 27) wetlands. Ducks that foraged in forested and LR wetlands encountered the least food abundance during spring in the UMRGLR. Our estimates of food abundance were the lowest reported among other landscape scale surveys from mid‐continent North America. About 1 in every 5 PEM wetlands and over half of our PF and LR wetlands that we sampled contained <50 kg/ha of food, suggesting many had little or no forage value to ducks during spring. Biomass of plant foods generally exceeded invertebrate biomass in all habitat types, although invertebrate biomass estimates exceeded plant biomass in 8 of 29 sites when considered by wetland type and year. Total food biomass estimates varied widely (${\bar {x}}$ = 6–425 kg/ha) between years and among habitats; thus, using global arithmetic means to estimate food abundance for conservation planning obscures fine scale temporal and spatial variation that may be necessary for management on local and sub‐regional levels. Distributions of food biomass estimates were right‐skewed, causing us to question whether arithmetic means realistically represent levels of food abundance that all ducks encounter during spring migration. Alternative measures of central tendency (e.g., median) may be more biologically realistic, particularly if spring‐migrating ducks are not distributed in an ideal‐free manner with respect to food abundance. Future research should determine how ducks distribute themselves in relation to variation in food abundance in space and time during spring migration to strengthen the biological approach to conservation planning in non‐breeding Joint Venture areas of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. © 2011 The Wildlife Society.

Scientists estimate seed abundances to calculate seasonal carrying capacities and assess wetland management actions for waterfowl and other wildlife using soil core samples. We evaluated recovery of known quantities of moist‐soil seeds from whole and subsampled experimental core samples containing 12 seed taxa representing small, medium, and large size classes. We recovered 86.3% (SE = 1.8) of all seeds added to experimental cores; 8.3% (SE = 1.2) of seeds were destroyed during the sieving process and 5.4% (SE = 1.2) were not recovered by observers. Recovery rates varied by seed size, but not seed quantity or disproportionate ratios of seed‐size classes. Overall seed recovery rates were similar between subsampled (${\bar {x}}$ = 81.2%, SE = 3.6) and whole–processed core samples (${\bar {x}}$ = 86.3%, SE = 1.8). We used recovery rates to generate size‐specific, taxon‐specific, and constant correction factors and applied each to actual core sample data. Size‐specific correction factors increased seed mass estimates in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley (${\bar {x}}$ = 10.1%, SE = 0.32), upper Midwest (${\bar {x}}$ = 21.2%, SE = 0.61), and both regions combined (${\bar {x}}$ = 15.7%, SE = 0.51) differently, as seed composition in core samples varied regionally. We suggest scientists consider using size‐specific correction factors to account for seed recovery bias in core samples because these factors may be applied to a variety of taxa and produced similar mass estimates as taxon‐specific correction factors. However, if data from core samples are unavailable at the resolution of seed size classes, we suggest increasing seed mass estimates by 16% to account for seed recovery bias. © 2011 The Wildlife Society.

No abstract

The Mississippi Alluvial Valley once had extensive bottomland hardwood forests, but less than 25% of the original area remains. Impounded bottomland hardwood forests, or greentree reservoirs, and naturally flooded forests are important sources of invertebrate or other prey for waterfowl, but no previous studies of invertebrate abundance and biomass have been at the scale of the Mississippi Alluvial Valley. Additionally, the Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan requires precise, contemporary estimates of invertebrate biomass in hardwood bottomlands to determine potential foraging carrying capacity of these habitats for wintering ducks. We used sweep nets to collect aquatic invertebrates from four physiographically disjunct hardwood bottomlands in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley and Mississippi's Interior Flatwoods region during winters 2008–2010. Invertebrate abundance varied inversely with water depth in both early and late winter, with greatest abundances in depths ranging from 10 to 20 cm. The estimate of invertebrate biomass in naturally flooded forests of the Mississippi Alluvial Valley for both years combined was 18.39 kg(dry)/ha (coefficient of variation [CV]  =  15%). When we combined data across regions, sites, greentree reservoirs and naturally flooded forests, and years, the estimate of mean invertebrate biomass decreased to 6.6 kg/ha but precision increased to CV  =  9%. We recommend the Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture adopt 18.39 kg(dry)/ha as a revised estimate for invertebrate biomass for naturally flooded forests, because this estimate is reasonably precise and less than 2% of remaining hardwood bottomland is impounded greentree reservoirs in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley. Additionally, we recommend managing to invoke dynamic flooding regimes in greentree reservoirs to mimic natural flood events and provide maximal coverage of depths less than 30 cm to facilitate foraging ducks' access to nektonic and benthic invertebrates, acorns, and other natural seeds.