Home range estimator method and GPS sampling schedule affect habitat selection inferences for wild turkeys

Cohen, Bradley S.; Prebyl, Thomas J.; Collier, Bret A.; Chamberlain, Michael J.

doi:10.1002/wsb.845

Cited by 59 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We identified sex and determined age of captured individuals based on presence of barring on the ninth and tenth primaries (Pelham & Dickson, ). All individuals were given a numbered, riveted aluminum tarsal band and radio‐tagged with a backpack‐style GPS‒VHF transmitter (Guthrie et al, ) produced by Biotrack Ltd. We programmed transmitters to take 1 location nightly (23:58:58), and hourly locations between 05:00 and 20:00 until the battery died or the unit were recovered (Cohen, Prebyl, Collier, & Chamberlain, ). We released wild turkeys at the capture location immediately following processing.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incubation recess behaviors influence nest survival of Wild Turkeys

Bakner

Schofield

Cedotal

et al. 2019

Ecology and Evolution

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In ground nesting upland birds, reproductive activities contribute to elevated predation risk, so females presumably use multiple strategies to ensure nest success. Identification of drivers reducing predation risk has primarily focused on evaluating vegetative conditions at nest sites, but behavioral decisions manifested through movements during incubation may be additional drivers of nest survival. However, our understanding of how movements during incubation impact nest survival is limited for most ground nesting birds. Using GPS data collected from female Eastern Wild Turkeys (n = 206), we evaluated nest survival as it relates to movement behaviors during incubation, including recess frequency, distance traveled during recesses, and habitat selection during recess movements. We identified 9,361 movements off nests and 6,529 recess events based on approximately 62,065 hr of incubation data, and estimated mean nest attentiveness of 84.0%. The numbers of recesses taken daily were variable across females (range: 1‒7). Nest survival modeling indicated that increased cumulative distance moved during recesses each day was the primary driver of positive daily nest survival. Our results suggest behavioral decisions are influencing trade‐offs between nest survival and adult female survival during incubation to reduce predation risk, specifically through adjustments to distances traveled during recesses.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incubation recess behaviors influence nest survival of Wild Turkeys

Bakner

Schofield

Cedotal

et al. 2019

Ecology and Evolution

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We radio‐tagged adult and juvenile males with a backpack‐style global positioning system (GPS) transmitter (Guthrie et al ) equipped with a very high frequency beacon and mortality sensor weighing approximately 88 g (Lotek Wireless, Newmarket, ON, Canada). We programmed GPS units to record locations hourly from 0500 through 2000 and 1 roost location at 2359 for the life of the units (Cohen et al ). We released all turkeys on site immediately after processing.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hunting Activity Effects on Roost Selection by Male Wild Turkeys

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Roosting is an important component of wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo; turkey) ecology as roosts provide security from predators and inclement weather. Males call (gobble) from roosts during the reproductive season, and roost locations are important for maximizing access to females and transmission of calls across the landscape, while also minimizing predation risk. Spring hunting of male turkeys occurs during the reproductive season, and hunting activity influences male behaviors and calling. Because roost sites are important for wild turkey ecology, we evaluated roost site selection and fidelity of male turkeys relative to land cover types, vegetative characteristics, and the presence of hunting activity during 2017–2018 in Georgia, USA. Prior to onset of hunting, males selected roosts nearest to hardwood and pine (Pinus spp.) forests. Roost site fidelity was low and distances between roosts were large. After onset of hunting, males selected pine forests less and exhibited greater plasticity in roost selection while fidelity remained minimal, suggesting that males may have altered selection to mitigate risk from hunting while maintaining the strategy of moving about their ranges and roosting at different sites on consecutive nights. Future research should examine potential effects of hunting‐induced shifts in resource selection on other aspects of male turkey behavior and ecology. © 2019 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

“…We defined pre‐nesting area as the space used from 1 March until onset of laying behavior for first attempts. We estimated space use using the dynamic Brownian Bridge movement model (dBBMM) to calculate 95% utilization distributions (UDs) around individual turkey locations, using a window size of 15, margin of 5, and location error of 15 m (Kranstauber et al , Cohen et al ). We calculated UDs during all pre‐nesting, laying, and incubation periods for each female.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If a turkey had >1 nest, we considered the pre‐nesting area for each female as the merged UDs for each period prior to laying. We did this to create a more conservative estimate of space use because a new UD would be overly biased towards locations taken during the incubation period (Cohen et al ). To facilitate comparisons with recent studies, we mirrored the methodology of Yeldell et al (), and generated 5 paired random locations within each pre‐nesting range for each individual female across each nest attempt.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nest and brood site selection of eastern wild turkeys

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Management of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) forests relies on frequent prescribed fire to maintain desirable plant communities. Prescribed fire is often applied while female wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo) are reproductively active and may immediately affect habitat availability and demographic outcomes. We identified covariates affecting selection of areas used by nesting and brooding females and determined if these covariates influenced nest and brood survival in a longleaf pine ecosystem. We captured 63 female wild turkeys and measured vegetation and landscape characteristics surrounding nests, brood roosts, and daytime use sites. We used conditional logistic regression to determine which vegetation and landscape‐scale characteristics influenced nest, brood roost, or daytime use sites. We generated Cox proportional hazard models at multiple spatial scales to determine if selection influenced nest and brood survival. Females selected nest sites with greater visual obstruction and increased ground cover, and also nested closer to roads. We observed relevant differences in vegetation and landscape variables associated with where females chose to roost broods compared to sites chosen for foraging or loafing. Females roosted broods at sites with increased ground cover and decreased visual obstruction, and daytime use by broods was most related to increases in ground cover. Time‐since‐fire was an informative covariate for brood site selection but not for nest site selection. Females selected brood roost sites in stands not recently burned (3–6 yr post‐fire), and selected daytime use sites in stands burned the current year (0 yr post‐fire) and 2 years post‐fire. We failed to observe links between selection of vegetation and landscape covariates and probability of nest or brood survival. Notably, our results suggest short (i.e., 1–2 yr) fire return intervals do not provide vegetation communities selected by females to roost broods. Conversely, stands burned within the current year were important for daytime use by broods. Collectively, our findings demonstrate the importance of maintaining diverse fire return intervals to ensure availability of vegetation conditions necessary for nesting and brooding. © 2018 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

Home range estimator method and GPS sampling schedule affect habitat selection inferences for wild turkeys

Cited by 59 publications

References 44 publications

Incubation recess behaviors influence nest survival of Wild Turkeys

Incubation recess behaviors influence nest survival of Wild Turkeys

Hunting Activity Effects on Roost Selection by Male Wild Turkeys

Nest and brood site selection of eastern wild turkeys

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About