Temporally robust models for predicting seed yield of moist‐soil plants

Osborn, Joshua M.; Hagy, Heath M.; McClanahan, Matthew D.; Gray, Matthew J.

doi:10.1002/wsb.735

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other cover types, which included mudflat, bare soil, and open water, contained no or very little vegetation and therefore were assumed to contain an insignificant amount of seeds and tubers available to waterfowl (Osborn et al ). Osborn et al () indicated that rapid assessment models used to predict seed production of moist‐soil plants were temporally and spatially robust and accounted for >90% of biomass at sample locations; thus, we assumed our visual assessment models provided reasonable estimates of food density for waterfowl.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Energetic implications of floodplain wetland restoration strategies for waterfowl

McClain¹,

Hagy²,

Hine³

et al. 2018

Restoration Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modifications of the Illinois River and associated tributaries have resulted in altered hydrologic cycles and persistent river‐floodplain connections during the growing season that frequently impede the establishment of hydrophytic vegetation and have reduced value for migratory waterfowl and other waterbirds. To help guide floodplain restoration, we compared energetic carrying capacity for waterfowl in two wetland complexes along the Illinois River under different management regimes during 2012–2015. The south pool of Chautauqua National Wildlife Refuge (CNWR) was seasonally flooded due to a partial river connection and managed for moist‐soil vegetation. Emiquon Preserve was hydrologically isolated from the Illinois River by a high‐elevation levee and managed as a semipermanently flooded emergent marsh. Semipermanent emergent marsh management at Emiquon Preserve produced 5,495 energetic use‐days (EUD)/ha for waterfowl and other waterbirds across wetland cover types and years, and seasonal moist‐soil management at CNWR produced 6,199 EUD/ha in one of 4 years. At Emiquon Preserve, the aquatic bed cover type produced 9,660 EUD/ha, followed by 5,261 EUD/ha in moist‐soil, 1,398 EUD/ha in persistent emergent, 1,185 EUD/ha in hemi‐marsh, and 12 EUD/ha in open water cover types. At CNWR, the annual grass and sedge cover type produced 7,031 EUD/ha, followed by 5,618 EUD/ha in annual broadleaf and 1,305 EUD/ha in perennial grass cover types. Restoration of floodplain wetlands in isolation from frequent flood pulses during the growing season can produce hemi‐marsh and aquatic bed vegetation communities that provide high‐quality habitat for waterfowl and which have been mostly eliminated from large river systems in the Midwest, U.S.A.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Energetic implications of floodplain wetland restoration strategies for waterfowl

McClain¹,

Hagy²,

Hine³

et al. 2018

Restoration Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although a number of studies have documented an increase in consumption of invertebrates during winter and spring for northern pintail (Ballard et al 2004), blue-winged teal (Manley et al 1992), and mallard (Hitchcock et al 2021), it is unclear if trends are related to changing food availability (Hagy and Kaminski 2012b;Osborn et al 2017) or birds' response to physiological needs. Heitmeyer (1985) described an increase in dietary invertebrates for mallards during prebasic molt in late winter, but after molting they shifted back to a high carbohydrate diet immediately before spring migration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Food Selection by Spring-Migrating Green-Winged Teal

Klimas

Osborn

Yetter

et al. 2022

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Mississippi Flyway supports millions of waterfowl during spring migration as individuals replenish vital nutrients en route to breeding locations. Green-winged teal Anas crecca consume natural plant and animal foods in shallow wetlands during autumn and winter, but little information is available to describe food use and selection during spring migration. We experimentally collected green-winged teal and quantified food use and availability to determine selection in the Illinois River Valley during February–April 2016–2018. We removed, dried, and weighed (± 0.1 mg) food items by taxa from the upper digestive tract (proventriculus and esophagus) of birds and core samples for comparison. Additionally, we evaluated retention of common diet items between small (#60; 250 µm) and medium (#35; 500 µm) sieves and the effect of processing sieve size on selection coefficients. Seeds of moist-soil vegetation occurred in all green-winged teal diets, while invertebrates and vegetative material occurred in 67.4% and 25.8% of diets, respectively. Green-winged teal consumed 85.8% (CI95 = 81.2–90.3%) plant material and 14.2% (CI95 = 9.6–18.7%) invertebrates based on aggregate dry biomass. We failed to find support for selection of either plant or animal foods in general, but green-winged teal selected Cyperus spp., Ammannia spp., Leptochloa spp., and Potamogeton spp. and avoided Amaranthus spp., Ipomoea spp., Echinochloa spp., and Oligochaeta individual taxa. We found no support for a difference in selection ratios between sexes, but selection ratios differed among years and wetland connectivity regimes with changes in food availability. Sieve size had minimal impact on rank and selection intensity of most food items, but only small sieves captured Ammannia spp., which was an important diet item. We found no evidence that green-winged teal selected invertebrates in our mid-latitude migration study area as has been speculated for dabbling ducks in general during spring migration (i.e., spring diet-shift hypothesis). We encourage managers to provide shallowly flooded wetlands with desirable plant taxa (e.g., Cyperus spp., Ammannia spp., Leptochloa spp.) for green-winged teal by maintaining actively-managed moist-soil wetlands that are made available during spring migration.

show abstract

“…We excluded species not known to be consumed by ducks from analysis for both soil cores and rapid assessment data (Hagy and Kaminski 2012a;Osborn et al 2017). We used an analysis of variance to test for differences in seed yield by NWR using package stats in Program R (version 2.15.0; R Core Team 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rapid assessment methods for estimating seed yield include visual indices that are quicker to implement and more cost-effective than direct methods which require processing soil or plant samples in the laboratory (Kross et al 2008;Hagy et al 2011;Osborn et al 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Large-Scale Assessment of Rapid Monitoring Methods for Estimating Moist-Soil Seed Production

Martin

Hagy

Askren

et al. 2022

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Federal, state, and private entities manage seasonal flooded, shallow wetlands to provide food and other habitat resources for wetland-dependent migratory birds, including migrating and wintering waterfowl. Individual National Wildlife Refuges managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service annually monitor seed production in moist-soil wetlands to track performance relative to regional foraging habitat objectives and to evaluate local habitat management activities. The National Wildlife Refuge System does not currently have a standard sampling protocol, and thus seeks a reliable rapid assessment method for estimating seed production to achieve standardized estimates and to avoid inconsistencies in data collection, metrics used, and usefulness of the monitoring efforts. We compared seed yield estimates derived from a suite of commonly used seed production assessment methods with those from soil core samples across six National Wildlife Refuges in the southeastern U.S. The most parsimonious model included only common plant species and a single visual assessment of overall coverage (1-5) and seed quality (1-4) for each moist-soil unit (r2adj = 0.71). Generally, models that included only common plant species and a visual estimate of seed yield for moist-soil wetlands overall had greater support than models that included all plant species and those that included data from subplots (n = 10) nested within moist-soil wetlands. Experience level of observer had a moderate effect on accuracy (r2mar = 0.20) and geographic range increased variation in overall seed yield estimates within moist-soil wetlands. Notably, we found that similar indices developed in different geographic regions performed well across the Southeast, but a widely used index based on estimates of seed yield for individual plant species performed poorly in this study. Standardizing the use of a single, efficient, and reliable method to estimate seed abundance in moist-soil wetlands will provide wetland mangers the ability to consistently estimate performance relative to objectives, evaluate management actions, and track trends on National Wildlife Refuges in the southeastern U.S.

show abstract

Temporally robust models for predicting seed yield of moist‐soil plants

Cited by 6 publications

References 23 publications

Energetic implications of floodplain wetland restoration strategies for waterfowl

Energetic implications of floodplain wetland restoration strategies for waterfowl

Food Selection by Spring-Migrating Green-Winged Teal

Large-Scale Assessment of Rapid Monitoring Methods for Estimating Moist-Soil Seed Production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About