Twelve Years Later: Reassessing Visual and Olfactory Cues Raccoons Use to Find Diamondback Terrapin Nests

Edmunds, Sarah E.; Kasparov, Christine N.; Yoon, Jae Byeok; Kanonik, Alexandra; Burke, Russell L.

doi:10.1670/17-029

Cited by 10 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Researchers have reported a neutral or negative relationship between nest visitation or nest flagging and the probability of nest predation (Tuberville and Burke 1994, O'Grady et al 1996, Burke et al 2005, Edmunds et al 2018), so we do not think that our activity increased nest predation. The consistent variability in egg survival across sites appears to mirror observed recruitment patterns and suggests that observed egg survival may reflect longer‐term trends and not research‐augmented predation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…Researchers have reported a neutral or negative relationship between nest visitation or nest flagging and the probability of nest predation (Tuberville and Burke 1994, O'Grady et al 1996, Burke et al 2005, Edmunds et al 2018), so we do not think that our activity increased Figure 3. Mean daily temperature (A), mean daily minimum temperature (B), and mean daily temperature range (C) for 56 bog turtle nests with known or hypothesized incubation periods; these nests were located at 4 sites in North Carolina, USA, 2016-2017 (site A = 20 nests; site B = 10 nests; site D = 19 nests; site H = 7 nests).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hatch Success and Recruitment Patterns of the Bog Turtle

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researchers suggest that several bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii) populations in North Carolina, USA, are in decline and have few remaining individuals and low annual survival probability. Most populations are dominated by older adults with few juveniles encountered; however, the proportion of juveniles encountered in 2 populations is higher. It is unknown why the juvenile:adult ratio varies among populations. We conducted a nest monitoring study in 2016 and 2017 to test the hypothesis that sites with fewer juvenile encounters would be where nest predation was highest. We documented the fate of 272 eggs from 83 nests encountered across 7 sites in North Carolina. On average 28% of eggs hatched across all sites over both years, but we observed large variation in hatch success among sites. Predation by mesopredators and small mammals was the primary cause of nest failure. The probability of nest predation decreased with greater emergent vegetation density and increased with greater distance to the edge of the wetland. Cooler temperatures, which prolonged incubation and thus increased predation risk, may also hinder recruitment at higher elevation sites. Our observations are consistent with the hypothesis that nest predation would be highest at sites with fewer juvenile encounters. Managers concerned about low bog turtle recruitment rates should consider the role of nest predation and the potential benefits of management that increases hatch rates. © 2020 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…Researchers have reported a neutral or negative relationship between nest visitation or nest flagging and the probability of nest predation (Tuberville and Burke 1994, O'Grady et al 1996, Burke et al 2005, Edmunds et al 2018), so we do not think that our activity increased Figure 3. Mean daily temperature (A), mean daily minimum temperature (B), and mean daily temperature range (C) for 56 bog turtle nests with known or hypothesized incubation periods; these nests were located at 4 sites in North Carolina, USA, 2016-2017 (site A = 20 nests; site B = 10 nests; site D = 19 nests; site H = 7 nests).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Hatch Success and Recruitment Patterns of the Bog Turtle

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…8 pieces of dried dog food). Previous research has reported no negative impact of human scent or trail cameras on wild raccoons’ willingness to approach materials manufactured and handled by humans (Munoz et al 2014 ; Edmunds et al 2018 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 92%

Do wild raccoons (Procyon lotor) use tools?

Morton

2020

Anim Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Being able to make and use tools was once considered to be an evolutionary hallmark of our species, but has since been documented in other animals. However, for reasons that remain unclear, not all species naturally use tools. Racoons (Procyon lotor) are generalist carnivores that possess many of the physical, cognitive, and behavioural characteristics linked to tool use in other species (e.g. manual dexterity, tactile exploration, relatively large brains, extractive foraging, and sociality). Although raccoons have not been observed using tools outside of experimental captive conditions, wild data involving objective psychometric tests are needed. The current study administered a tool-related task to a wild population of raccoons from 20 locations within the Croatan National Forest, USA. The task required participants to use a stick to extract food from a pipe. To facilitate interpretations of their performances on the task, data were obtained on natural tool availability at the field site and participants’ mode of exploring the novel task. None of the participants solved the task despite natural sticks (suitable for solving the task) being widely available across testing locations. Participants were equally likely to smell versus handle novel sticks, which were provided at testing platforms. Limited tactile exploration, but not tool availability, could be at least one factor that reduces these raccoons’ opportunities to interact with and learn about novel tools like sticks.

show abstract

“…clutches eaten, empty nests and nests ignored) declined ( figure 3 a ). Simultaneously, bears showed a marginal increase in their visits to empty nests (contrary to predictions; figures 2 a and 3 b ), suggesting that the proportion of ‘nest visits’ are increasingly empty, which may indicate that bears are unable to discern full from already-predated nests in advance of visiting them [ 50 ], either by using sensory mechanisms such as the odour of a clutch or conspicuousness of eggs [ 49 ]. Given that visiting empty nests can be both time and energetically costly (i.e.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, we examined whether foraging bears are responsive to declining resource density by sampling the area and exhibiting behaviours in accordance with expectations of OFT that would minimize net energetic expenditure. Specifically, by (i) using nest site information, such as the odour of a clutch or conspicuousness of eggs [ 49 ], to avoid ‘already predated’ nests [ 50 ] since foraging in an already-searched-area is both time and energetically costly and may have implications on patch-residency time decisions (i.e. marginal value theorem [ 51 , 52 ]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polar bears are inefficient predators of seabird eggs

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate-mediated sea-ice loss is disrupting the foraging ecology of polar bears ( Ursus maritimus ) across much of their range. As a result, there have been increased reports of polar bears foraging on seabird eggs across parts of their range. Given that polar bears have evolved to hunt seals on ice, they may not be efficient predators of seabird eggs. We investigated polar bears' foraging performance on common eider ( Somateria mollissima ) eggs on Mitivik Island, Nunavut, Canada to test whether bear decision-making heuristics are consistent with expectations of optimal foraging theory. Using aerial-drones, we recorded multiple foraging bouts over 11 days, and found that as clutches were depleted to completion, bears did not exhibit foraging behaviours matched to resource density. As the season progressed, bears visited fewer nests overall, but marginally increased their visitation to nests that were already empty. Bears did not display different movement modes related to nest density, but became less selective in their choice of clutches to consume. Lastly, bears that capitalized on visual cues of flushing eider hens significantly increased the number of clutches they consumed; however, they did not use this strategy consistently or universally. The foraging behaviours exhibited by polar bears in this study suggest they are inefficient predators of seabird eggs, particularly in the context of matching behaviours to resource density.

show abstract

Twelve Years Later: Reassessing Visual and Olfactory Cues Raccoons Use to Find Diamondback Terrapin Nests

Abstract: BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses.

Cited by 10 publications

References 17 publications

Hatch Success and Recruitment Patterns of the Bog Turtle

Hatch Success and Recruitment Patterns of the Bog Turtle

Do wild raccoons (Procyon lotor) use tools?

Polar bears are inefficient predators of seabird eggs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About