Nest cameras do not affect nest survival in a meadow-nesting shorebird

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
VOLKER SALEWSKI ◽  
LUIS SCHMIDT

Summary Identifying the fate of birds’ nests and the causes of breeding failure is often crucial for the development of conservation strategies for threatened species. However, collecting these data by repeatedly visiting nests might itself contribute to nest failure or bias. To solve this dilemma, automatic cameras have increasingly been used as a time-efficient means for nest monitoring. Here, we consider whether the use of cameras itself may influence hatching success of nests of the Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa at two long-term study sites in northern Germany. Annually between 2013 and 2019, cameras were used to monitor godwit nests. In 2014 and 2019, nests were randomly equipped with cameras or not, and nest survival checked independently of the cameras. Nest-survival models indicated that survival probabilities varied between years, sites and with time of the season, but were unaffected by the presence of cameras. Even though predation is the main cause of hatching failure in our study system, we conclude that predators did not learn to associate cameras with food either when the cameras were initially installed or after they had been used for several years. Cameras were thus an effective and non-deleterious tool to collect data for conservation in this case. As other bird species may react differently to cameras at their nests, and as other sets of predators may differ in their ability to associate cameras with food, the effect of cameras on breeding success should be carefully monitored when they are used in a new study system.

Eos ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terri Cook

Scientific insights from the Agricultural Research Service’s long-term study sites underpin dozens of models and research methods that guide global land management and conservation practices.


Author(s):  
Ellen Wohl

By late April, the snow is gone from the beaver meadow. The promises of March are starting to be fulfilled: insects are on the wing, some of the willows have furry catkins along their branches, and fish jump from the quiet waters of the beaver ponds. I can no longer easily get around the beaver meadows on foot unless I wear chest waders. The sound of the beaver meadow in March was primarily wind. By April, the sound is primarily moving water. The water gurgles, shushes, and whispers. In another month it will roar with the melting snows. Another three miles up the creek valley and 1,500 feet higher, one of my long-term study sites still lies under 6 feet of snow, but in the meadow I see only one patch of tenacious snow-ice in the deep shade beneath a spruce along the northern edge of the meadow. I know that snow will still fall here during late spring storms, but it will melt quickly. March felt on the cusp, as if it could as easily tip toward winter or spring. Late April is definitely spring headed toward summer. The beaver meadow remains a riverscape more brown and tan than green. The willows are still leafless, although some of the branch tips are turning pale yellow-green and others seem to be taking on a more vivid orange hue. I can see the leaf buds starting to swell. The grass has just begun to grow in dark green tips steadily forcing their way through the thick mat of last year’s dead stems. Clusters of new leaves on low-growing wintergreen are the only other sign of green outside of the channels. Some of the smaller side channels are thick with emerald green algae undulating slowly in the current. A stonefly lands on my hand. Its slender, dark gray body seems surprisingly delicate for a creature that has hatched into the vagaries of April air, with its potential for blasting winds and sudden snow squalls.


Author(s):  
Katharina Homburg ◽  
Claudia Drees ◽  
Estève Boutaud ◽  
Dorothea Nolte ◽  
Wiebke Schuett ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 258-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura E. Hayes ◽  
Jennifer A. Scott ◽  
Kirby C. Stafford

Behaviour ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 138 (11-12) ◽  
pp. 1481-1516 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.E.G. Tutin ◽  
W.C. McGrew ◽  
R.W. Wrangham ◽  
◽  
◽  
...  

AbstractCultural variation among chimpanzee communities or unit-groups at nine long-term study sites was charted through a systematic, collaborative procedure in which the directors of the sites first agreed a candidate list of 65 behaviour patterns (here fully defined), then classified each pattern in relation to its local frequency of occurrence. Thirty-nine of the candidate behaviour patterns were discriminated as cultural variants, sufficiently frequent at one or more sites to be consistent with social transmission, yet absent at one or more others where environmental explanations were rejected. Each community exhibited a unique and substantial profile of such variants, far exceeding cultural variation reported before for any other non-human species. Evaluation of these pan-African distributions against three models for the diffusion of traditions identified multiple cases consistent with cultural evolution involving differentiation in form, function and targets of behaviour patterns.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-7
Author(s):  
Santhwana A ◽  
Venkitachalam R ◽  
Sridhu Prakash

A total of 20 bird species belongs to 7 orders and 11 families were recorded in Dharmadam estuary in Kannur district. The record of migratory bird Eurasian Curlew and two species near threatened birds within a short period of study and this record indicate that Dharmadam estuary may be attracting more number of migratory bird species. A long-term study is needed to understand the seasonal variation of the bird species in Dharmadam estuary in Kannur district.


Author(s):  
Joseph E. Hazel ◽  
Matt Kaplinski ◽  
Roderic Parnell ◽  
Mark Manone ◽  
Alan Dale

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document