scholarly journals Amphibian terrestrial habitat selection and movement patterns vary with annual life-history period

2017 ◽  
Vol 95 (6) ◽  
pp. 433-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke A. Groff ◽  
Aram J.K. Calhoun ◽  
Cynthia S. Loftin

Identification of essential habitat is a fundamental component of amphibian conservation; however, species with complex life histories frequently move among habitats. To better understand dynamic habitat use, we evaluated Wood Frog (Lithobates sylvaticus (LeConte, 1825)) habitat selection and movement patterns during the spring migration and foraging periods and described the spatiotemporal variability of habitats used during all annual life-history periods. We radio-tracked 71 frogs in Maine during 2011–2013 and evaluated spring migration, foraging activity center (FAC), and within-FAC habitat selection. Telemetered frogs spent the greatest percentage of each field season in hibernacula (≥54.4%), followed by FACs (≥25.5%), migration habitat (≥16.9%), and breeding sites (≥4.5%). FACs ranged 49 – 1 335 m2 (568.0 ± 493.4 m2) and annual home ranges spanned 1 413 – 32 165 m2 (11 780.6 ± 12 506.1 m2). During spring migration, Wood Frogs exhibited different movement patterns (e.g., turn angles), selected different habitat features, and selected habitat features less consistently than while occupying FACs, indicating that the migration and foraging periods are ecologically distinct. Habitat-use studies that do not discriminate among annual life-history periods may obscure true ecological relationships and fail to identify essential habitat necessary for sustaining amphibian populations.

2004 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 391-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Arvisais ◽  
Esther Lévesque ◽  
Jean-Claude Bourgeois ◽  
Claude Daigle ◽  
Denis Masse ◽  
...  

We characterized the chronology of habitat use by the wood turtle, Clemmys insculpta (LeC., 1829), in the Mauricie region of Quebec, Canada. We also determined if this species used habitats according to availability within a home range and identified habitat features influencing habitat selection. Habitats were characterized for 20 wood turtles followed weekly by telemetry during the active season of 1997. Turtles used a great diversity of terrestrial and aquatic habitats. Alder (Alnus rugosa (Du Roi) Spreng.) stands were the most used terrestrial habitats throughout the active season. Habitat use varied according to activity period. Indeed, wood turtles used aquatic habitats and alder stands during prenesting and prehibernation activity periods, whereas all habitat types were used during nesting and postnesting activity periods. Wood turtles did not use habitats randomly within their home ranges, suggesting that they selected them. Wood turtles seemed to select mixed forest stands that were relatively young (16 years), short (1–4 m), had low arborescent cover (25%), moderate cover of the upper shrub layer (35%), and low total canopy closure (0%–50%). This knowledge will be helpful in the establishment of future conservation measures.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Saidee J. Hyder ◽  
Joshua R. Ennen ◽  
Jon M. Davenport

Abstract We aimed to discern the seasonal movement patterns, home range sizes, and microhabitat associations of subadult Macrochelys temminckii in a West Tennessee population. Because this population was previously monitored (i.e., telemetry and habitat use) as juveniles after the initial release in 2005, studying the movement ecology and habitat use of the same released cohort 12 years later allows for unique comparisons between hatchling and subadult ecology. We used radio telemetry to collect movement and microhabitat data of 16 subadult M. temminckii during one year. Our results suggest that seasonal and ontogenetic variation in movement patterns and habitat selection occur within a cohort of M. temminckii. Compared to juveniles, subadults used deep slough areas with high overstory tree cover and had larger home ranges (100% minimum convex polygons [MCP]). Additionally, as subadults, the mean distance moved (m) varied among seasons and furthest during summer. Subadults used deeper water, with higher temperatures and significantly more tree canopy cover, than random locations. Overall, the home range estimate for subadults (mean MCP ± SE; 1.64 ± 0.57 ha) was greater than for juveniles (0.044 ± 0.021 ha). These home-range estimates and habitat usage patterns were similar to subadults in other studies. The seasonal and ontogenetic variations suggest that habitat heterogeneity is critical to sustain populations of introduced M. temminckii.


2021 ◽  
Vol 149 (6) ◽  
pp. 4264-4280
Author(s):  
Benjamin Hendricks ◽  
Eric M. Keen ◽  
Chenoah Shine ◽  
Janie L. Wray ◽  
Hussein M. Alidina ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 152-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas A. Eifler ◽  
Maria A. Eifler ◽  
Erin N. Eifler

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
B Cristescu ◽  
S Bose ◽  
LM Elbroch ◽  
ML Allen ◽  
Heiko Wittmer

© 2019 The Zoological Society of London Many predators specialize on one or several prey species that they select from the range of potential prey. Predator specialization on primary versus alternative prey is driven in part by encounter rates with prey and a predator’s habitat selection. Although habitat selection changes with behavioural state, this has not been well-recognized in the resource selection function (RSF) literature to date, often because auxiliary data on the predator’s behavioural states (e.g. hunting) are absent. We monitored habitat selection of pumas Puma concolor in a multi-prey system in northern California, where pumas specialized on black-tailed deer Odocoileus hemionus columbianus. We employed multiple RSF analyses on different datasets to test the following three hypotheses: (1) Pumas utilize habitats in proportion to their availability; (2) Pumas select specific habitat features when killing black-tailed deer, their primary prey; (3) Pumas do not select distinct habitats from those identified under hypothesis 1 when killing alternative prey. We found that pumas in our study selected for specific habitats and habitat features in general, but that their selection was more pronounced when killing black-tailed deer. In summer, kill sites of deer were associated with rugged terrain, but gentle slopes and northerly aspects. In winter, pumas killed deer at low elevations, on gentle slopes and on northerly and westerly aspects. Overall, evidence suggested that pumas tracked their primary prey across seasonal migrations, which were short in distance but resulted in pronounced changes in elevation. When killing alternative prey, pumas showed little evidence of habitat selection, suggesting they may kill alternative prey opportunistically. Our results hold implications for how data should be partitioned when modelling baseline habitat selection of predators, hunting habitat selection and predation risk for prey species, as well as for how we model ecological processes such as apparent competition.


2017 ◽  
Vol 131 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-45
Author(s):  
Graham P. Dixon-MacCallum ◽  
Katie A.H. Bell ◽  
Patrick T. Gregory

Understanding habitat requirements of species is fundamental for their conservation and urban parks can provide key habitat for species in otherwise disturbed settings. Northwestern Gartersnakes (Thamnophis ordinoides) are common in parks in Saanich, British Columbia, but their specific habitat requirements are poorly understood. Based on previous studies and thermoregulatory needs of snakes, we predicted that edges, particularly field margins, would be heavily used by active snakes. We therefore used surveys that focused on edges to find snakes and measured edge-habitat use by comparing habitat variables at locations where snakes were found to the same variables at nearby random locations. Habitat variables included composition and structure of vegetation, substrate temperature, aspect, and slope. Overall, litter depth, canopy cover, a lack of bare ground and woody vegetation were the most important habitat variables for determining where snakes were found. our results provide a preliminary assessment to improve our understanding of habitat use for this species. The abundance of snakes found while surveying edges supports our initial assumption that edges are important habitat features but more work is required using multiple survey methods to further test this hypothesis.


Ecography ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (12) ◽  
pp. 1842-1858
Author(s):  
Juliet S. Lamb ◽  
Peter W. C. Paton ◽  
Jason E. Osenkowski ◽  
Shannon S. Badzinski ◽  
Alicia M. Berlin ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 131 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-140
Author(s):  
Emily J. Herdman ◽  
Karen E. Hodges

in Canada, Nuttall’s Cottontails (Sylvilagus nuttallii nuttallii) occur in southcentral British Columbia (BC), where they are federally listed as a species of special Concern due to their presumed small populations and limited distribution in fragmented habitats. Their habitat use and movement patterns are poorly known at this northern edge of their distribution. We used livetrapping, radio-collaring, and fecal pellet surveys to examine Nuttall’s Cottontails’ use of remaining patches of native habitat as well as use of human-impacted areas. Cottontails were present in low densities and only about half of presumably suitable patches of native sagebrush-steppe were occupied. Cottontails were more likely to occur in shrubby habitat, but at a fine scale cottontails used areas that had a lower density of shrubs and finer substrates. movement patterns differed significantly between areas of varying habitat quality, with longer movements in natural habitat. one radio-collared male cottontail used anthropogenic habitats adjacent to native habitat; this use corresponds with landowner reports. However, it is not clear whether Nuttall’s Cottontails are able to use anthropogenically-impacted areas to maintain populations or in areas where such habitats are not near native habitats. our results suggest that these animals are rare and occur primarily in remnant patches of shrub-steppe within BC.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document