Search

Nest predation is the main cause of nest failure for ducks. Understanding how habitat features influence predator movements may facilitate management of upland and wetland breeding habitats that reduces predator encounter rates with duck nests and increases nest survival rates. For 1618 duck nests, nest survival increased with distance to phragmites (Phragmites australis), shrubs, telephone poles, human structures, and canals, but not for four other habitat features. Using GPS collars, we tracked 25 raccoons (Procyon lotor) and 16 striped skunks (Mephitis mephitis) over 4 years during waterfowl breeding and found marked differences in how these predators were located relative to specific habitat features; moreover, the probability of duck nests being encountered by predators differed by species. Specifically, proximity to canals, wetlands, trees, levees/roads, human structures, shrubs, and telephone poles increased the likelihood of a nest being encountered by collared raccoons. For collared skunks, nests were more likely to be encountered if they were closer to canals, trees, and shrubs, and farther from wetlands and human structures. Most predator encounters with duck nests were attributable to a few individuals; 29.2% of raccoons and 38.5% of skunks were responsible for 95.6% of total nest encounters. During the central span of duck nesting (April 17–June 14: 58 nights), these seven raccoons and five skunks encountered >1 nest on 50.8 ± 29.2% (mean ± SD) and 41.5 ± 28.3% of nights, respectively, and of those nights individual raccoons and skunks averaged 2.60 ± 1.28 and 2.50 ± 1.09 nest encounters/night, respectively. For collared predators that encountered >1 nest, a higher proportion of nests encountered by skunks had evidence of predation (51.9 ± 26.6%) compared to nests encountered by raccoons (22.3 ± 17.1%). Because duck eggs were most likely consumed as raccoons and skunks opportunistically discovered nests, managing the habitat features those predators most strongly associated with could potentially reduce rates of egg predation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Incubating birds must balance the needs of their developing embryos with their own physiological needs, and many birds accomplish this by taking periodic breaks from incubation. Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) and gadwall (Mareca strepera) hens typically take incubation recesses in the early morning and late afternoon, but recesses can also take place at night. We examined nocturnal incubation recess behavior for mallard and gadwall hens nesting in Suisun Marsh, California, USA, using iButton temperature dataloggers and continuous video monitoring at nests. Fourteen percent of all detected incubation recesses (N = 13,708) were nocturnal and took place on 20% of nest‐days (N = 8,668). Video monitoring showed that hens covered their eggs with down feathers when they initiated a nocturnal recess themselves as they would a diurnal recess, but they left the eggs uncovered in 94% of the nocturnal recesses in which predators appeared at nests. Thus, determining whether or not eggs were left uncovered during a recess can provide strong indication whether the recess was initiated by the hen (eggs covered) or a predator (eggs uncovered). Because nest temperature decreased more rapidly when eggs were left uncovered versus covered, we were able to characterize eggs during nocturnal incubation recesses as covered or uncovered using nest temperature data. Overall, we predicted that 75% of nocturnal recesses were hen‐initiated recesses (eggs covered) whereas 25% of nocturnal recesses were predator‐initiated recesses (eggs uncovered). Of the predator‐initiated nocturnal recesses, 56% were accompanied by evidence of depredation at the nest during the subsequent nest monitoring visit. Hen‐initiated nocturnal recesses began later in the night (closer to morning) and were shorter than predator‐initiated nocturnal recesses. Our results indicate that nocturnal incubation recesses occur regularly (14% of all recesses) and, similar to diurnal recesses, most nocturnal recesses (75%) are initiated by the hen rather than an approaching predator. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nesting birds must provide a thermal environment sufficient for egg development while also meeting self‐maintenance needs. Many birds, particularly those with uniparental incubation, achieve this balance through periodic incubation recesses, during which foraging and other self‐maintenance activities can occur. However, incubating birds may experience disturbances such as predator or human activity which interrupt natural incubation patterns by compelling them to leave the nest. We characterized incubating mallard Anas platyrhynchos and gadwall Mareca strepera hens' responses when flushed by predators and investigators in Suisun Marsh, California, USA. Diurnal incubation recesses initiated by investigators approaching nests were 63% longer than natural diurnal incubation recesses initiated by the hen (geometric mean: 226.77 min versus 142.04 min). Nocturnal incubation recesses, many of which were likely the result of predators flushing hens, were of similar duration regardless of whether the nest was partially depredated during the event (115.33 [101.01;131.68] minutes) or not (119.62 [111.96;127.82] minutes), yet were 16% shorter than natural diurnal incubation recesses. Hens moved further from the nest during natural diurnal recesses or investigator‐initiated recesses than during nocturnal recesses, and the proportion of hen locations recorded in wetland versus upland habitat during recesses varied with recess type (model‐predicted means: natural diurnal recess 0.77; investigator‐initiated recess 0.82; nocturnal recess 0.31). Hens were more likely to take a natural recess following an investigator‐initiated recess earlier that same day than following a natural recess earlier that same day, and natural recesses that followed an investigator‐initiated recess were longer than natural recesses that followed an earlier natural recess, suggesting that hens may not fulfill all of their physiological needs during investigator‐initiated recesses. We found no evidence that the duration of investigator‐initiated recesses was influenced by repeated visits to the nest, whether by predators or by investigators, and trapping and handling the hen did not affect investigator‐initiated recess duration unless the hen was also fitted with a backpack‐harness style GPS–GSM transmitter at the time of capture. Hens that were captured and fitted with GPS–GSM transmitters took recesses that were 26% longer than recesses during which a hen was captured but a GPS–GSM transmitter was not attached. Incubation interruptions had measurable but limited and specific effects on hen behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Eggshell thickness is important for physiological, ecological, and ecotoxicological studies on birds; however, empirical eggshell thickness measurements for many species and regions are limited. We measured eggshell thickness at the equator and the egg poles for 12 avian species and related eggshell thickness to egg morphometrics, embryonic development, egg status, and mercury contamination. Within an egg, eggshells were approximately 5.1% thicker at the equator than the sharp pole of the egg, although this difference varied among species (0.6%-9.8%). Within Forster's tern (Sterna forsteri), where eggshell thickness was measured at 5 equally spaced positions along the longitude of the egg, eggshell thickness changed more rapidly near the sharp pole of the egg compared to near the blunt pole of the egg. Within species, eggshell thickness was related to egg width and egg volume for six of the 12 species but was not related to egg length for any species. Among species, mean eggshell thickness was strongly related to species mean egg width, egg length, egg volume, and bird body mass, although species mean body mass was the strongest predictor of species mean eggshell thickness. Using three species (American avocet [Recurvirostra americana], black-necked stilt [Himantopus mexicanus], and Forster's tern), whose nests were carefully monitored, eggshell thickness (including the eggshell membrane) did not differ among viable, naturally abandoned, dead, or failed-tohatch eggs; was not related to total mercury concentrations of the egg content; and did not decrease with embryonic age. Our study also provides a review of all existing eggshell thickness data for these 12 species. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For ground‐nesting waterfowl, the timing of egg hatch and duckling departure from the nest may be influenced by the risk of predation at the nest and en route to wetlands and constrained by the time required for ducklings to imprint on the hen and be physically able to leave the nest. We determined the timing of hatch, nest departure, and predation on dabbling duck broods using small video cameras placed at the nests of mallard (Anas platyrhynchos; n = 26), gadwall (Mareca strepera; n = 24), and cinnamon teal (Anas cyanoptera; n = 5). Mallard eggs began to hatch throughout the day and night, whereas gadwall eggs generally started to hatch during daylight hours (mean 7.5 hr after dawn). Among all species, duckling departure from the nest occurred during daylight (98%), and 53% of hens typically left the nest with their broods 1–4 hr after dawn. For mallard and gadwall, we identified three strategies for the timing of nest departure: (a) 9% of broods left the nest the same day that eggs began to hatch (6–12 hr later), (b) 81% of broods left the nest the day after eggs began to hatch, and (c) 10% of broods waited 2 days to depart the nest after eggs began to hatch, leaving the nest just after the second dawn (27–42 hr later). Overall, eggs were depredated at 10% of nests with cameras in the 2 days prior to hatch and ducklings were depredated at 15% of nests with cameras before leaving the nest. Our results suggest that broods prefer to depart the nest early in the morning, which may best balance developmental constraints with predation risk both at the nest and en route to wetlands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Intraspecific variability in foraging behavior has been documented across a range of taxonomic groups, yet the energetic consequences of this variation are not well understood for many species. Understanding the effect of behavioral variation on energy expenditure and acquisition is particularly crucial for mammalian carnivores because they have high energy requirements that place considerable pressure on prey populations. To determine the influence of behavior on energy expenditure and balance, we combined simultaneous measurements of at‐sea field metabolic rate (FMR) and foraging behavior in a marine carnivore that exhibits intraspecific behavioral variation, the California sea lion (Zalophus californianus). Sea lions exhibited variability in at‐sea FMR, with some individuals expending energy at a maximum of twice the rate of others. This variation was in part attributable to differences in diving behavior that may have been reflective of diet; however, this was only true for sea lions using a foraging strategy consisting of epipelagic (<200 m within the water column) and benthic dives. In contrast, sea lions that used a deep‐diving foraging strategy all had similar values of at‐sea FMR that were unrelated to diving behavior. Energy intake did not differ between foraging strategies and was unrelated to energy expenditure. Our findings suggest that energy expenditure in California sea lions may be influenced by interactions between diet and oxygen conservation strategies. There were no apparent energetic trade‐offs between foraging strategies, although there was preliminary evidence that foraging strategies may differ in their variability in energy balance. The energetic consequences of behavioral variation may influence the reproductive success of female sea lions and result in differential impacts of individuals on prey populations. These findings highlight the importance of quantifying the relationships between energy expenditure and foraging behavior in other carnivores for studies addressing fundamental and applied physiological and ecological questions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Little is known about the foraging behavior of top predators in the deep mesopelagic ocean. Elephant seals dive to the deep biota-poor oxygen minimum zone ( OMZ) (>800 m depth) despite high diving costs in terms of energy and time, but how they successfully forage in the OMZ remains largely unknown. Assessment of their feeding rate is the key to understanding their foraging behavior, but this has been challenging. Here, we assessed the feeding rate of 14 female northern elephant seals determined by jaw motion events ( JME) and dive cycle time to examine how feeding rates varied with dive depth, particularly in the OMZ. We also obtained video footage from seal-mounted videos to understand their feeding in the OMZ. While the diel vertical migration pattern was apparent for most depths of the JME, some very deep dives, beyond the normal diel depth ranges, occurred episodically during daylight hours. The midmesopelagic zone was the main foraging zone for all seals. Larger seals tended to show smaller numbers of JME and lower feeding rates than smaller seals during migration, suggesting that larger seals tended to feed on larger prey to satisfy their metabolic needs. Larger seals also dived frequently to the deep OMZ, possibly because of a greater diving ability than smaller seals, suggesting their dependency on food in the deeper depth zones. Video observations showed that seals encountered the rarely reported ragfish ( Icosteus aenigmaticus) in the depths of the OMZ, which failed to show an escape response from the seals, suggesting that low oxygen concentrations might reduce prey mobility. Less mobile prey in OMZ would enhance the efficiency of foraging in this zone, especially for large seals that can dive deeper and longer. We suggest that the OMZ plays an important role in structuring the mesopelagic ecosystem and for the survival and evolution of elephant seals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]