Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Mission blue butterfly habitat conservation wikipedia , lookup
Soundscape ecology wikipedia , lookup
Conservation biology wikipedia , lookup
Biogeography wikipedia , lookup
Theoretical ecology wikipedia , lookup
Operation Wallacea wikipedia , lookup
Molecular ecology wikipedia , lookup
Conservation psychology wikipedia , lookup
Biological Dynamics of Forest Fragments Project wikipedia , lookup
Reconciliation ecology wikipedia , lookup
Wildlife crossing wikipedia , lookup
Conservation biogeography of a rare prairie grouse Michael A. Patten University of Oklahoma Oklahoma Biological Survey, Department of Biology, and Sutton Avian Research Center Conservation Biogeography use of biogeographical techniques and principles to guide conservation planning for example, island biogeography • species-area relationships • degree of isolation areas of endemism patterns of species richness trait variation across space can consider the past and future, too Examples include: o forecasts o reserve selection o invasive species Single species or entire communities. Does one size fit all? lower panel: Smith-Patten and Patten (2015, Biotropica 47:128–135) The Lesser Prairie-Chicken o a medium-sized grouse endemic to southern shortgrass and mixed grass prairies o endemic to the southcentral United States (i.e., it is found nowhere else, and never has been) photos by Noppadol Paothong Lekking o lek mating system o as with other open-country grouse, males gather communally to display to females . . . and to squabble with other males o the goal is to lure a female to mate . . . at which point the male continues to display and the female heads off to • build a nest • guard her eggs • (with luck) raise her young photos by Greg W. Lasley, Noppadol Paothong, and Joel Sartore Data Collection Sample Sizes • 898 radiotagged birds (>1000 banded) 550 in Oklahoma, 1999–2014 348 in New Mexico, 2000–2005 • 267 nests 142 in Oklahoma, 1999–2014 125 in New Mexico, 2000–2005 • >60,000 individual tracking locations • ~18,000 vegetation samples 6483 vegetation and general cover transects 10488 “cone of vulnerability” and microclimate 737 1-m2 grass and forb plots The Data o survivorship and cause of mortality o movements (and home range) o habitat use (including for leks and broods) – woody vegetation – “cone of vulnerability” – grasses and forbs – microclimate o nest placement o demography (clutch size, nest success, reproductive effort, etc.) o mitochondrial DNA and microsatellites o nutrition (blood screening) Southern Shortgrass Prairie Habitat Loss Samson et al. (2004, Wildlife Society Bulletin 32:6–15) Population Decline • total world population numbers 20,000–35,000 • population has declined by >90% in the past century trend from Hagen et al. (2009, Journal of Wildlife Management 73:1325–1332) The U.S. Endangered Species Act almost exactly a year ago today . . . the species was listed as threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act Capitol Hill Outsider (2014) Controversy Ecoregions Ecoregions 23.3 birds / km2 13.0 birds / km2 18.1 birds / km2 10.4 birds / km2 Ecoregions STRUCTURE plot for 13 microsatellite loci plot from Oyler-McCance, DeYoung, Hagen, Johnson, Larsson, and Patten (in prep., targeted for Conservation Genetics) Selectivity Patten et al. (2005, Journal of Wildlife Management 69:1270–1278) 40 o Mean Exposure Angle ( ) Microclimate occupied random 30 20 10 0 Jun Jul Aug Sep 2003 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 2004 Larsson et al. (2013, Southwestern Naturalist 58:135–149) Patten et al. (2005, Journal of Wildlife Management 69:1270–1278) Predator Avoidance depredations angle temperature 20 30 o Mean Exposure Angle ( ) 14 20 12 15 10 10 8 5 6 4 0 summer '03 autumn '03 winter '03/04 spring '04 Larsson et al. (2013, Southwestern Naturalist 58:135–149) summer '04 autumn '04 o 25 16 Mean Apparent Temperature ( C) 18 Woody Vegetation and Adult Survival 1.0 shrub cover <10% shrub cover 10–20% shrub cover >20% Probability of Survival 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 200 400 600 Days Patten et al. (2005, Journal of Wildlife Management 69:1270–1278) 800 1000 Too Many Shrubs cedar photos by Donald H. Wolfe Loss of Shrub Cover Sagebrush Steppe Treatment Evaluation Project <http://www.sagestep.org/> Too Few Shrubs tebuthiuron untreated 10 Number of Nests 8 6 4 2 0 5 10 15 20 Mean Shrub Cover (%) Patten and Kelly (2010, Ecological Applications 20:2148–2156) 25 30 Solutions The Prairie Has Changed The Future photos by Donald H. Wolfe Pruett et al. (2009, BioScience 59:257–262) Avoidance of Highways Pruett et al. (2009, Conservation Biology 23:1253–1259) Avoidance of Power Lines Pruett et al. (2009, Conservation Biology 23:1253–1259) Highways + Power Lines Pruett et al. (2009, Conservation Biology 23:1253–1259) Avoidance Behavior* < 100 m 100–500 m transmission line 6 (88–129) 156 (398–471) Highway 412 24 (25–48) 182 (125–165) Lesser Prairie-Chicken Highway 283 20 (135–181) 166 (586–674) Greater Prairie-Chicken transmission line 0 (16–35) 5 (83–121) no evidence of avoidance > 500 m from any feature Pruett et al. (2009, Conservation Biology 23:1253–1259) *Behaviour Other Manmade Features transmission lines buildings roads (any type) improved roads unimproved roads center-pivot fields nests birds oil or gas wellheads 0 200 400 600 800 meters (± SE) data from Robel et al. (2004, Transactions of the N. Am. Wildlife Natural Resources Conference 69:251–266) 1000 1200 1400 Nest Placement center-pivot improved road unimproved road building wellhead tranmission line transmission line 0 500 1000 meters data from Pitman et al. (2005, Journal of Wildlife Management 69:1259–1269) 1500 2000 And so on . . . Hagen et al. (2011, Studies in Avian Biology 39:63–75 Winder et al. (2014, Ecosphere 5[1]:3) Planning Tools Correlations Truism 1: Where there is a powerline or a road there typically is a fence. Truism 2: And where there is a fence there typically is: habitat loss o livestock o woody vegetation encroachment o Spellerberg (1998, Global Ecology and Biogeography Letters 7:317–333) Fence Collisions Fence Collisions Determining Cause of Death o radio-transmitters on our Lesser PrairieChickens equipped with a mortality switch o recovered carcasses are examined to determine one of four causes of death: o o o o raptor kill mammal kill collision — fence, power line, or car other (or unknown) — this category has included, for example, drowning in a stock tank o note that collisions are associated with habitat fragmentation Mortality Cause n = 260 New Mexico Oklahoma vehicle powerline fence mammal raptor 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 proportion of mortalities data from Wolfe et al. (2007, Wildlife Biology 13[supp. 1]:95–104) 0.5 1.0 Survival by Sex New Mexico Oklahoma Probability of Survival 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 ♂ 0.0 0 1.0 200 400 600 800 1000 Days New Mexico Oklahoma Probability of Survival 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 ♀ 0.0 0 200 400 Days 600 800 Patten et al. (2005, Evolutionary Ecology Research 7:235–249) ♂♂ and predation predation male mortality Proportion of males killed 16 14 25 20 12 15 10 8 10 6 5 4 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Month Proportion of females killed collisions female mortality 15 30 12 24 9 18 12 6 6 3 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Month Patten et al. (2005, Evolutionary Ecology Research 7:235–249) Nov 0 Dec Prairie-chicken kills due to collisions 18 36 ♀♀ and collisions Nov Dec Prairie-chicken kills due to predation 18 Life-history Evolution o Lifetime reproductive value o a species-specific trait o roughly constant among populations o Trade-offs o both fecundity and lifespan contribute o r selection vs. K selection o common in birds Predictions! Higher mortality of Oklahoma ♀♀ o larger clutch sizes o more fledglings o attempt more nests in a season Fecundity 12 clutch size fledglings frequency 10 8 6 4 2 0 New Mexico Oklahoma Mean nest attempts / year (± SE) 1.07 ± 0.04 1.55 ± 0.11 0.15 0.94 Proportion re-nesting in same year adapted from Patten et al. (2005, Evolutionary Ecology Research 7:235–249) Fragmentation Patten et al. (2005, Evolutionary Ecology Research 7:235–249) Land Tenure o mean parcel size o roads / 10-km2 o fencing New Mexico ~1300 ha 8.0 ± 2.3 sections* Oklahoma ~180 ha 14.5 ± 1.7 ¼-sections o land tenure differences have a historical basis (Homestead Act vs. Spanish Land Grant) o land tenure in the Texas Panhandle is much more like that in Oklahoma than in New Mexico Patten et al. (2005, Evolutionary Ecology Research 7:235–249) *1 section ≈ 260 ha and is 1.6 km per side Plasticity? 13 New Mexico Oklahoma 2002 (7) Mean Clutch Size 12 2003 (4) 11 2001 (7) 2000 (5) 10 9 2002 (25) 2003 (13) 8 2001 (15) 1999 (2) 2000 (2) 7 0 2 4 6 8 10 Cumulative Precipitation (cm) Patten et al. (2005, Evolutionary Ecology Research 7:235–249) 12 14 16 Nutrition? 13 clutch size 12 11 10 9 8 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0 2.0 2 4 6 8 10 vitamin E retinol (vitamin A) 13 clutch size 12 11 10 9 New Mexico ♀♀ have higher levels of vitamin A but lay smaller clutches. 8 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 lutein 4 6 zeaxanthin 13 12 clutch size Only vitamin A (as retinol) is correlated with clutch size . . . but in the “wrong” direction: 11 10 9 8 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 canthaxanthin 2.0 0 2 4 6 8 10 xanthophylls 12 14 16 Sutton Avian Research Center unpubl. data In summary . . . o ♀♀ in Oklahoma die from fence collision far more often than do ♀♀ in New Mexico o more roads more fences more collisions (ultimately a result of historic land parceling) o survivorship in Oklahoma has (apparently) selected for clutch size and re-nesting rate o larger clutches do not appear to be the result of variation in rainfall or nutrition 2500 Oklahoma New Mexico The fate of the mixed grass prairie population? Population Size 2000 1500 1000 500 0 2004 Probability of Extinction 1.0 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 Year 0.8 100% of simulations forecast a population crash in Oklahoma, yielding 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 2005 5 10 15 20 Years 2022 Patten et al. (2005, Evolutionary Ecology Research 7:235–249) 25 30 2018 Management Strategies Option 1: Increase fecundity Requires clutch sizes approaching 30 (!). Requires 3 successful nests / year. i.e., reproductive output must double. Option 2: Reduce ♀ mortality At current Ne, raising adult ♀ survivorship to the level of that elsewhere (e.g., New Mexico) would ensure population persistence. Pruett et al. (2011, Conservation Genetics 12:1205–1214) Management Strategies Option 1: Increase fecundity Requires clutch sizes approaching 30 (!). Requires 3 successful nests / year. i.e., reproductive output must double. Option 2: Reduce ♀ mortality At current Ne, raising adult ♀ survivorship to the level of that elsewhere (e.g., New Mexico) would ensure population persistence. Pruett et al. (2011, Conservation Genetics 12:1205–1214) Reducing mortality Reducing Mortality see Baines and Andrew (2003, Biological Conservation 110:169–176) Fence marking Wolfe et al. (2009, Ecological Restoration 27:141–143) Does marking work? efficacy not assessed fully, but . . . all except one collision 2007–2014 have been along unmarked fences! Stevens et al. (2012, Wildlife Society Bulletin 27:141–143) Winder et al. (2015, Ecosphere in press) o kernel HR estimators o land cover from aerial photos & GIS layers o software estimates of habitat proportions & edge Home Range (ha) 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 Extent of Contiguous Habitat (ha) Patten et al. (2011, Studies in Avian Biology 39:51–62) Wrapping Up One size does not fit all! A single, all-encompassing plan that would benefit each Lesser PrairieChicken population in the same way cannot be devised. Instead, we must consider geographic variation among populations to guide management and conservation. Thank You Save the prairie chicken!