, Volume 28, Issue 7, pp 809–824 | Cite as

Distribution of contaminants in the environment and wildlife habitat use: a case study with lead and waterfowl on the Upper Texas Coast

  • Brian Kearns
  • Stephen McDowell
  • Jena Moon
  • Elizabeth Rigby
  • Warren C. Conway
  • David HaukosEmail author


The magnitude and distribution of lead contamination remain unknown in wetland systems. Anthropogenic deposition of lead may be contributing to negative population-level effects in waterfowl and other organisms that depend on dynamic wetland habitats, particularly if they are unable to detect and differentiate levels of environmental contamination by lead. Detection of lead and behavioral response to elevated lead levels by waterfowl is poorly understood, but necessary to characterize the risk of lead-contaminated habitats. We measured the relationship between lead contamination of wetland soils and habitat use by mottled ducks (Anas fulvigula) on the Upper Texas Coast, USA. Mottled ducks have historically experienced disproportionate negative effects from lead exposure, and exhibit a unique nonmigratory life history that increases risk of exposure when inhabiting contaminated areas. We used spatial interpolation to estimate lead in wetland soils of the Texas Chenier Plain National Wildlife Refuge Complex. Soil lead levels varied across the refuge complex (0.01–1085.51 ppm), but greater lead concentrations frequently corresponded to areas with high densities of transmittered mottled ducks. We used soil lead concentration data and MaxENT species distribution models to quantify relationships among various habitat factors and locations of mottled ducks. Use of habitats with greater lead concentration increased during years of a major disturbance. Because mottled ducks use habitats with high concentrations of lead during periods of stress, have greater risk of exposure following major disturbance to the coastal marsh system, and no innate mechanism for avoiding the threat of lead exposure, we suggest the potential presence of an ecological trap of quality habitat that warrants further quantification at a population scale for mottled ducks.


Anas fulvigula Contaminants Ecological trap Lead Mottled duck Species distribution model 



We would like to acknowledge field staff on the Texas Chenier Plain National Wildlife Refuge complex, particularly the contributions of Patrick Walther who was an invaluable asset to data collection and mottled duck conservation as a whole. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the United States Government. The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.


Financial and logistical support for this project was provided in part by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Region 2 Migratory Bird Office (Jeff Haskins) and Division of Refuges, United States Fish and Wildlife Service Avian Health and Disease Program, United States Geologic Survey Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Stephen F. Austin State University, and Texas Tech University.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. Allen GP, Salomon J, Bassoullet P, Du Penhoat Y, De Grandpre C (1980) Effects of tides on mixing and suspended sediment transport in macrotidal estuaries. Sed Geol 26:69–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson WL, Havera SP, Montgomery RA (1987) Incidence of ingested shot in waterfowl in the Mississippi Flyway, 1977–1979. Wildl Soc Bull 15:181–188Google Scholar
  3. Batzer DP, Baldwin AH Eds (2012) Wetland habitats of North America: ecology and conservation concerns. University of California Press, BerkleyGoogle Scholar
  4. Bellrose FC (1955) A comparison of recoveries from reward and standard bands. J Wildl Manag 19:71–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bellrose FC (1959) Lead poisoning as a mortality factor in waterfowl populations. IL Nat Hist Surv Bull 27:235–288Google Scholar
  6. Beyer WN, Audet DJ, Morton A, Campbell JK, LeCaptain L (1998) Lead exposure of waterfowl ingesting Coeur d’Alene River basin sediments. J Environ Qual 27:1533–1538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bhattacharjee J, Haukos D, Neaville J (2007) Vegetation response to disturbance in a coastal marsh in Texas. Commun Ecol 8:15–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blood ER, Anderson P, Smith PA, Nybro C, Ginsberg KA (1991) Effects of hurricane Hugo on coastal soil solution chemistry in South Carolina. Biotrop 23:348–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bollhöfer A, Rosman KJR (2001) Isotopic source signatures for atmospheric lead: the Northern Hemisphere. Geochim Et Cosmochim Acta 65:1727–1740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cambardella CA, Moorman TB, Parkin TB, Karlen DL, Novak JM, Turco RF, Konopka RE (1994) Field-scale variability of soil properties in central Iowa soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 58:1501–1511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Check L, Marteel-Parrish A (2013) The fate and behavior of persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) chemicals: examining lead (Pb) as a PBT metal. Rev Environ Health 28:85–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Coburn DR, Metzler DW, Treichler R (1951) A study of absorption and retention of lead in wild waterfowl in relation to clinical evidence of lead poisoning. J Wildl Manag 15:186–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis JM, Otto DA, Weil DE, Grant LD (1990) The comparative developmental neurotoxicity of lead in humans and animals. Neurotoxicol Teratol 12:215–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eagles-Smith CA, Ackerman JT, De La Cruz SEW, Takekawa JY (2009) Mercury bioaccumulation and risk to three waterbird foraging guilds is influenced by foraging ecology and breeding stage. Environ Poll 157:1993–2002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elith J, Phillips SJ, Hastie T, Dudik M, Chee YE, Yates CJ (2011) A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists. Divers Distrib 17:43–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. ESRI (2012) ArcGIS. ESRI, Redlands, CAGoogle Scholar
  17. Figuerola J, Mateo R, Green AJ, Mondain-Monval JY, Lefranc H, Mentaberre G (2005) Grit selection in waterfowl and how it determines exposure to ingested lead shot in Mediterranean wetlands. Environ Conserv 32:226–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fisher FM, Hall SL, Wilder RW, Robinson BC, Lobpries DS (1986) An analysis of spent shot in Upper Texas Coastal waterfowl wintering habitat. In: Feieraben JS, Russel AB (eds) Lead poisoning in waterfowl, a workshop. National Wildlife Federation, Washington, D.C., p 50–53Google Scholar
  19. Fisher IJ, Pain DJ, Thomas VG (2006) A review of lead poisoning from ammunition sources in terrestrial birds. Biol Conserv 131:421–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Golden NH, Warner SE, Coffey MJ (2016) A review and assessment of spent lead ammunition and its exposure and effects to scavenging birds in the United States. Rev Environ Contam Toxic 237:123–191Google Scholar
  21. Guisan A, Edwards Jr TC, Hastie T (2002) Generalized linear and generalized additive models in studies of species distributions: setting the scene. Ecol Model 157:89–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Guisan A, Zimmermann NE (2000) Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol Model 135:147–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Haig SM, D’Elia J, Eagles-Smith C, Fair JM, Gervais J, Herring G, Rivers JW, Schulz JH (2014) The persistent problem of lead poisoning in birds from ammunition and fishing tackle. Condor 116:408–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1982) The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 143:29–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Haukos D, Martinez S, Heltzel J (2010) Characteristics of ponds used by breeding mottled ducks on the Chenier Plain of the Texas Gulf Coast. J Fish Wildl Manag 1:93–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Howes NC, FitzGerald DM, Hughes ZJ, Georgiou IY, Kulp MA, Miner MD, Smith JM, Barras JA (2010) Hurricane-induced failure of low salinity wetlands. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:14014–14019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Irwin JC, Karstad LH (1972) The toxicity for ducks of disintegrated lead shot in a simulated-marsh environment. J Wildl Dis 8:149–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Janssen S, Dumont G, Fierens F, Mensink C (2008) Spatial interpolation of air pollution measurements using CORINE land cover data. Atmos Environ 42:4884–4903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jørgensen SS, Willems M (1987) The fate of lead in soils: the transformation of lead pellets in shooting-range soils. Ambio 16:11–15Google Scholar
  30. Keim BD, Muller RA, Stone GW (2007) Spatiotemporal patterns and return periods of tropical storm and hurricane strikes from Texas to Maine. J Clim 20:3498–3509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kennish MJ (2001) Coastal salt marsh systems in the US: a review of anthropogenic impacts. J Coast Res 17:731–748Google Scholar
  32. Kennish MJ (2002) Environmental threats and environmental future of estuaries. Environ Conserv 29:78–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kokko H, Sutherland WJ (2001) Ecological traps in changing environments: ecological and evolutionary consequences of a behaviourally mediated Allee effect. Evol Ecol Res 3:537–551Google Scholar
  34. Longcore JR, Corr PO, Spencer Jr HE (1982) Lead shot incidence in sediments and waterfowl gizzards from Merrymeeting Bay, Maine. Wildl Soc Bull 10:3–10Google Scholar
  35. Mateo R, Belliure J, Dolz J, Aguilar Serrano J, Guitart R (1998) High prevalences of lead poisoning in wintering waterfowl in Spain. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 35:342–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mateo R, Guitart R, Green AJ (2000) Determinants of lead shot, rice, and grit ingestion in ducks and coots. J Wildl Manag 64:939–947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McBride RA, Taylor MJ, Byrnes MR (2007) Coastal morphodynamics and Chenier-Plain evolution in Southwestern Louisiana, USA: a geomorphic model. Geomorphol 88:367–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McCracken KG, Afton AD, Peters MS (2000) Condition bias of hunter-shot ring-necked ducks exposed to lead. J Wildl Manag 64:584–590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. McDowell SK (2014) Environmental availability and lead exposure to mottled ducks (Anas fulvigula) in the Texas Chenier Plains region. Thesis, Stephen F. Austin State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  40. McDowell SK, Conway WC, Haukos DA, Moon JA, Comer CE, Hung I (2015) Blood lead exposure concentrations in mottled ducks (Anas fulvigula) on the upper Texas coast. J Southeast Assoc Fish Wildl Agencies 2:221–228Google Scholar
  41. Merchant ME, Shukla SS, Akers HA (1991) Lead concentrations in wing bones of the mottled duck. Environ Toxicol Chem 10:1503–1507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Merendino MT, Lobpries DS, Neaville JE, Ortego JD, Johnson WP (2005) Regional differences and long-term trends in lead exposure in mottled ducks. Wildl Soc Bull 33:1002–1008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Moon JA (2014) Mottled duck (Anas fulvigula) ecology in the Texas Chenier Plain region. Dissertation, Stephen F. Austin State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  44. Moon JA, Haukos DA, Conway WC (2015) Mottled duck (Anas fulvigula) movements in the Texas Chenier plain region. J Southeast Assoc Fish Wildl Agencies 2:255–261Google Scholar
  45. Moon JA, Haukos DA, Conway WC (2017) Seasonal survival of adult female mottled ducks. J Wildl Manag 81:461–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Moulton DW, Frentress CD, Stutzenbaker CD, Lobpries DS, Brownlee WC (1988) Ingestion of shotshell pellets by waterfowl wintering in Texas. In: Weller MW (ed) Waterfowl in winter. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, p 597–607Google Scholar
  47. Nelson BW, Fink Jr LK (1978) Geological and botanical features of sand beach systems in Maine and their relevance to the critical areas program of the state planning office. Maine Critical Areas Program, AugustaGoogle Scholar
  48. NRCS (2012) Soil survey geographic (SSURGO) database, Web Soil Survey. Accessed 8 Jan 2017
  49. Pain DJ (1996) Lead in waterfowl. In: Beyer GHHWN (ed) Environmental contaminants in wildlife: interpreting tissue concentrations. Lewis, Boca Raton, p 251–264Google Scholar
  50. Phillips S, Dudik M, Schapire R (2012) A brief tutorial on Maxent. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  51. R Development Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
  52. Riecke TV, Conway WC, Haukos DA, Moon JA, Comer CE (2015) Baseline blood Pb concentrations in black-necked stilts on the Upper Texas Coast. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 95:465–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rigby EA, Haukos DA (2012) Breeding season survival and breeding incidence of female mottled ducks on the Upper Texas Gulf Coast. Waterbirds 35:260–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rigby EA, Haukos DA (2015) Duckling survival, fecundity, and habitat selection of mottled duck broods on the Upper Texas Gulf coast. J Southeast Assoc Fish Wildl Agencies 2:156–163Google Scholar
  55. Rocke TE, Samuel MD (1991) Effects of lead shot ingestion on selected cells of the mallard immune system. J Wildl Dis 27:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rooney C (2002) The fate of lead in soils contaminated with lead shot. Dissertation, Lincoln University, ChristchurchGoogle Scholar
  57. Samuel MD, Fuller MR (1994) Wildlife radiotelemetry. In: Bookhout TA (ed) Research and management techniques for wildlife habitats, 5th edn. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, p 370–418Google Scholar
  58. Sanderson GC, Wood SG, Foley GL, Brawn JD (1992) Toxicity of bismuth shot compared with lead and steel shot in game-farm mallards. Trans N Am Wildl Nat Resour Conf 57:526–540Google Scholar
  59. Schlaepfer MA, Runge MC, Sherman PW (2002) Ecological and evolutionary traps. Trends Ecol Evol 17:474–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schulz JH, Millspaugh JJ, Washburn BE, Wester GR, Lanigan III JT, Franson JC (2002) Spent-shot availability and ingestion on areas managed for mourning doves. Wildl Soc Bull 30:112–120Google Scholar
  61. Sharma P, Dubey RS (2005) Lead toxicity in plants. Braz J Plant Phys 17:35–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Spehar RL, Anderson RL, Fiandt JT (1978) Toxicity and bioaccumulation of cadmium and lead in aquatic invertebrates. Environ Pollut 15:195–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Stendell RC, Smith RI, Burnham KP, Christensen RE (1979) Exposure of waterfowl to lead: a nationwide survey of residues in wing bones of seven, 1973-1973. Special Science Report–Wildlife No. 223, U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  64. Stockton CW, Meko DM (1975) A long-term history of drought occurrence in western United States as inferred from tree rings. Weatherwise 28:244–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Stone GW, Grymes JM, Dingler JR, Pepper DA (1997) Overview and significance of hurricanes on the Louisiana coast, USA. J Coast Res 13:656–669Google Scholar
  66. Stutzenbaker CD (1988) The mottled duck: its life history, ecology and management. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, AustinGoogle Scholar
  67. Tomasevic M, Antanasijevic D, Anicic M, Deljanin I, Peric-Grujic A, Ristic M (2013) Lead concentrations and isotope ratios in urban tree leaves. Ecol Indic 24:504–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Turner RE, Baustian JJ, Swenson EM, Spicer JS (2006) Wetland sedimentation from hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Science 314:449–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Uhlig HH (1971) Corrosion and corrosion control: an introduction to corrosion science and engineering, 2nd edn. John Wiley and Sons, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  70. U.S. EPA (2012) Selected analytical methods for environmental remediation and recovery (SAM)EPA/600/R-12/555. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  71. USFWS (2007) Anahuac National Wildlife Refuge habitat management plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sabine PassGoogle Scholar
  72. USFWS (2008) Texas Chenier Plain Refuge Complex: final environmental impact statement, comprehensive conservation plan, and land protection plan, vols 1 and 2. Sabine Pass. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, AlbuquerqueGoogle Scholar
  73. USFWS (2013a) Nontoxic shot regulations for hunting waterfowl and coots in the U.S. Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  74. USFWS (2013b) National Wetlands Inventory. Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  75. Weegman MD, Weegman MM (2007) Chromium and selenium in invertebrate prey of lesser scaup. J Wildl Manag 71:778–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Weis JS, Weis P (2004) Metal uptake, transport and release by wetland plants: implications for phytoremediation and restoration. Environ Int 30:685–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Wobeser GA (1997) Diseases of wild waterfowl. Plenum Press, New York, NYCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zhang C (2006) Using multivariate analyses and GIS to identify pollutants and their spatial patterns in urban soils in Galway, Ireland. Environ Pollut 142:501–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Zimmerman D, Pavlik C, Ruggles A, Armstrong MP (1999) An experimental comparison of ordinary and universal kriging and inverse distance weighting. Math Geol 31:375–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Division of BiologyKansas State UniversityManhattanUSA
  2. 2.Stephen F. Austin State UniversityNacogdochesUSA
  3. 3.U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceWinnieUSA
  4. 4.U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceBloomingtonUSA
  5. 5.U.S. Geological Survey, Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research UnitKansas State UniversityManhattanUSA
  6. 6.WRA Environmental Inc.San RafaelUSA
  7. 7.J.D. Murphree WMA, TPWDPort ArthurUSA
  8. 8.Department of Natural Resources ManagementTexas Tech UniversityLubbockUSA

Personalised recommendations