Oecologia

pp 1–14 | Cite as

Dynamics of habitat selection in birds: adaptive response to nest predation depends on multiple factors

Ecosystem ecology – original research

Abstract

According to theory, habitat selection by organisms should reflect underlying habitat-specific fitness consequences and, in birds, reproductive success has a strong impact on population growth in many species. Understanding processes affecting habitat selection also is critically important for guiding conservation initiatives. Northern pintails (Anas acuta) are migratory, temperate-nesting birds that breed in greatest concentrations in the prairies of North America and their population remains below conservation goals. Habitat loss and changing land use practices may have decoupled formerly reliable fitness cues with respect to nest habitat choices. We used data from 62 waterfowl nesting study sites across prairie Canada (1997–2009) to examine nest survival, a primary fitness metric, at multiple scales, in combination with estimates of habitat selection (i.e., nests versus random points), to test for evidence of adaptive habitat choices. We used the same habitat covariates in both analyses. Pintail nest survival varied with nest initiation date, nest habitat, pintail breeding pair density, landscape composition and annual moisture. Selection of nesting habitat reflected patterns in nest survival in some cases, indicating adaptive selection, but strength of habitat selection varied seasonally and depended on population density and landscape composition. Adaptive selection was most evident late in the breeding season, at low breeding densities and in cropland-dominated landscapes. Strikingly, at high breeding density, habitat choice appears to become maladaptive relative to nest predation. At larger spatial scales, the relative availability of habitats with low versus high nest survival, and changing land use practices, may limit the reproductive potential of pintails.

Keywords

Agroecosystems Habitat use Conservation Reproductive success Northern pintail 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Financial support for waterfowl nesting studies was provided by Ducks Unlimited Canada through the Institute for Wetland and Waterfowl Research, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through the North American Wetland Conservation Council, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Conservation Education International, the Alberta North American Waterfowl Management Plan Science Fund, and an anonymous Canadian donor. Over 150 crew leaders, field and research assistants assisted with data collection. We acknowledge also the cooperation of many landowners on study sites across prairie Canada for allowing access to their land for nest searching and surveying purposes. All applicable institutional and/or national guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. We appreciate helpful comments provided by Tony Fox, John Eadie, and two anonymous reviewers.

Author contribution statement

JHD and RGC conceived and designed the study. JHD conducted the fieldwork, data analysis and wrote the manuscript. LMA provided statistical advice. RGC provided editorial advice.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

442_2018_4134_MOESM1_ESM.docx (56 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 55 kb)

References

  1. Ackerman JT, Blackmer AL, Eadie JM (2004) Is predation on waterfowl nests density dependent?—tests at three spatial scales. Oikos 107:128–140.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.13226.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arlt D, Pärt T (2007) Nonideal breeding habitat selection: a mismatch between preference and fitness. Ecology 88:792–801.  https://doi.org/10.1890/06-0574 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnold TW (2010) Uninformative parameters and model selection using Akaike’s information criterion. J Wildl Manag 74:1175–1178.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-2817.2010.tb01236.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnold TW, Roche EA, Devries JH, Howerter DW (2012) Costs of reproduction in breeding female mallards: predation risk during incubation drives annual mortality. Avian Conserv Ecol 7(1):1.  https://doi.org/10.5751/ace-00504-070101 Google Scholar
  5. Battin J, Lawler JJ (2006) Cross-scale correlations and the design and analysis of avian habitat selection studies. The Condor 108:59–70.  https://doi.org/10.1650/0010-5422(2006)108[0059:CCATDA]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beissinger SR, McCullough DR (2002) Population viability analysis. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  7. Bloom PM, Clark RG, Howerter DW, Armstrong LM (2012) Landscape-level correlates of mallard duckling survival: implications for conservation programs. J Wildl Manag 76:813–823.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.297 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multi-model inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Chalfoun AD, Martin TE (2007) Assessments of habitat preferences and quality depend on spatial scale and metrics of fitness. J Appl Ecol 44:983–992.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2007.01352.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chalfoun AD, Schmidt KA (2012) Adaptive breeding-habitat selection: is it for the birds? Auk 129:589–599.  https://doi.org/10.1525/auk.2012.129.4.589 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clark RG, Shutler D (1999) Avian habitat selection: pattern from process in nest-site use by ducks? Ecology 80:272–287.  https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[0272:AHSPFP]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Clark RG, Fleskes JP, Guyn KL, Haukos DA, Austin JE, Miller MR (2014) Northern Pintail (Anas acuta). In: Rodewald PG (ed) The birds of North America. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca,  https://doi.org/10.2173/bna.163
  13. Cowardin LM, Carter V, Golet FC, LaRoe ET (1979) Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  14. Derrickson SR (1978) The mobility of breeding pintails. Auk 95:104–114.  https://doi.org/10.2307/4085500 Google Scholar
  15. Devries JH (2014) Fitness consequences of avian habitat selection in dynamic landscapes: Multi-scale evaluations in northern pintails. PhD dissertation, Department of Biology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  16. Devries JH, Citta JJ, Lindberg MS, Howerter DW, Anderson MG (2003) Breeding-season survival of mallard females in the prairie pothole region of Canada. J Wildl Manag 67:551–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Devries JH, Armstrong LM, MacFarlane RJ, Moats L, Thoroughgood PT (2008) Waterfowl nesting in fall-seeded and spring-seeded cropland in Saskatchewan. J Wildl Manag 72:1790–1797.  https://doi.org/10.2193/2007-513 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dinsmore SJ, White GC, Knopf FL (2002) Advanced techniques for modeling avian nest survival. Ecology 83:3476–3488.  https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[3476:atfman] CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dwernychuk LW, Boag DA (1972) Ducks nesting in association with gulls—an ecological trap? Can J Zool 50:559–563.  https://doi.org/10.1139/z72-076 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dzubin A (1969) Assessing breeding populations of ducks by ground counts. Can Wildl Serv Rep Ser 6:178–230Google Scholar
  21. Ecological Stratification Working Group (1995) A national ecological framework for Canada. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Centre for Land and Biological Resources Research and Environment Canada, Ottawa, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  22. Emery RB, Howerter DW, Armstrong LM, Anderson MG, Devries JH, Joynt BL (2005) Seasonal variation in waterfowl nesting success and its relation to cover management in the Canadian prairies. J Wildl Manag 69:1181–1193.  https://doi.org/10.2193/0022-541X(2005)069[1181:SVIWNS]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fretwell SD, Lucas HL Jr (1969) On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. I. Theoretical development. Acta Biotheor 19:16–36.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01601955 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gillies CS, Hebblewhite M, Nielsen SE, Krawchuk MA, Aldridge CL, Frair JL, Saher DJ, Stevens CE, Jerde CL (2006) Application of random effects to the study of resource selection by animals. J Anim Ecol 75:887–898.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2006.01106.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Gloutney ML, Clark RG, Afton AD, Huff GJ (1993) Timing of nest searches for upland nesting waterfowl. J Wildl Manag 57:597–601.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3809288 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Goelitz WA (1918) The destruction of nests by farming operations in Saskatchewan. Auk 35:238–240.  https://doi.org/10.2307/4072879 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Greenwood RJ, Sargeant AB, Johnson DH, Cowardin LM, Shaffer TL (1995) Factors associated with duck nest success in the prairie pothole region of Canada. Wildl Monogr 128:3–57Google Scholar
  28. Higgins KF (1977) Duck nesting in intensively farmed areas of North Dakota. J Wildl Manag 41:232–242.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3800600 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Higgins KF, Kirsch LM, Duebbert HF, Klett AT, Lokemoen JT, Miller HW, Kruse AD (1977) Construction and operation of a cable-chain drag for nest searches. Wildlife Leaflet 512, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  30. Hoekman ST, Mills LS, Howerter DW, Devries JH, Ball IJ (2002) Sensitivity analyses of the life cycle of mid-continent mallards. J Wildl Manag 66:883–900.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3803153 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Howerter DW, Anderson MG, Devries JH, Joynt BL, Armstrong LM, Emery RB, Arnold TW (2014) Variation in mallard vital rates in Canadian aspen Parklands: the prairie habitat joint venture assessment. Wildl Monogr 188:1–37.  https://doi.org/10.1002/wmon.1012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ims RA (1990) On the adaptive value of reproductive synchrony as a predator-swamping strategy. Am Nat 136:485–498.  https://doi.org/10.1086/285109 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Johnson CJ, Nielsen SE, Merrill EH, McDonald TL, Boyce MS (2006) Resource selection functions based on use-availability data: theoretical motivation and evaluation methods. J Wildl Manag 70:347–357.  https://doi.org/10.2193/0022-541x(2006)70[347:rsfbou] CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Klett AT, Duebbert HF, Faanes CA, Higgins KF (1986) Techniques for studying nest success of ducks in upland habitats in the Prairie Pothole Region. Resource Publication 158, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  35. Klett AT, Shaffer TL, Johnson DH (1988) Duck nest success in the Prairie Pothole Region. J Wildl Manag 52:431–440.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3801586 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Larivière S, Messier F (1998) Effects of density and nearest neighbors on simulated waterfowl nests: can predators recognize high-density nesting patches? Oikos 83:12–20.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3546541 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Larivière S, Messier F (2000) Habitat selection and use of edges by striped skunks in the Canadian prairies. Can J Zool 78:366–372.  https://doi.org/10.1139/z99-230 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Livezey BC (1981) Duck nesting in retired croplands at Horicon National Wildlife Refuge, Wisconsin. J Wildl Manag 45:27–37.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3807870 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Martin TE (1993) Nest predation and nest sites. Bioscience 43:523–532.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1311947 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Martin TE (1998) Are microhabitat preferences of coexisting species under selection and adaptive. Ecology 79:656–670.  https://doi.org/10.2307/176961 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McCullagh P, Nelder JA (1989) Generalized linear models. Chapman and Hall, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McLoughlin PD, Boyce MS, Coulson T, Clutton-Brock T (2006) Lifetime reproductive success and density-dependent, multi-variable resource selection. Proc Roy Soc B 273:1449–1454.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2006.3486 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McLoughlin PD, Morris DW, Fortin D, Vander Wal E, Contasti AL (2010) Considering ecological dynamics in resource selection functions. J Anim Ecol 79:4–12.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2009.01613.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Miller MR, Duncan DC (1999) The northern pintail in North America: status and conservation needs of a struggling population. Wildl Soc Bull 27:788–800Google Scholar
  45. Milonski M (1958) The significance of farmland for waterfowl nesting and techniques for reducing losses due to agricultural practices. Trans N Am Wildl Conf 23:215–227Google Scholar
  46. Minot EO (1981) Effects of interspecific competition for food in breeding blue and great tits. J Anim Ecol 50:375–385.  https://doi.org/10.2307/4061 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Misenhelter MD, Rotenberry JT (2000) Choices and consequences of habitat occupancy and nest site selection in sage sparrows. Ecology 81:2892–2901.  https://doi.org/10.2307/177349 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Morris DW (1987) Tests of density-dependent habitat selection in a patchy environment. Ecol Monogr 57:270–281.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2937087 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mysterud A, Ims RA (1998) Functional responses in habitat use: availability influences relative use in trade-off situations. Ecology 79:1435–1441.  https://doi.org/10.2307/176754 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Nagy LR, Holmes RT (2004) Factors influencing fecundity in migratory songbirds: is nest predation the most important? J Avian Biol 35:487–491.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0908-8857.2004.03429.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Newton I (1998) Population limitation in birds. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  52. Opdam P, Wiens JA (2002) Fragmentation, habitat loss and landscape management. In: Norris K, Pain DJ (eds) Conserving bird biodiversity: general principles and their application. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 202–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Orians GH, Wittenberger JF (1991) Spatial and temporal scales in habitat selection. Am Nat 137:S29–S49.  https://doi.org/10.1086/285138 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pagano AM, Arnold TW (2010) Detection probabilities for ground-based breeding waterfowl surveys. J Wildl Manag 73:392–398.  https://doi.org/10.2193/2007-411 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Patten MA, Kelly JF (2010) Habitat selection and the perceptual trap. Ecol Appl 20:2148–2156.  https://doi.org/10.1890/09-2370.1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Perezgonzalez JD (2015) P values as percentiles. commentary on: “null hypothesis significance tests. A mix–up of two different theories: the basis for widespread confusion and numerous misinterpretations”. Front Psychol 6:341.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00341 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. Peron G, Walker J, Rotella J, Hines JE, Nichols JD (2014) Estimating nest abundance while accounting for time-to-event processes and imperfect detection. Ecology 95:2548–2557.  https://doi.org/10.1890/13-1779.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Phillips ML, Clark WR, Sovada MA, Horn DJ, Kolford RR, Greenwood RJ (2003) Predator selection of prairie landscape features and its relation to duck nest success. J Wildl Manag 67:104–114.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3803066 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Podruzny KM, Devries JH, Armstrong LM, Rotella JJ (2002) Long-term response of northern pintails to changes in wetlands and agriculture in the Canadian prairie pothole region. J Wildl Manag 66:993–1010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Pulliam HR (1988) Sources, sinks, and population regulation. Am Nat 132:652–661.  https://doi.org/10.1086/284880 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pulliam HR (1996) Sources and sinks: empirical evidence and population consequences. In: Rhodes EO Jr, Chesser RK, Smith MH (eds) Population dynamics in ecological space and time. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 45–69Google Scholar
  62. Reynolds RE, Shaffer TL, Renner RW, Newton WE, Batt BDJ (2001) Impact of the conservation reserve program on duck recruitment in the US prairie pothole region. J Wildl Manag 65:765–780.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3803027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Richkus KD (2002) Northern pintail nest site selection, nest success, renesting ecology and survival in the intensively farmed prairies of southern Saskatchewan: an evaluation of the ecological trap hypothesis. PhD dissertation. Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, USAGoogle Scholar
  64. Ricklefs RE (1969) An analysis of nesting mortality in birds. Smithson Contrib Zool 9:1–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Rodenhouse NL, Sherry TW, Holmes RT (1997) Site-dependent regulation of population size: a new synthesis. Ecology 78:2025–2042.  https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(1997)078[2025:SDROPS]2.0.CO;2 Google Scholar
  66. Rodenhouse NL, Sillet TS, Doran PJ, Holmes RT (2003) Multiple density-dependence mechanisms regulate a migratory bird population during the breeding season. Proc R Soc B 270:2105–2110.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2003.2438 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. Rosenzweig ML (1974) On the evolution of habitat selection. In: Proceedings of the First International Congress of Ecology. Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, Wageningen, Netherlands, pp 401–404Google Scholar
  68. Rotella JJ, Ratti JT (1992) Mallard brood movements and wetland selection in southwestern Manitoba. J Wildl Manag 56:508–515.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3808866 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sargeant AB, Greenwood RJ, Sovada MA, Shaffer TL (1993) Distribution and abundance of predators that affect duck production: the Prairie Pothole Region. Resource Publication 194, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  70. Sauder DW, Linder RL, Dahlgren RB, Tucker WL (1971) An evaluation of the roadside technique for censusing breeding waterfowl. J Wildl Manag 35:538–543.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3799709 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Schlaepfer MA, Runge MC, Sherman PW (2002) Ecological and evolutionary traps. Trends Ecol Evol 17:474–480.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(02)02580-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Smith RI (1968) The social aspects of reproductive behavior in the pintail. Auk 85:381–396.  https://doi.org/10.2307/4083286 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Sovada MA, Zicus MC, Greenwood RJ, Rave DP, Newton WE, Woodward RO, Beiser JA (2000) Relationships of habitat patch size to predator community and survival of duck nests. J Wildl Manag 64:820–831.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3802752 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Stephens SE, Rotella JJ, Lindberg MS, Taper ML, Ringelman JK (2005) Duck nest survival in the Missouri Coteau of North Dakota: landscape effects at multiple spatial scales. Ecol Appl 15:2137–2149.  https://doi.org/10.1890/04-1162 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Stewart RE, Kantrud HA (1971) Classification of natural ponds and lakes in the glaciated prairie region. Resource Publication 92, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  76. Titman RD, Lowther JK (1975) The breeding behavior of a crowded population of mallards. Can J Zool 53:1270–1283.  https://doi.org/10.1139/z75-152 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. US Fish and Wildlife Service and Canadian Wildlife Service (1987) Standard operating procedures for aerial waterfowl breeding ground population and habitat surveys in North America. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington DC, and Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  78. van Beest FM, Uzal A, Vander Wal E, Laforge MP, Contasti AL, Colville D, McLoughlin PD (2014) Increasing density leads to generalization in both coarse-grained habitat selection and fine-grained resource selection in a large mammal. J Anim Ecol 83:147–156.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12115 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Walker J, Rotella JJ, Stephens SE, Lindberg MS, Ringelman JK, Hunter C, Smith AJ (2013) Time-lagged variation in pond density and primary productivity affects duck nest survival in the prairie pothole region. Ecol Appl 23:1061–1074.  https://doi.org/10.1890/12-1755.1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Weller MW (1956) A simple candler for waterfowl eggs. J Wildl Manag 20:111–113.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3797414 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Weller MW (1979) Density and habitat relationships of blue-winged teal nesting in northwestern Iowa. J Wildl Manag 43:367–374.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3800345 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada
  2. 2.Institute for Wetland and Waterfowl Research, Ducks Unlimited CanadaStonewallCanada
  3. 3.Environment and Climate Change CanadaPrairie and Northern Wildlife Research CenterSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations