Behavioral-dependent recursive movements and implications for resource selection

Abstract

Within home ranges, animals repeatedly visit certain areas. Recursive movement patterns are widespread throughout the animal kingdom, but are rarely considered when developing resource selection models. We examined how behavioral state-dependent recursive movements influenced reource selection of eastern wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris) broods as they aged from day 1 to 28. Because broods become more plastic in behaviors once they begin roosting off the ground, we separated data into broods that were ground roosting (1–13 days) and tree roosting (14–28 days). We used Hidden Markov Models to identify 2 behavioral states (restricted and mobile). We extracted state-specific recursive movements based on states and specific step lengths, which we integrated into a step selection analysis to evaluate resource selection. We found that in a restricted state, ground roosting broods spent less time in areas of mixed pine-hardwoods and more time in areas with greater vegetation density. Tree roosting broods revisited areas closer to shrub/scrub landcover types, and areas with greater vegetation density. Tree roosting broods also spent less time near mixed pine-hardwoods, while spending more time in areas with greater vegetation density. We found that in a mobile state, ground roosting broods revisited areas closer to secondary roads and mixed pine-hardwoods, but farther from hardwoods. Tree roosting broods revisited areas farther from secondary roads and with greater vegetation density. Tree roosting broods also spent more time in areas closer to pine. Resource selection varied depending on behavioral state and recursive movements. However, revisitation and residence time impacted selection in both ground and tree roosting broods. Our findings highlight the need to consider how behaviors can influence movement decisions and ultimately resource selection.

Spatial roost networks and resource selection of female wild turkeys

“…Open treeless areas are selected by wild turkeys throughout portions of their annual cycle [46,47,49], and provide the opportunity to increase foraging efficiency while also increasing the detectability of predators, which has similarly been shown in various Galliformes [108,109]. Furthermore, open treeless areas provide forb and grass communities that provide relatively high densities of invertebrates necessary for poult development [49,[110][111][112]. Additionally, selecting roost sites closer to water could buffer thermal extremes common throughout the southeastern United States during the summer after reproductive activities cease [68,113,114].…”

“…Locations of hub nodes within a network are often affiliated with greater connectivity to other nodes within the network [ 19 ]. Within our network, hub roosts were situated closer to secondary roads, which may provide quality foraging opportunities and opportunities to escape predation threats [ 68 , 113 ] and enhance mobility for females [ 110 ]. Furthermore, the low-intensity maintenance of trails and secondary roads promotes early successional vegetative communities, which were spatially limited on our study sites [ 68 ].…”