Cameras Identify White-tailed Deer Depredating Northern Bobwhite Nests

Ellis‐Felege, Susan N.; Burnam, Jonathan S.; Palmer, William E.; Sisson, D. Clay; Wellendorf, Shane D.; Thornton, Ryan P.; Stribling, H. Lee; Carroll, John P.

doi:10.1656/1528-7092-7.3.562

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, neither fallow deer nor white-tailed deer were observed eating eggs from the nests, even though they were caught on the camera traps. North American studies have noted white-tailed deer to predate the nests of groundnesting birds (Pietz and Granfors 2000;Ellis-Felege et al 2008). Ellis-Felege et al (2008) state that the deer may opportunistically use high-protein and high-energy foods, such as eggs, particularly during antler development and fawning.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…North American studies have noted white-tailed deer to predate the nests of groundnesting birds (Pietz and Granfors 2000;Ellis-Felege et al 2008). Ellis-Felege et al (2008) state that the deer may opportunistically use high-protein and high-energy foods, such as eggs, particularly during antler development and fawning. Angelstam (1986) suggests that the contribution of eggs to a predator's diet is so insignificant compared to their food requirements that becoming a nest-robbing specialist does not pay off.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The new faces of nest predation in agricultural landscapes—a wildlife camera survey with artificial nests

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

European populations of many ground-nesting farmland birds have declined in recent decades. Increases in predator populations and nest predation may play an important role in this decline, along with habitat loss. However, the role of various predators has often remained unclear. We conducted a study with artificial nests and wildlife cameras (n = 104) in agricultural landscapes during 2015-2016 in South Finland. Our trials formed a 400-m wide gradient from forest to field. The aim of our study was to monitor nest survival and nest predators in a spatial and temporal scale. We tested the effect of distance to the forest and nest visibility to nest predation. During an 8-day period, 39.4% of the artificial nests were predated. Fifty percent of the predators were birds, 40% mammals, and 10% remained unknown. The three dominant predators of our artificial nests were the raccoon dog (Nyctereutes procyonoides) with 11 nests and the hooded crow (Corvus corone cornix) and the magpie (Pica pica) with 10 depredated nests each. Our analysis indicates that avian predators preyed upon nests in open fields further away from the forest edge, whereas mammalian predation concentrated closer to the forest edge. Predation occurred more likely at the beginning of the survey and nest survival increased as days passed. Our study highlights the efficiency of using wildlife camera traps in nest predation studies. We also suggest that the ongoing expansion of alien predators across Europe may have a greater impact on ground-nesting bird populations than previously anticipated.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The new faces of nest predation in agricultural landscapes—a wildlife camera survey with artificial nests

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Westwood and several incidental predator species (Staller et al. 2005; Ellis‐Felege et al. 2008; Terhune et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, several other predator species exist within the community, such as snakes (particularly rat snakes Pantherophis alleghaniensis and P. guttatus Say and kingsnakes Lampropeltis getula Linnaeus), fire ants Solenopsis spp. Westwood and several incidental predator species (Staller et al 2005;Ellis-Felege et al 2008;Terhune et al 2008). Some of these species, such as snakes, serve roles as both bobwhite predators and as prey items for the mesomammals being reduced (Lang 2008;Howze 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predator reduction results in compensatory shifts in losses of avian ground nests

Ellis‐Felege

Conroy

Palmer

et al. 2012

Journal of Applied Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary1. Nesting birds can be vulnerable to predation. Wildlife managers sometimes manipulate predator communities to enhance avian productivity and abundance. Managers need to know the predation risk from different predator species responsible for nest failures to maximize success. This issue is especially important when considering reductions in only a part of the predator community in complex ecosystems. 2. We conducted a 7-year crossover experiment at four study sites to examine the effect of mesomammalian predator control on nest success of northern bobwhite Colinus virginianus in the southeastern USA. Nests were monitored using 24-h near-infrared video. We hypothesized that nest failures caused by different predator guilds may not be independent and may lead to compensation by other predators as one predator guild was reduced. 3. We compared levels of bobwhite nest predation by mesomammals, snakes and other predators in years with and without mesomammal control. 4. Control of mesomammal predators reduced the levels of mesomammal nest predation, but predation levels by snakes and other predators increased such that total nest mortality was not reduced. Nest mortality among predator groups was best described as compensatory, and total nest mortality differed among sites. 5. Synthesis and applications. Our findings suggest that reductions in predation risk from one predator guild can be compensated by an increased risk from other predators in complex ecosystems. Predator removal within one group may not translate to additive increases in overall nest success, but rather results in shifts in the identity of predators responsible for nest failures. Management efforts focused on manipulating predator communities to enhance avian reproduction are encouraged to examine cause-specific nest fates to determine the effectiveness of predator reduction programmes.

show abstract

“…Motion‐triggered cameras took 104 photographs of 10 different species of mammalian predators (Table 2). White‐tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ), which have recently been documented as opportunistic nest predators (Pietz & Granfors 2000; Ellis‐Felege et al 2008), were detected most frequently.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Climate and Exurban Development on Nest Predation and Predator Presence in the southern Appalachian Mountains (U.S.A.)

Lumpkin

Pearson

Turner

2012

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the eastern United States, land-use and climate change have likely contributed to declines in the abundance of Neotropical migrant birds that occupy forest interiors, but the mechanisms are not well understood. We conducted a nest-predation experiment in southern Appalachian Mountain forests (North Carolina, U.S.A.) during the 2009 and 2010 breeding seasons to determine the effects of exurban development and temperature on predator presence and the average number of days until eggs in an artificial nest were disturbed by predators. We baited artificial nests with quail (Excalfactoria chinensi) eggs and monitored them for 18 days. We used clay eggs, track plates, and motion-triggered cameras to detect and identify nest predators. The average number of days a nest was undisturbed decreased as mean temperature increased and, to a lesser extent, as the density of buildings increased. Nests on the ground were more often depredated than those in trees, likely due to increased predation by opossum (Didelphis virginiana) and other carnivores. Raccoons (Procyon lotor), opossums, corvids (Corvus brachyrhynchos and Cyanocitta cristata), chipmunks (Tamias striatus), black bears (Ursus americanus), and domestic cats (Felis catus) were the most commonly detected predators. Presence of these predators did not vary as a function of mean temperature. Domestic cats and corvids were detected more frequently in plots with high rather than low densities of buildings. Forest-interior specialists and Neotropical migrants often nest in cool, high-elevation areas with low housing density. These bird species, especially those that nest on the ground, may be most vulnerable to increased nest predation if temperature and exurban development increase at higher elevations as anticipated.

show abstract

Cameras Identify White-tailed Deer Depredating Northern Bobwhite Nests

Cited by 14 publications

References 10 publications

The new faces of nest predation in agricultural landscapes—a wildlife camera survey with artificial nests

The new faces of nest predation in agricultural landscapes—a wildlife camera survey with artificial nests

Predator reduction results in compensatory shifts in losses of avian ground nests

Effects of Climate and Exurban Development on Nest Predation and Predator Presence in the southern Appalachian Mountains (U.S.A.)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About