Long-term Monitoring and Recovery of a Population of Alligator Snapping Turtles, Macrochelys temminckii (Testudines: Chelydridae), from a Northeastern Arkansas Stream

Trauth, Stanley E.; Siegel, Dustin S.; McCallum, Malcolm L.; Jamieson, David H.; Holt, Anatol W.; Trauth, Joy B.; Hicks, Helen; Stanley, Jonathan W.; Elston, Jennifer J.; Kelly, J. J.; Konvalina, John D.

doi:10.54119/jaas.2016.7031

Cited by 16 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…22, Special Issue 12 greater proportion of juveniles may indicate higher recruitment and survivorship of young cohorts or, on the contrary, can also result from increased adult mortality (Lescher et al 2013). Exemplifying the latter case, the high proportion of juveniles and lower numbers of adults reported from northeastern Arkansas were sampled from a historically harvested area, and are consistent with the impact of size-biased harvest activities (Trauth et al 1998). Similar effects of previous harvest pressure were not evident from our study area, as we observed higher adult proportions and a normal size distribution of individuals in both surveys.…”

Section: Demography and Size Distributionmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…The overall CPUE in 2020-2021 was one-half that reported from surveys across the state of Arkansas (CPUE = 0.234; Wagner et al 1996) and from northeastern Arkansas (CPUE = 0.278; Trauth et al 1998), which suggests the species is less Vol. 22, Special Issue 12 abundant in Texas.…”

mentioning

confidence: 84%

“…data) and thus is likely an important source of variation across surveys and sites. Spacing of traps is not usually reported from M. temminckii surveys (but see Trauth et al 1998), nor is it usually standardized within surveys. Instead, it is determined by the availability of microhabitat inferred to be favorable for capture (e.g., Baxley et al 2014, Huntzinger et al 2019, Shipman and Riedle 2008.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Distribution and Demography of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) in Texas: A 20-Year Perspective

Rosenbaum

Rudolph

Saenz

et al. 2023

Southeastern Naturalist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Texas contains the southwestern range edge of Macrochelys temminckii (Alligator Snapping Turtle), but there is relatively little published information on this species within the state. To document its range and assess temporal changes in its distribution and demography, we sampled 23 sites from 1999 to 2001. We then resurveyed 22 of these sites and sampled 29 additional sites in 2020-2021. Detection outcomes were consistent between 18 of the 22 resurveyed sites. Sex ratios and body-size distributions were similar across surveys. Catch per unit effort (CPUE) was lower in areas with trotlines, corroborating known interactions between turtles and fishing gear. Patterns in CPUE indicate Gulf of Mexico-draining watersheds are important systems for the species, while CPUE was lower in Mississippi-draining watersheds.

show abstract

Section: Demography and Size Distributionmentioning

confidence: 68%

mentioning

confidence: 84%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Distribution and Demography of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) in Texas: A 20-Year Perspective

Rosenbaum

Rudolph

Saenz

et al. 2023

Southeastern Naturalist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first is that occupancy status ( z i ) does not change for the duration of the study. This assumption is reasonably met by the sampling procedure because of the limited timeframe over which repeat surveys occurred, and the propensity for alligator snapping turtles to adopt home ranges they move from infrequently (Trauth et al 2016). Second is the assumption of no unmodeled heterogeneity in p among sites (MacKenzie et al 2006).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Under circumstances that p is heterogeneous across sites for reasons other than variation in N , CPUE among sites will be biased and not indicative of a constant proportion from each sampling unit (White and Bennetts 1996), rendering its interpretation as relative abundance imprecise. Hoop trap surveys often take place at large spatial scales (Wagner et al 1996, Rudolph et al 2002), over a variety of environmental conditions and habitat characteristics (Riedle et al 2005), and across long periods of time (Trauth et al 2016). This leaves potential for environmental heterogeneity between survey conditions, which can influence p (Morreale et al 1984).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection, occupancy, and abundance of the alligator snapping turtle in Texas

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The alligator snapping turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) is a long‐lived species that is widely distributed across the southeastern United States. Both these characteristics make monitoring its occupancy and abundance particularly challenging. In 2020 and 2021, we conducted hoop trap surveys at 51 permanent water bodies across the Texas, USA, range of the species to estimate occupancy and average abundance with site occupancy models and multinomial N‐mixture models, respectively. We confirmed the species to be present at 61% of surveyed locations. Mean detection probability was 0.77, and was influenced methodologically by the spacing of traps, and environmentally by lunar phase and water flow velocity. Mean occupancy probability was 0.82, and mean estimated abundance was 7.57 turtles/site. Our data provided evidence that the species has a higher occurrence probability in waters of highly forested catchments, and is most probable to occur in highest abundances at median latitudes within its Texas range. Despite known microhabitat preferences of the species, instream habitat characteristics (e.g., canopy coverage, depth, sinuosity) did not strongly influence its occupancy or abundance. Spatial dynamics of the occupancy and abundance of the species in Texas are influenced by landscape features more than local habitat. These results further corroborate the importance of watershed land cover to aquatic organisms, and our methods provide a standardized template for monitoring and quantifying important demographic parameters of the species across multiple locations while accounting for imperfect detection.

show abstract

Comparing cost, effort, and performance of environmental DNA sampling and trapping for detecting an elusive freshwater turtle

Sternhagen,

Davis,

Larson

et al. 2024

Environmental DNA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis is an effective and non‐invasive technique for surveying and monitoring rare, threatened, or endangered (RTE) species. Compared to conventional capture‐based sampling, eDNA analysis may offer a more cost‐effective approach for surveying RTE species, yet few studies have compared their cost‐efficiency—a critical consideration for conservation planning. We compared the costs, effort, and relative performance of aquatic eDNA sampling and conventional trapping for detecting the Alligator Snapping Turtle, Macrochelys temminckii Troost, 1835, in southwest Louisiana, United States. Environmental DNA was sampled quarterly over 1 year (2018–2019) at 19 streams, including three streams where M. temminckii presence had been previously confirmed via conventional trapping efforts (2012–2013). Water samples from each stream were analyzed using quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) to assess M. temminckii eDNA presence/absence. Time and costs (i.e., labor, travel, wages, and supplies) per detection via eDNA analysis and trapping were calculated and compared. Environmental DNA analysis documented the presence of M. temminckii DNA at two of the three streams where individuals had previously been trapped and yielded detections (qPCR amplifications) at 16 additional streams not previously sampled, expanding M. temminckii's documented distribution at our study sites by 84%. Environmental DNA analysis returned a detection rate (per site) 5.55 times higher than conventional trapping and was 18.7% less expensive. Our results provide evidence that strategically deployed eDNA surveys may be an effective and cost‐efficient approach for detecting freshwater RTE species. With eDNA analysis, additional resources can be invested toward expanding survey coverage and increasing sampling frequency, allowing managers to more effectively target subsequent intensive monitoring efforts.

show abstract

Long-term Monitoring and Recovery of a Population of Alligator Snapping Turtles, Macrochelys temminckii (Testudines: Chelydridae), from a Northeastern Arkansas Stream

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Distribution and Demography of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) in Texas: A 20-Year Perspective

Distribution and Demography of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) in Texas: A 20-Year Perspective

Detection, occupancy, and abundance of the alligator snapping turtle in Texas

Comparing cost, effort, and performance of environmental DNA sampling and trapping for detecting an elusive freshwater turtle

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About