Microhabitat Use, Home Range, and Movements of the Alligator Snapping Turtle, Macrochelys Temminckii, in Oklahoma

Riedle, J. Daren; Shipman, Paul A.; Fox, Stanley F.; Leslie, David M.

doi:10.1894/0038-4909(2006)51[35:muhram]2.0.co;2

Cited by 48 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Throughout the year, M. temminckii used sites that had a high percentage of canopy cover, an observation that is consistent with other habitat selection studies on adult M. temminckii (Riedle et al, 2006;Shipman and Riedle, 2008). However, it remains unknown why M. temminckii used sites with higher percentages of canopy cover.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…Based on what was previously known about habitat selection throughout its range (Sloan and Taylor, 1987;Harrel et al, 1996;Riedle et al, 2006;Shipman and Riedle, 2008), we predicted M. temminckii would select habitat with structure and a high percentage of canopy cover, which is similar to previous habitat selection studies conducted in riverine habitats (Riedle et al, 2006;Shipman and Riedle, 2008). …”

supporting

confidence: 69%

“…Throughout its range, subadult or adult M. temminckii select structure (e.g., submerged trees, stumps, and tree root masses) along banks more often than open water (Sloan and Taylor, 1987;Harrel et al, 1996;Riedle et al, 2006;Shipman and Riedle, 2008). Macrochelys temminckii may also select sites with a high percentage of canopy cover throughout the year (Riedle et al, 2006;Shipman and Riedle, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given that M. temminckii rarely leaves the water (Pritchard, 1989), individuals could regulate body temperature through differential use of aquatic microhabitats with different thermal characteristics (Riedle et al, 2006). Similarly, gravid female Smooth Softshells (Apalone mutica) may select shallower habitats than males just prior to nesting, but both sexes may use deep, open water during other times of the year (Plummer, 1977).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Habitat Selection of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) in Arkansas

Howey¹,

Dinkelacker²

2009

Journal of Herpetology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

supporting

confidence: 69%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Habitat Selection of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) in Arkansas

Howey¹,

Dinkelacker²

2009

Journal of Herpetology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Woody debris is important to turtles for aerial basking and refugia (Chaney and Smith, 1950) and as foraging sites (Moll, 1976;Gibbons and Lovich, 1990). Presence of woody debris dictate the distribution of basking emydid turtles (Lovich, 1988;Lindeman, 1999) as well as bottom dwellers such as Macrochelys that depend on submerged woody debris for cover (Riedle et al, 2006;Shipman and Riedle, 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Habitat associations of fish and aquatic turtles in an East Texas Stream

Riedle

Kazmaier

Killian

et al. 2016

Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-The community structure of stream communities are treated as bioassays of stream ecosystems and changes to species patterns within those communities reflect response to multiple stressors including natural fluctuations in environmental variables. Research has focused on the structure of fish assemblages and there is increasing interest in environmental factors structuring turtle communities. Both fishes and turtles can be sampled using common methods, but are rarely studied together. Our objective was to compare distribution of fish and turtle species based on measured environmental variables in East Texas, USA. Species distributions were influenced by flow, substrate, and emergent vegetation. Results from Monte Carlo permutation tests suggest that downed woody debris and water temperature also had a strong influence on species distributions. Co-correspondence analysis showed considerable overlap of species scores in the absence of environmental variables. The five macrohabitats sampled exhibited varying degrees of connectivity and thus species mixing, which is driven by annual fluctuations in precipitation. Results from this study suggest that turtles and fishes can be considered simultaneously and exhibit similar patterns of species distribution across the landscape, at least at local scales.

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

Microhabitat Use, Home Range, and Movements of the Alligator Snapping Turtle, Macrochelys Temminckii, in Oklahoma

Cited by 48 publications

References 2 publications

Habitat Selection of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) in Arkansas

Habitat Selection of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) in Arkansas

Habitat associations of fish and aquatic turtles in an East Texas Stream

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About