Nesting Synchrony: A Strategy to Decrease Predation of Snapping Turtle (Chelydra serpentina) Nests

Robinson, Charlotte J.; Bider, J. R.

doi:10.2307/1564342

Cited by 35 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Congdon et al (1987) found that of depredated snapping Turtle (Chelydra serpentina) nests, 59% were depredated within the first 24 h, 73% of these nests were depredated within the first 6 days, and 100% by the 32 nd day post-oviposition. Robinson and Bider (1988) found that 57% of depredation events occurred within 72 h of nest construction, and 87% occurred within 5 days post-oviposition. similarly, Desroches and Picard (2007) found that 80% of nests were depredated in the first week post-oviposition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Many studies of turtle nest depredation report that most depredation events occur within the first week post-oviposition (Tinkle et al 1981;Christens and Bider 1987;Congdon et al 1983Congdon et al , 1987Robinson and Bider 1988;Burke et al 2005;strickland et al 2010;geller 2012;Wirsing et al 2012;Holcomb and Carr 2013). For example, Congdon et al (1983) found that 87% of Blanding's Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) nest depredation occurred within the first 5 days post-oviposition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cues used by predators to detect freshwater turtle nests may persist late into incubation

Riley

Litzgus

2014

Can Field Nat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 2014. Cues used by predators to detect freshwater turtle nests may persist late into incubation. Canadian Field-Naturalist 128(2): 179-188.Previous studies have found that turtle nest depredation is concentrated immediately post-oviposition, likely because cues alerting predators to nest presence are most obvious during this time. In algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario, we examined the frequency of nest depredation during the incubation period for snapping Turtles (Chelydra serpentina [Linnaeus, 1758]) and Midland Painted Turtles (Chrysemys picta marginata [agassiz, 1857]). Contrary to most past findings, nest depredation occurred throughout the incubation period for both species. In fact, 83% and 86% of depredation interactions with snapping and Painted Turtle nests, respectively, occurred more than a week after oviposition at our study site. Peaks in nest depredation (weeks with ≥10% nest depredation) occurred late in incubation and may have coincided with hatching. Trail cameras deployed at four nesting sites revealed six predator species interacting with nests. The presence of predators at nest sites increased late in the incubation period indicating a persistence or renewal (from hatching) of cues; additional research is necessary to determine the nature of these cues. These findings have implications for both research and turtle conservation. Further research should examine the relationship between temporal changes in predator species' density and patterns of nest depredation. additionally, in areas where protective nest caging is used as a species recovery action, it may be important to ensure that cages remain in place throughout the incubation period until emergence of hatchlings.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cues used by predators to detect freshwater turtle nests may persist late into incubation

Riley

Litzgus

2014

Can Field Nat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Three, snapping turtles often nest at twilight or at night, meaning that attractive olfactory cues emitted by their fresh nests are most potent when many nest predators are more active (Legler 1954;Burger 1977;Tinkle et al 1981;Christens and Bider 1987), whereas painted turtles nest mainly diurnally (Congdon and Gatten 1989). Four, snapping turtle egg numbers and corresponding nest sizes are substantially larger than those for painted turtles (Robinson and Bider 1988), implying that snapping turtle nests likely represent a more detectable visual and olfactory target for predators. Thus, we predicted that painted turtle nests would be attacked by predators with lower frequency than snapping turtle nests because they are more cryptic (Schmidt and Whelan 1998;Schmidt 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…Thus, we predicted that painted turtle nests would be attacked by predators with lower frequency than snapping turtle nests because they are more cryptic (Schmidt and Whelan 1998;Schmidt 2004). Given that the vulnerability of any particular nest to predation should correlate positively with its detectability (Wilhoft et al 1979;Robinson and Bider 1988;Schmidt 1999Schmidt , 2004, we also predicted that nests of both species in locations facilitating opportunistic discovery (e.g., highly visible locations) or characterized by relatively heavy predator traYc would be most likely to be depredated.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Incidental nest predation in freshwater turtles: inter- and intraspecific differences in vulnerability are explained by relative crypsis

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has long been interest in the influence of predators on prey populations, although most predator-prey studies have focused on prey species that are targets of directed predator searching. Conversely, few have addressed depredation that occurs after incidental encounters with predators. We tested two predictions stemming from the hypothesis that nest predation on two sympatric freshwater turtle species whose nests are differentially prone to opportunistic detection-painted turtles (Chrysemys picta) and snapping turtles (Chelydra serpentina)-is incidental: (1) predation rates should be density independent, and (2) individual predators should not alter their foraging behavior after encountering nests. After monitoring nest survival and predator behavior following nest depredation over 2 years, we confirmed that predation by raccoons (Procyon lotor), the primary nest predators in our study area, matched both predictions. Furthermore, cryptic C. picta nests were victimized with lower frequency than more detectable C. serpentina nests, and nests of both species were more vulnerable in human-modified areas where opportunistic nest discovery is facilitated. Despite apparently being incidental, predation on nests of both species was intensive (57% for painted turtles, 84% for snapping turtles), and most depredations occurred within 1 day of nest establishment. By implication, predation need not be directed to affect prey demography, and factors influencing prey crypsis are drivers of the impact of incidental predation on prey. Our results also imply that efforts to conserve imperiled turtle populations in human-modified landscapes should include restoration of undisturbed conditions that are less likely to expose nests to incidental predators.

show abstract

Assessing wild turkey productivity before and after a 14‐day delay in the start date of the spring hunting season in Tennessee

Quehl,

Phillips,

Johnson

et al. 2024

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ten state wildlife management agencies in the United States, including six within the Southeast, have delayed their spring wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) hunting seasons since 2017 by five or more days to address concerns related to the potential effects of hunting on wild turkey seasonal productivity. One hypothesis posits that if the spring hunting season is too early, there may be insufficient time for males to breed hens before being harvested, thus leading to reduced seasonal productivity. We conducted an experiment to determine whether delaying the wild turkey hunting season by 2 weeks in south‐middle Tennessee would affect various reproductive rates. In 2021 and 2022, the Tennessee Fish and Wildlife Commission experimentally delayed the spring hunting season to open 14 days later than the traditional date (the Saturday closest to 1 April) in Giles, Lawrence, and Wayne counties. We monitored reproductive rates from 2017 to 2022 in these three counties as well as two adjacent counties, Bedford and Maury, that were not delayed. We used a Before‐After‐Control‐Impact design to analyze the proportion of hens nesting, clutch size, hatchability, nest success, poult survival and hen survival with linear mixed‐effect models and AIC model selection to detect relationships between the 14‐day delay and reproductive parameters. We detected no relationship (p > .05) between the 14‐day delay and any individual reproductive parameter. In addition, recruitment (hen poults per hen that survived until the next breeding season) was very low (<0.5) and did not increase because of the 14‐day delay. The traditional Tennessee start date had been in place since 1986 while the turkey harvest increased markedly until about 2006 and more recently stabilized. Our data indicate that moving the start of the hunting season from a period just prior to peak nest initiation to 2 weeks later, to coincide with a period just prior to peak nest incubation initiation, resulted in no change to productivity or populations in wild turkey flocks in south‐middle Tennessee.

show abstract

Nesting Synchrony: A Strategy to Decrease Predation of Snapping Turtle (Chelydra serpentina) Nests

Cited by 35 publications

References 4 publications

Cues used by predators to detect freshwater turtle nests may persist late into incubation

Cues used by predators to detect freshwater turtle nests may persist late into incubation

Incidental nest predation in freshwater turtles: inter- and intraspecific differences in vulnerability are explained by relative crypsis

Assessing wild turkey productivity before and after a 14‐day delay in the start date of the spring hunting season in Tennessee

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About