Modeling Colony-Site Dynamics: A Case Study of Gull-Billed Terns (Sterna nilotica) in Coastal Virginia
We developed a Markov process model for colony-site dynamics of Gull-billed Terns (Sterna nilotica). From 1993 through 1996, we monitored breeding numbers of Gull-billed Terns and their frequent colony associates, Common Terns (Sterna hirundo) and Black Skimmers (Rynchops niger), at colony sites alo...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Auk 1998-10, Vol.115 (4), p.970-978 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 978 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 970 |
container_title | The Auk |
container_volume | 115 |
creator | Erwin, R. Michael Nichols, James D. T. Brain Eyler Stotts, Daniel B. Barry R. Truitt |
description | We developed a Markov process model for colony-site dynamics of Gull-billed Terns (Sterna nilotica). From 1993 through 1996, we monitored breeding numbers of Gull-billed Terns and their frequent colony associates, Common Terns (Sterna hirundo) and Black Skimmers (Rynchops niger), at colony sites along 80 km of the barrier island region of coastal Virginia. We also monitored flooding events and renesting. We developed the model for colony survival, extinction, and recolonization at potential colony sites over the four-year period. We then used data on annual site occupation by Gull-billed Terns to estimate model parameters and tested for differences between nesting substrates (barrier island vs. shellpile). Results revealed a dynamic system but provided no evidence that the dynamics were Markovian, i.e. the probability that a site was occupied in one year was not influenced by whether it had been occupied in the previous year. Nor did colony-level reproductive success the previous season seem to affect the probability of site occupancy. Site survival and recolonization rates were similar, and the estimated overall annual probability of a site being occupied was 0.59. Of the 25 sites that were used during the four-year period, 16 were used in one or two years only, and only three were used in all four years. Flooding and renesting were frequent in both habitat types in all years. The frequent flooding of nests on shellpiles argues for more effective management; augmentation with shell and sand to increase elevations as little as 20 cm could have reduced flooding at a number of sites. The low colonysite fidelity that we observed suggests that an effective management approach would be to provide a large number of sand and/or shellpile sites for use by nesting terns. Sites not used in one year may still be used in subsequent years. |
doi_str_mv | 10.2307/4089515 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_17210568</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>4089515</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>4089515</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-9a3915850e9866126065e6e36b6aaddc0faba8b0c0dabf97005b67a01217d6d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10EtLxDAUBeAgCo4P_AtBxMeietM2aeturE9QXMzgttym6ZAhk2jSLubfG3FgQHB1uPBx4FxCThhcpxkUNzmUFWd8h0xYlZVJnvJ8l0wAIE9KyMp9chDCMp48ugnp31ynjLYLWjvj7DqZ6UHR-7XFlZbhlk5pjUHR2TB2a-p6-jQak9xpY1RH58rbQC9nQ0ykVhs3aIlXVNtYhmFAQz-0X2ir8Yjs9WiCOt7kIZk_Pszr5-T1_emlnr4mMivSIakwqxgvOaiqFIKlAgRXQmWiFYhdJ6HHFssWJHTY9lURV7SiQGApKzrRZYfk_Lf207uvUYWhWekglTFolRtDw4qUARdlhKd_4NKNcYWJphI5r1LgEV38IuldCF71zafXK_TrhkHz8-tm8-sozzZ1GCSa3qOVOmx5kfOsgC1bhsH5f9u-ATN4ho8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>196459205</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Modeling Colony-Site Dynamics: A Case Study of Gull-Billed Terns (Sterna nilotica) in Coastal Virginia</title><source>SORA - Searchable Ornithological Research Archive</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Erwin, R. Michael ; Nichols, James D. ; T. Brain Eyler ; Stotts, Daniel B. ; Barry R. Truitt</creator><creatorcontrib>Erwin, R. Michael ; Nichols, James D. ; T. Brain Eyler ; Stotts, Daniel B. ; Barry R. Truitt</creatorcontrib><description>We developed a Markov process model for colony-site dynamics of Gull-billed Terns (Sterna nilotica). From 1993 through 1996, we monitored breeding numbers of Gull-billed Terns and their frequent colony associates, Common Terns (Sterna hirundo) and Black Skimmers (Rynchops niger), at colony sites along 80 km of the barrier island region of coastal Virginia. We also monitored flooding events and renesting. We developed the model for colony survival, extinction, and recolonization at potential colony sites over the four-year period. We then used data on annual site occupation by Gull-billed Terns to estimate model parameters and tested for differences between nesting substrates (barrier island vs. shellpile). Results revealed a dynamic system but provided no evidence that the dynamics were Markovian, i.e. the probability that a site was occupied in one year was not influenced by whether it had been occupied in the previous year. Nor did colony-level reproductive success the previous season seem to affect the probability of site occupancy. Site survival and recolonization rates were similar, and the estimated overall annual probability of a site being occupied was 0.59. Of the 25 sites that were used during the four-year period, 16 were used in one or two years only, and only three were used in all four years. Flooding and renesting were frequent in both habitat types in all years. The frequent flooding of nests on shellpiles argues for more effective management; augmentation with shell and sand to increase elevations as little as 20 cm could have reduced flooding at a number of sites. The low colonysite fidelity that we observed suggests that an effective management approach would be to provide a large number of sand and/or shellpile sites for use by nesting terns. Sites not used in one year may still be used in subsequent years.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0004-8038</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-4254</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2732-4613</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2307/4089515</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AUKJAF</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Lawrence, KS: The American Ornithologists' Union</publisher><subject>Animal and plant ecology ; Animal populations ; Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Animals ; Aves ; Aviculture ; Barrier islands ; Biological and medical sciences ; Bird nesting ; Birds ; Breeding ; Coasts ; Colonies ; Demecology ; Dynamic modeling ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Habitat selection ; Marine ; Markov processes ; Nesting sites ; Parametric models ; Rynchops niger ; Sterna ; Sterna nilotica ; Vertebrata ; Wildlife habitats</subject><ispartof>The Auk, 1998-10, Vol.115 (4), p.970-978</ispartof><rights>Copyright 1998 The American Ornithologists' Union</rights><rights>1999 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Ornithologists' Union Oct 1998</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-9a3915850e9866126065e6e36b6aaddc0faba8b0c0dabf97005b67a01217d6d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-9a3915850e9866126065e6e36b6aaddc0faba8b0c0dabf97005b67a01217d6d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/4089515$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/4089515$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,800,27905,27906,57998,58231</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1745370$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Erwin, R. Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nichols, James D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>T. Brain Eyler</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stotts, Daniel B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barry R. Truitt</creatorcontrib><title>Modeling Colony-Site Dynamics: A Case Study of Gull-Billed Terns (Sterna nilotica) in Coastal Virginia</title><title>The Auk</title><description>We developed a Markov process model for colony-site dynamics of Gull-billed Terns (Sterna nilotica). From 1993 through 1996, we monitored breeding numbers of Gull-billed Terns and their frequent colony associates, Common Terns (Sterna hirundo) and Black Skimmers (Rynchops niger), at colony sites along 80 km of the barrier island region of coastal Virginia. We also monitored flooding events and renesting. We developed the model for colony survival, extinction, and recolonization at potential colony sites over the four-year period. We then used data on annual site occupation by Gull-billed Terns to estimate model parameters and tested for differences between nesting substrates (barrier island vs. shellpile). Results revealed a dynamic system but provided no evidence that the dynamics were Markovian, i.e. the probability that a site was occupied in one year was not influenced by whether it had been occupied in the previous year. Nor did colony-level reproductive success the previous season seem to affect the probability of site occupancy. Site survival and recolonization rates were similar, and the estimated overall annual probability of a site being occupied was 0.59. Of the 25 sites that were used during the four-year period, 16 were used in one or two years only, and only three were used in all four years. Flooding and renesting were frequent in both habitat types in all years. The frequent flooding of nests on shellpiles argues for more effective management; augmentation with shell and sand to increase elevations as little as 20 cm could have reduced flooding at a number of sites. The low colonysite fidelity that we observed suggests that an effective management approach would be to provide a large number of sand and/or shellpile sites for use by nesting terns. Sites not used in one year may still be used in subsequent years.</description><subject>Animal and plant ecology</subject><subject>Animal populations</subject><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Aves</subject><subject>Aviculture</subject><subject>Barrier islands</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Bird nesting</subject><subject>Birds</subject><subject>Breeding</subject><subject>Coasts</subject><subject>Colonies</subject><subject>Demecology</subject><subject>Dynamic modeling</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Habitat selection</subject><subject>Marine</subject><subject>Markov processes</subject><subject>Nesting sites</subject><subject>Parametric models</subject><subject>Rynchops niger</subject><subject>Sterna</subject><subject>Sterna nilotica</subject><subject>Vertebrata</subject><subject>Wildlife habitats</subject><issn>0004-8038</issn><issn>1938-4254</issn><issn>2732-4613</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1998</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp10EtLxDAUBeAgCo4P_AtBxMeietM2aeturE9QXMzgttym6ZAhk2jSLubfG3FgQHB1uPBx4FxCThhcpxkUNzmUFWd8h0xYlZVJnvJ8l0wAIE9KyMp9chDCMp48ugnp31ynjLYLWjvj7DqZ6UHR-7XFlZbhlk5pjUHR2TB2a-p6-jQak9xpY1RH58rbQC9nQ0ykVhs3aIlXVNtYhmFAQz-0X2ir8Yjs9WiCOt7kIZk_Pszr5-T1_emlnr4mMivSIakwqxgvOaiqFIKlAgRXQmWiFYhdJ6HHFssWJHTY9lURV7SiQGApKzrRZYfk_Lf207uvUYWhWekglTFolRtDw4qUARdlhKd_4NKNcYWJphI5r1LgEV38IuldCF71zafXK_TrhkHz8-tm8-sozzZ1GCSa3qOVOmx5kfOsgC1bhsH5f9u-ATN4ho8</recordid><startdate>19981001</startdate><enddate>19981001</enddate><creator>Erwin, R. Michael</creator><creator>Nichols, James D.</creator><creator>T. Brain Eyler</creator><creator>Stotts, Daniel B.</creator><creator>Barry R. Truitt</creator><general>The American Ornithologists' Union</general><general>Ornithological Societies North America</general><general>American Ornithological Society</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19981001</creationdate><title>Modeling Colony-Site Dynamics: A Case Study of Gull-Billed Terns (Sterna nilotica) in Coastal Virginia</title><author>Erwin, R. Michael ; Nichols, James D. ; T. Brain Eyler ; Stotts, Daniel B. ; Barry R. Truitt</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-9a3915850e9866126065e6e36b6aaddc0faba8b0c0dabf97005b67a01217d6d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1998</creationdate><topic>Animal and plant ecology</topic><topic>Animal populations</topic><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Aves</topic><topic>Aviculture</topic><topic>Barrier islands</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Bird nesting</topic><topic>Birds</topic><topic>Breeding</topic><topic>Coasts</topic><topic>Colonies</topic><topic>Demecology</topic><topic>Dynamic modeling</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Habitat selection</topic><topic>Marine</topic><topic>Markov processes</topic><topic>Nesting sites</topic><topic>Parametric models</topic><topic>Rynchops niger</topic><topic>Sterna</topic><topic>Sterna nilotica</topic><topic>Vertebrata</topic><topic>Wildlife habitats</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Erwin, R. Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nichols, James D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>T. Brain Eyler</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stotts, Daniel B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barry R. Truitt</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences & Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>The Auk</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Erwin, R. Michael</au><au>Nichols, James D.</au><au>T. Brain Eyler</au><au>Stotts, Daniel B.</au><au>Barry R. Truitt</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Modeling Colony-Site Dynamics: A Case Study of Gull-Billed Terns (Sterna nilotica) in Coastal Virginia</atitle><jtitle>The Auk</jtitle><date>1998-10-01</date><risdate>1998</risdate><volume>115</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>970</spage><epage>978</epage><pages>970-978</pages><issn>0004-8038</issn><eissn>1938-4254</eissn><eissn>2732-4613</eissn><coden>AUKJAF</coden><abstract>We developed a Markov process model for colony-site dynamics of Gull-billed Terns (Sterna nilotica). From 1993 through 1996, we monitored breeding numbers of Gull-billed Terns and their frequent colony associates, Common Terns (Sterna hirundo) and Black Skimmers (Rynchops niger), at colony sites along 80 km of the barrier island region of coastal Virginia. We also monitored flooding events and renesting. We developed the model for colony survival, extinction, and recolonization at potential colony sites over the four-year period. We then used data on annual site occupation by Gull-billed Terns to estimate model parameters and tested for differences between nesting substrates (barrier island vs. shellpile). Results revealed a dynamic system but provided no evidence that the dynamics were Markovian, i.e. the probability that a site was occupied in one year was not influenced by whether it had been occupied in the previous year. Nor did colony-level reproductive success the previous season seem to affect the probability of site occupancy. Site survival and recolonization rates were similar, and the estimated overall annual probability of a site being occupied was 0.59. Of the 25 sites that were used during the four-year period, 16 were used in one or two years only, and only three were used in all four years. Flooding and renesting were frequent in both habitat types in all years. The frequent flooding of nests on shellpiles argues for more effective management; augmentation with shell and sand to increase elevations as little as 20 cm could have reduced flooding at a number of sites. The low colonysite fidelity that we observed suggests that an effective management approach would be to provide a large number of sand and/or shellpile sites for use by nesting terns. Sites not used in one year may still be used in subsequent years.</abstract><cop>Lawrence, KS</cop><pub>The American Ornithologists' Union</pub><doi>10.2307/4089515</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0004-8038 |
ispartof | The Auk, 1998-10, Vol.115 (4), p.970-978 |
issn | 0004-8038 1938-4254 2732-4613 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_17210568 |
source | SORA - Searchable Ornithological Research Archive; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing |
subjects | Animal and plant ecology Animal populations Animal, plant and microbial ecology Animals Aves Aviculture Barrier islands Biological and medical sciences Bird nesting Birds Breeding Coasts Colonies Demecology Dynamic modeling Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Habitat selection Marine Markov processes Nesting sites Parametric models Rynchops niger Sterna Sterna nilotica Vertebrata Wildlife habitats |
title | Modeling Colony-Site Dynamics: A Case Study of Gull-Billed Terns (Sterna nilotica) in Coastal Virginia |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T15%3A33%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Modeling%20Colony-Site%20Dynamics:%20A%20Case%20Study%20of%20Gull-Billed%20Terns%20(Sterna%20nilotica)%20in%20Coastal%20Virginia&rft.jtitle=The%20Auk&rft.au=Erwin,%20R.%20Michael&rft.date=1998-10-01&rft.volume=115&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=970&rft.epage=978&rft.pages=970-978&rft.issn=0004-8038&rft.eissn=1938-4254&rft.coden=AUKJAF&rft_id=info:doi/10.2307/4089515&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E4089515%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=196459205&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=4089515&rfr_iscdi=true |