Human access constrains optimal foraging and habitat availability in an avian generalist

Animals balance costs of antipredator behaviors with resource acquisition to minimize hunting and other mortality risks and maximize their physiological condition. This inherent trade‐off between forage abundance, its quality, and mortality risk is intensified in human‐dominated landscapes because f...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ecological applications 2024-04, Vol.34 (3), p.e2952-n/a
Hauptverfasser: Masto, Nicholas M., Blake‐Bradshaw, Abigail G., Highway, Cory J., Keever, Allison C., Feddersen, Jamie C., Hagy, Heath M., Cohen, Bradley S.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page n/a
container_issue 3
container_start_page e2952
container_title Ecological applications
container_volume 34
creator Masto, Nicholas M.
Blake‐Bradshaw, Abigail G.
Highway, Cory J.
Keever, Allison C.
Feddersen, Jamie C.
Hagy, Heath M.
Cohen, Bradley S.
description Animals balance costs of antipredator behaviors with resource acquisition to minimize hunting and other mortality risks and maximize their physiological condition. This inherent trade‐off between forage abundance, its quality, and mortality risk is intensified in human‐dominated landscapes because fragmentation, habitat loss, and degradation of natural vegetation communities is often coupled with artificially enhanced vegetation (i.e., food plots), creating high‐risk, high‐reward resource selection decisions. Our goal was to evaluate autumn–winter resource selection trade‐offs for an intensively hunted avian generalist. We hypothesized human access was a reliable cue for hunting predation risk. Therefore, we predicted resource selection patterns would be spatiotemporally dependent upon levels of access and associated perceived risk. Specifically, we evaluated resource selection of local‐scale flights between diel periods for 426 mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) relative to wetland type, forage quality, and differing levels of human access across hunting and nonhunting seasons. Mallards selected areas that prohibited human access and generally avoided areas that allowed access diurnally, especially during the hunting season. Mallards compensated by selecting for high‐energy and greater quality foraging patches on allowable human access areas nocturnally when they were devoid of hunters. Postseason selection across human access gradients did not return to prehunting levels immediately, perhaps suggesting a delayed response to reacclimate to nonhunted activities and thus agreeing with the assessment mismatch hypothesis. Last, wetland availability and human access constrained selection for optimal natural forage quality (i.e., seed biomass and forage productivity) diurnally during preseason and hunting season, respectively; however, mallards were freed from these constraints nocturnally during hunting season and postseason periods. Our results suggest risk‐avoidance of human accessible (i.e., hunted) areas is a primary driver of resource selection behaviors by mallards and could be a local to landscape‐level process influencing distributions, instead of forage abundance and quality, which has long‐been assumed by waterfowl conservation planners in North America. Broadly, even an avian generalist, well adapted to anthropogenic landscapes, avoids areas where hunting and human access are allowed. Future conservation planning and implementation must consider manageme
doi_str_mv 10.1002/eap.2952
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2933464099</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3047345376</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3492-ca98b7d539aed2a79a56e8b62aa23fe7e9bd49619a23396f6727898cb412abfc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kF1LwzAUhoMobk7BXyAFb7zpzFeb5nKM6YSBXih4F07TdGb0YybtZP_ezE0FwXBIzoHnPIQXoUuCxwRjemtgPaYyoUdoSCSTcZJk9Dj0OCExFikZoDPvVzgcSukpGrCME8ETMkSv876GJgKtjfeRbhvfObCNj9p1Z2uoorJ1sLTNMoKmiN4gtx10EWzAVqGvbLeNbFgPtbHhXprGOKis787RSQmVNxeHd4Re7mbP03m8eLx_mE4WsWZc0liDzHJRJEyCKSgICUlqsjylAJSVRhiZF1ymRIaRybRMBRWZzHTOCYW81GyEbvbetWvfe-M7VVuvTVVBY9reKyoZ4ynHUgb0-g-6anvXhN8phrlgPGEi_RVq13rvTKnWLiThtopgtUtbhbTVLu2AXh2EfV6b4gf8jjcA8R74sJXZ_itSs8nTl_ATXs-IZQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3047345376</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Human access constrains optimal foraging and habitat availability in an avian generalist</title><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Masto, Nicholas M. ; Blake‐Bradshaw, Abigail G. ; Highway, Cory J. ; Keever, Allison C. ; Feddersen, Jamie C. ; Hagy, Heath M. ; Cohen, Bradley S.</creator><creatorcontrib>Masto, Nicholas M. ; Blake‐Bradshaw, Abigail G. ; Highway, Cory J. ; Keever, Allison C. ; Feddersen, Jamie C. ; Hagy, Heath M. ; Cohen, Bradley S.</creatorcontrib><description>Animals balance costs of antipredator behaviors with resource acquisition to minimize hunting and other mortality risks and maximize their physiological condition. This inherent trade‐off between forage abundance, its quality, and mortality risk is intensified in human‐dominated landscapes because fragmentation, habitat loss, and degradation of natural vegetation communities is often coupled with artificially enhanced vegetation (i.e., food plots), creating high‐risk, high‐reward resource selection decisions. Our goal was to evaluate autumn–winter resource selection trade‐offs for an intensively hunted avian generalist. We hypothesized human access was a reliable cue for hunting predation risk. Therefore, we predicted resource selection patterns would be spatiotemporally dependent upon levels of access and associated perceived risk. Specifically, we evaluated resource selection of local‐scale flights between diel periods for 426 mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) relative to wetland type, forage quality, and differing levels of human access across hunting and nonhunting seasons. Mallards selected areas that prohibited human access and generally avoided areas that allowed access diurnally, especially during the hunting season. Mallards compensated by selecting for high‐energy and greater quality foraging patches on allowable human access areas nocturnally when they were devoid of hunters. Postseason selection across human access gradients did not return to prehunting levels immediately, perhaps suggesting a delayed response to reacclimate to nonhunted activities and thus agreeing with the assessment mismatch hypothesis. Last, wetland availability and human access constrained selection for optimal natural forage quality (i.e., seed biomass and forage productivity) diurnally during preseason and hunting season, respectively; however, mallards were freed from these constraints nocturnally during hunting season and postseason periods. Our results suggest risk‐avoidance of human accessible (i.e., hunted) areas is a primary driver of resource selection behaviors by mallards and could be a local to landscape‐level process influencing distributions, instead of forage abundance and quality, which has long‐been assumed by waterfowl conservation planners in North America. Broadly, even an avian generalist, well adapted to anthropogenic landscapes, avoids areas where hunting and human access are allowed. Future conservation planning and implementation must consider management for recreational access (i.e., people) equally important as foraging habitat management for wintering waterfowl.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1051-0761</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-5582</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/eap.2952</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38417451</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Abundance ; Anas platyrhynchos ; Anthropogenic factors ; Anti-predator behavior ; Availability ; Body condition ; Conservation ; conservation planning ; Constraints ; Delayed response ; Environmental degradation ; Forage ; forage quality ; Foraging ; Foraging behavior ; Foraging habitats ; GPS telemetry ; Habitat availability ; Habitat loss ; Habitats ; Health risks ; human access ; Hunting ; indirect habitat loss ; Interspecific relationships ; Mortality ; Mortality risk ; Natural vegetation ; Optimal foraging ; Overwintering ; Overwintering behavior ; Predation ; resource selection trade‐offs ; Risk perception ; Seasons ; Tradeoffs ; Vegetation ; Waterfowl ; Wetlands</subject><ispartof>Ecological applications, 2024-04, Vol.34 (3), p.e2952-n/a</ispartof><rights>2024 The Ecological Society of America.</rights><rights>Copyright Ecological Society of America Apr 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3492-ca98b7d539aed2a79a56e8b62aa23fe7e9bd49619a23396f6727898cb412abfc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3492-ca98b7d539aed2a79a56e8b62aa23fe7e9bd49619a23396f6727898cb412abfc3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0186-3057 ; 0000-0002-5194-3987</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Feap.2952$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Feap.2952$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,1418,27926,27927,45576,45577</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38417451$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Masto, Nicholas M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blake‐Bradshaw, Abigail G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Highway, Cory J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keever, Allison C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feddersen, Jamie C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hagy, Heath M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cohen, Bradley S.</creatorcontrib><title>Human access constrains optimal foraging and habitat availability in an avian generalist</title><title>Ecological applications</title><addtitle>Ecol Appl</addtitle><description>Animals balance costs of antipredator behaviors with resource acquisition to minimize hunting and other mortality risks and maximize their physiological condition. This inherent trade‐off between forage abundance, its quality, and mortality risk is intensified in human‐dominated landscapes because fragmentation, habitat loss, and degradation of natural vegetation communities is often coupled with artificially enhanced vegetation (i.e., food plots), creating high‐risk, high‐reward resource selection decisions. Our goal was to evaluate autumn–winter resource selection trade‐offs for an intensively hunted avian generalist. We hypothesized human access was a reliable cue for hunting predation risk. Therefore, we predicted resource selection patterns would be spatiotemporally dependent upon levels of access and associated perceived risk. Specifically, we evaluated resource selection of local‐scale flights between diel periods for 426 mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) relative to wetland type, forage quality, and differing levels of human access across hunting and nonhunting seasons. Mallards selected areas that prohibited human access and generally avoided areas that allowed access diurnally, especially during the hunting season. Mallards compensated by selecting for high‐energy and greater quality foraging patches on allowable human access areas nocturnally when they were devoid of hunters. Postseason selection across human access gradients did not return to prehunting levels immediately, perhaps suggesting a delayed response to reacclimate to nonhunted activities and thus agreeing with the assessment mismatch hypothesis. Last, wetland availability and human access constrained selection for optimal natural forage quality (i.e., seed biomass and forage productivity) diurnally during preseason and hunting season, respectively; however, mallards were freed from these constraints nocturnally during hunting season and postseason periods. Our results suggest risk‐avoidance of human accessible (i.e., hunted) areas is a primary driver of resource selection behaviors by mallards and could be a local to landscape‐level process influencing distributions, instead of forage abundance and quality, which has long‐been assumed by waterfowl conservation planners in North America. Broadly, even an avian generalist, well adapted to anthropogenic landscapes, avoids areas where hunting and human access are allowed. Future conservation planning and implementation must consider management for recreational access (i.e., people) equally important as foraging habitat management for wintering waterfowl.</description><subject>Abundance</subject><subject>Anas platyrhynchos</subject><subject>Anthropogenic factors</subject><subject>Anti-predator behavior</subject><subject>Availability</subject><subject>Body condition</subject><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>conservation planning</subject><subject>Constraints</subject><subject>Delayed response</subject><subject>Environmental degradation</subject><subject>Forage</subject><subject>forage quality</subject><subject>Foraging</subject><subject>Foraging behavior</subject><subject>Foraging habitats</subject><subject>GPS telemetry</subject><subject>Habitat availability</subject><subject>Habitat loss</subject><subject>Habitats</subject><subject>Health risks</subject><subject>human access</subject><subject>Hunting</subject><subject>indirect habitat loss</subject><subject>Interspecific relationships</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Mortality risk</subject><subject>Natural vegetation</subject><subject>Optimal foraging</subject><subject>Overwintering</subject><subject>Overwintering behavior</subject><subject>Predation</subject><subject>resource selection trade‐offs</subject><subject>Risk perception</subject><subject>Seasons</subject><subject>Tradeoffs</subject><subject>Vegetation</subject><subject>Waterfowl</subject><subject>Wetlands</subject><issn>1051-0761</issn><issn>1939-5582</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kF1LwzAUhoMobk7BXyAFb7zpzFeb5nKM6YSBXih4F07TdGb0YybtZP_ezE0FwXBIzoHnPIQXoUuCxwRjemtgPaYyoUdoSCSTcZJk9Dj0OCExFikZoDPvVzgcSukpGrCME8ETMkSv876GJgKtjfeRbhvfObCNj9p1Z2uoorJ1sLTNMoKmiN4gtx10EWzAVqGvbLeNbFgPtbHhXprGOKis787RSQmVNxeHd4Re7mbP03m8eLx_mE4WsWZc0liDzHJRJEyCKSgICUlqsjylAJSVRhiZF1ymRIaRybRMBRWZzHTOCYW81GyEbvbetWvfe-M7VVuvTVVBY9reKyoZ4ynHUgb0-g-6anvXhN8phrlgPGEi_RVq13rvTKnWLiThtopgtUtbhbTVLu2AXh2EfV6b4gf8jjcA8R74sJXZ_itSs8nTl_ATXs-IZQ</recordid><startdate>202404</startdate><enddate>202404</enddate><creator>Masto, Nicholas M.</creator><creator>Blake‐Bradshaw, Abigail G.</creator><creator>Highway, Cory J.</creator><creator>Keever, Allison C.</creator><creator>Feddersen, Jamie C.</creator><creator>Hagy, Heath M.</creator><creator>Cohen, Bradley S.</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>Ecological Society of America</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0186-3057</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5194-3987</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202404</creationdate><title>Human access constrains optimal foraging and habitat availability in an avian generalist</title><author>Masto, Nicholas M. ; Blake‐Bradshaw, Abigail G. ; Highway, Cory J. ; Keever, Allison C. ; Feddersen, Jamie C. ; Hagy, Heath M. ; Cohen, Bradley S.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3492-ca98b7d539aed2a79a56e8b62aa23fe7e9bd49619a23396f6727898cb412abfc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Abundance</topic><topic>Anas platyrhynchos</topic><topic>Anthropogenic factors</topic><topic>Anti-predator behavior</topic><topic>Availability</topic><topic>Body condition</topic><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>conservation planning</topic><topic>Constraints</topic><topic>Delayed response</topic><topic>Environmental degradation</topic><topic>Forage</topic><topic>forage quality</topic><topic>Foraging</topic><topic>Foraging behavior</topic><topic>Foraging habitats</topic><topic>GPS telemetry</topic><topic>Habitat availability</topic><topic>Habitat loss</topic><topic>Habitats</topic><topic>Health risks</topic><topic>human access</topic><topic>Hunting</topic><topic>indirect habitat loss</topic><topic>Interspecific relationships</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Mortality risk</topic><topic>Natural vegetation</topic><topic>Optimal foraging</topic><topic>Overwintering</topic><topic>Overwintering behavior</topic><topic>Predation</topic><topic>resource selection trade‐offs</topic><topic>Risk perception</topic><topic>Seasons</topic><topic>Tradeoffs</topic><topic>Vegetation</topic><topic>Waterfowl</topic><topic>Wetlands</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Masto, Nicholas M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blake‐Bradshaw, Abigail G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Highway, Cory J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keever, Allison C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feddersen, Jamie C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hagy, Heath M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cohen, Bradley S.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Ecological applications</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Masto, Nicholas M.</au><au>Blake‐Bradshaw, Abigail G.</au><au>Highway, Cory J.</au><au>Keever, Allison C.</au><au>Feddersen, Jamie C.</au><au>Hagy, Heath M.</au><au>Cohen, Bradley S.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Human access constrains optimal foraging and habitat availability in an avian generalist</atitle><jtitle>Ecological applications</jtitle><addtitle>Ecol Appl</addtitle><date>2024-04</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>e2952</spage><epage>n/a</epage><pages>e2952-n/a</pages><issn>1051-0761</issn><eissn>1939-5582</eissn><abstract>Animals balance costs of antipredator behaviors with resource acquisition to minimize hunting and other mortality risks and maximize their physiological condition. This inherent trade‐off between forage abundance, its quality, and mortality risk is intensified in human‐dominated landscapes because fragmentation, habitat loss, and degradation of natural vegetation communities is often coupled with artificially enhanced vegetation (i.e., food plots), creating high‐risk, high‐reward resource selection decisions. Our goal was to evaluate autumn–winter resource selection trade‐offs for an intensively hunted avian generalist. We hypothesized human access was a reliable cue for hunting predation risk. Therefore, we predicted resource selection patterns would be spatiotemporally dependent upon levels of access and associated perceived risk. Specifically, we evaluated resource selection of local‐scale flights between diel periods for 426 mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) relative to wetland type, forage quality, and differing levels of human access across hunting and nonhunting seasons. Mallards selected areas that prohibited human access and generally avoided areas that allowed access diurnally, especially during the hunting season. Mallards compensated by selecting for high‐energy and greater quality foraging patches on allowable human access areas nocturnally when they were devoid of hunters. Postseason selection across human access gradients did not return to prehunting levels immediately, perhaps suggesting a delayed response to reacclimate to nonhunted activities and thus agreeing with the assessment mismatch hypothesis. Last, wetland availability and human access constrained selection for optimal natural forage quality (i.e., seed biomass and forage productivity) diurnally during preseason and hunting season, respectively; however, mallards were freed from these constraints nocturnally during hunting season and postseason periods. Our results suggest risk‐avoidance of human accessible (i.e., hunted) areas is a primary driver of resource selection behaviors by mallards and could be a local to landscape‐level process influencing distributions, instead of forage abundance and quality, which has long‐been assumed by waterfowl conservation planners in North America. Broadly, even an avian generalist, well adapted to anthropogenic landscapes, avoids areas where hunting and human access are allowed. Future conservation planning and implementation must consider management for recreational access (i.e., people) equally important as foraging habitat management for wintering waterfowl.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>38417451</pmid><doi>10.1002/eap.2952</doi><tpages>19</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0186-3057</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5194-3987</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1051-0761
ispartof Ecological applications, 2024-04, Vol.34 (3), p.e2952-n/a
issn 1051-0761
1939-5582
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2933464099
source Access via Wiley Online Library
subjects Abundance
Anas platyrhynchos
Anthropogenic factors
Anti-predator behavior
Availability
Body condition
Conservation
conservation planning
Constraints
Delayed response
Environmental degradation
Forage
forage quality
Foraging
Foraging behavior
Foraging habitats
GPS telemetry
Habitat availability
Habitat loss
Habitats
Health risks
human access
Hunting
indirect habitat loss
Interspecific relationships
Mortality
Mortality risk
Natural vegetation
Optimal foraging
Overwintering
Overwintering behavior
Predation
resource selection trade‐offs
Risk perception
Seasons
Tradeoffs
Vegetation
Waterfowl
Wetlands
title Human access constrains optimal foraging and habitat availability in an avian generalist
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-18T06%3A45%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Human%20access%20constrains%20optimal%20foraging%20and%20habitat%20availability%20in%20an%20avian%20generalist&rft.jtitle=Ecological%20applications&rft.au=Masto,%20Nicholas%20M.&rft.date=2024-04&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=e2952&rft.epage=n/a&rft.pages=e2952-n/a&rft.issn=1051-0761&rft.eissn=1939-5582&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/eap.2952&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3047345376%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3047345376&rft_id=info:pmid/38417451&rfr_iscdi=true