在室外饲养和不在室外饲养的情况下,莫哈韦沙漠陆龟的存活率和行为表现

IF 1.9 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ECOLOGY
M. Susanna Glass, Brian D. Todd, Kurt A. Buhlmann, Clark S. Rushing, Tracey D. Tuberville
{"title":"在室外饲养和不在室外饲养的情况下,莫哈韦沙漠陆龟的存活率和行为表现","authors":"M. Susanna Glass,&nbsp;Brian D. Todd,&nbsp;Kurt A. Buhlmann,&nbsp;Clark S. Rushing,&nbsp;Tracey D. Tuberville","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Mojave desert tortoise (<i>Gopherus agassizii</i>) populations in some regions have declined by &gt;50% since 2004, prompting the need for more research on ways to recover populations. One possible recovery tool is head-starting (i.e., the act of protecting and raising juvenile tortoises to sizes that increase survival upon release); however, head-starting can have high start-up and maintenance costs that can limit its feasibility. Strategies that reduce cost and rearing duration may foster broader and more effective use. We released and radio-tracked 60 juvenile tortoises in the Mojave National Preserve in California, USA, that had been reared under 2 treatments: those reared 1 year indoors after hatching, then 1 year outdoors (combo) and those reared just 1 year indoors (indoor-only). We tested whether indoor-only rearing alone could be a more efficient means of producing robust head-started tortoises. We examined the behavior, movement, and survival of tortoises after release into the wild from 2020 to 2021 to determine whether these outcomes differed between husbandry treatments. Combo tortoises tended to perform settling behaviors (mean ± 1 SE days to building first burrow = 6.7 ± 0.8, entering dormancy = 23.3 ± 2.1, and emerging from dormancy = 189.6 ± 4.4) earlier than indoor-only tortoises (7.4 ± 0.9, 31.5 ± 2.6, and 193.9 ± 5.9, respectively), but this difference was not significant, suggesting the rearing method did not greatly alter settling behavior. Indoor-only tortoises dispersed at least twice as far from their release site (156.2 ± 26.3 m compared with 77.3 ± 20.6 m for combo tortoises), had larger mean use areas (3.7 ± 0.1 ha compared with 2.8 ± 0.3 ha for combo tortoises for 95% Brownian bridge movement model estimates), and greater variability in their movements than combo tortoises (daily average step length post-emergence: 4.3 ± 0.2 m compared with 2.8 ± 0.1 m for combo tortoises). Despite differences in their movements, indoor-only and combo tortoises had similar survival rates over the study, 51% versus 42%, respectively, during a period of extreme drought in 2021. The similarity in survival between groups gives head-starting practitioners freedom in their rearing methods. The indoor-only group had lower site fidelity, which should be considered when this is an undesirable trait for released tortoises.</p>","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jwmg.22562","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survival and behavior of Mojave desert tortoises head-started with and without outdoor rearing\",\"authors\":\"M. Susanna Glass,&nbsp;Brian D. Todd,&nbsp;Kurt A. Buhlmann,&nbsp;Clark S. Rushing,&nbsp;Tracey D. Tuberville\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jwmg.22562\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Mojave desert tortoise (<i>Gopherus agassizii</i>) populations in some regions have declined by &gt;50% since 2004, prompting the need for more research on ways to recover populations. One possible recovery tool is head-starting (i.e., the act of protecting and raising juvenile tortoises to sizes that increase survival upon release); however, head-starting can have high start-up and maintenance costs that can limit its feasibility. Strategies that reduce cost and rearing duration may foster broader and more effective use. We released and radio-tracked 60 juvenile tortoises in the Mojave National Preserve in California, USA, that had been reared under 2 treatments: those reared 1 year indoors after hatching, then 1 year outdoors (combo) and those reared just 1 year indoors (indoor-only). We tested whether indoor-only rearing alone could be a more efficient means of producing robust head-started tortoises. We examined the behavior, movement, and survival of tortoises after release into the wild from 2020 to 2021 to determine whether these outcomes differed between husbandry treatments. Combo tortoises tended to perform settling behaviors (mean ± 1 SE days to building first burrow = 6.7 ± 0.8, entering dormancy = 23.3 ± 2.1, and emerging from dormancy = 189.6 ± 4.4) earlier than indoor-only tortoises (7.4 ± 0.9, 31.5 ± 2.6, and 193.9 ± 5.9, respectively), but this difference was not significant, suggesting the rearing method did not greatly alter settling behavior. Indoor-only tortoises dispersed at least twice as far from their release site (156.2 ± 26.3 m compared with 77.3 ± 20.6 m for combo tortoises), had larger mean use areas (3.7 ± 0.1 ha compared with 2.8 ± 0.3 ha for combo tortoises for 95% Brownian bridge movement model estimates), and greater variability in their movements than combo tortoises (daily average step length post-emergence: 4.3 ± 0.2 m compared with 2.8 ± 0.1 m for combo tortoises). Despite differences in their movements, indoor-only and combo tortoises had similar survival rates over the study, 51% versus 42%, respectively, during a period of extreme drought in 2021. The similarity in survival between groups gives head-starting practitioners freedom in their rearing methods. The indoor-only group had lower site fidelity, which should be considered when this is an undesirable trait for released tortoises.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17504,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Wildlife Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jwmg.22562\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Wildlife Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jwmg.22562\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Wildlife Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jwmg.22562","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自2004年以来,一些地区的莫哈韦沙漠陆龟(Gopherus agassizii)数量下降了50%,这促使人们需要对恢复种群的方法进行更多的研究。其中一种可能的恢复手段是起步饲养(即保护和饲养幼龟,使其达到一定大小,以提高放归后的存活率);然而,起步饲养的启动和维护成本较高,限制了其可行性。降低成本和缩短饲养时间的策略可促进更广泛、更有效的使用。我们在美国加利福尼亚州莫哈韦国家保护区放归了 60 只幼龟并对其进行了无线电跟踪,这些幼龟是在两种情况下饲养的:孵化后在室内饲养 1 年,然后在室外饲养 1 年(组合饲养)和仅在室内饲养 1 年(仅室内饲养)。我们测试了只在室内饲养是否能更有效地培育出健壮的头部启动陆龟。我们考察了 2020 年至 2021 年陆龟放归野外后的行为、运动和存活率,以确定不同饲养方法的结果是否存在差异。与室内饲养的陆龟(分别为7.4 ± 0.9、31.5 ± 2.6和193.9 ± 5.9)相比,Combo陆龟倾向于更早地完成定居行为(建造第一个洞穴的平均±1 SE天数= 6.7 ± 0.8、进入休眠期= 23.3 ± 2.1和从休眠期脱出= 189.6 ± 4.4),但这一差异并不显著,表明饲养方法并不会在很大程度上改变陆龟的定居行为。室内陆龟从释放地点向外散布的距离至少是组合陆龟的两倍(156.2 ± 26.3 米,而组合陆龟为 77.3 ± 20.6 米),平均使用面积更大(3.7 ± 0.1 公顷,而根据 95% 布朗桥运动模型估算,组合陆龟为 2.8 ± 0.3 公顷),其运动的变异性比组合陆龟更大(萌发后的日平均步长:4.3 ± 0.2 米):4.3 ± 0.2 米,而组合陆龟为 2.8 ± 0.1 米)。尽管室内陆龟和组合陆龟的运动方式不同,但它们在研究期间的存活率相似,在 2021 年的极端干旱期间,室内陆龟的存活率分别为 51% 和 42%。组间存活率的相似性为起步阶段的从业者提供了饲养方法上的自由。仅在室内饲养的组别对饲养场地的忠诚度较低,如果这是放归陆龟所不希望出现的特征,则应加以考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Survival and behavior of Mojave desert tortoises head-started with and without outdoor rearing

Survival and behavior of Mojave desert tortoises head-started with and without outdoor rearing

Survival and behavior of Mojave desert tortoises head-started with and without outdoor rearing

Mojave desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) populations in some regions have declined by >50% since 2004, prompting the need for more research on ways to recover populations. One possible recovery tool is head-starting (i.e., the act of protecting and raising juvenile tortoises to sizes that increase survival upon release); however, head-starting can have high start-up and maintenance costs that can limit its feasibility. Strategies that reduce cost and rearing duration may foster broader and more effective use. We released and radio-tracked 60 juvenile tortoises in the Mojave National Preserve in California, USA, that had been reared under 2 treatments: those reared 1 year indoors after hatching, then 1 year outdoors (combo) and those reared just 1 year indoors (indoor-only). We tested whether indoor-only rearing alone could be a more efficient means of producing robust head-started tortoises. We examined the behavior, movement, and survival of tortoises after release into the wild from 2020 to 2021 to determine whether these outcomes differed between husbandry treatments. Combo tortoises tended to perform settling behaviors (mean ± 1 SE days to building first burrow = 6.7 ± 0.8, entering dormancy = 23.3 ± 2.1, and emerging from dormancy = 189.6 ± 4.4) earlier than indoor-only tortoises (7.4 ± 0.9, 31.5 ± 2.6, and 193.9 ± 5.9, respectively), but this difference was not significant, suggesting the rearing method did not greatly alter settling behavior. Indoor-only tortoises dispersed at least twice as far from their release site (156.2 ± 26.3 m compared with 77.3 ± 20.6 m for combo tortoises), had larger mean use areas (3.7 ± 0.1 ha compared with 2.8 ± 0.3 ha for combo tortoises for 95% Brownian bridge movement model estimates), and greater variability in their movements than combo tortoises (daily average step length post-emergence: 4.3 ± 0.2 m compared with 2.8 ± 0.1 m for combo tortoises). Despite differences in their movements, indoor-only and combo tortoises had similar survival rates over the study, 51% versus 42%, respectively, during a period of extreme drought in 2021. The similarity in survival between groups gives head-starting practitioners freedom in their rearing methods. The indoor-only group had lower site fidelity, which should be considered when this is an undesirable trait for released tortoises.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Wildlife Management
Journal of Wildlife Management 环境科学-动物学
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
13.00%
发文量
188
审稿时长
9-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Wildlife Management publishes manuscripts containing information from original research that contributes to basic wildlife science. Suitable topics include investigations into the biology and ecology of wildlife and their habitats that has direct or indirect implications for wildlife management and conservation. This includes basic information on wildlife habitat use, reproduction, genetics, demographics, viability, predator-prey relationships, space-use, movements, behavior, and physiology; but within the context of contemporary management and conservation issues such that the knowledge may ultimately be useful to wildlife practitioners. Also considered are theoretical and conceptual aspects of wildlife science, including development of new approaches to quantitative analyses, modeling of wildlife populations and habitats, and other topics that are germane to advancing wildlife science. Limited reviews or meta analyses will be considered if they provide a meaningful new synthesis or perspective on an appropriate subject. Direct evaluation of management practices or policies should be sent to the Wildlife Society Bulletin, as should papers reporting new tools or techniques. However, papers that report new tools or techniques, or effects of management practices, within the context of a broader study investigating basic wildlife biology and ecology will be considered by The Journal of Wildlife Management. Book reviews of relevant topics in basic wildlife research and biology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信