Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Kyle J. Kuechle

Publications and source records attributed to Kyle J. Kuechle.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Phenological flexibility in nesting grassland birds over a half century informs timing of management

The timing of biological events for wildlife species reflects and influences ecological and evolutionary processes and helps guide management actions to meet conservation objectives. Climate change may cause phenological shifts across trophic levels and ecosystems, which can have broad ecological impacts. Shifts may also result in mistiming between management practices based on historical conditions and current biological events, reducing the effectiveness of natural resource management and conservation efforts. We analyzed nesting phenology patterns over recent decades across North America for 44 species of grassland-nesting birds, including waterfowl, upland gamebirds, shorebirds, and passerines, many of which have experienced precipitous population declines. Understanding nesting phenologies of these species is important to their conservation, as grassland management activities often conflict with reproductive periods leading to high nest and young mortality. We compiled a dataset of over 172,000 nest records spanning five decades and evaluated environmental factors influencing long-term shifts and short-term flexibility in nesting phenology. We found considerable variation in responses among species, with differences in both direction and magnitude of spatiotemporal effects on nest initiation dates. Notably, the community-level nesting season lengthened over time, but shifts exhibited spatial heterogeneity within this community of grassland birds. Nesting dates shifted asymmetrically across the breeding season with differential changes in early, peak, and late nesting dates whereas long-term changes were mediated by weather and geographic gradients. For example, nest initiation was earlier in warmer and wetter years. By applying a quantile-based analysis, we provide estimates of the full nesting period that could serve as a flexible tool for scheduling monitoring efforts and balancing management and human activities with periods of reduced nesting activity. Our collaborative effort illustrates the challenges and opportunities of collecting long-term data on avian communities necessary for answering questions across large regions but highlights the value of research coordination for bird conservation.

Global Change Biology↗

Nest remains are insufficient to identify predators of waterfowl nests

Context: Nest predation is a leading cause of nest failure for most ground-nesting birds. Methods that allow for accurate classification of fate and identification of predators are important for understanding productivity and conservation strategies. Past studies have used a visual inspection of nest remains to determine nest fate and predict predator identity. Most formal assessments of these methods have addressed small-bodied birds nesting in trees or shrubs, and have revealed that use of evidence at nests can be relatively accurate for determining nest fate but may lead to incorrect conclusions regarding predator identity. However, few have tested the latter hypothesis for larger ground-nesting birds with precocial young. Aim: We aimed to evaluate a classification system developed for determining nest fate and identifying predators of waterfowl nests, at both the scale of individual nests and across the study area. Methods: From 2016 to 2020, we located 989 blue-winged teal ( Spatula discors ), mallard ( Anas platyrhynchos ) and gadwall ( Mareca strepera ) nests in central North Dakota. We placed cameras at a subset of 249 nests and recorded evidence of nest remains at depredated nests. Key results: The most common predators were American badgers ( Taxidea taxus ), followed by striped skunks ( Mephitis mephitis ), raccoons ( Procyon lotor ) and red foxes ( Vulpes vulpes ). Using evidence of nest remains, we determined nest fates with high accuracy (98.0%). However, evidence of nest remains was only sufficient for identifying predators at 50% of nests, and the classification system was correct only 69.7% of the time. The predicted proportion of predators across the study area differed between the classification system and our video evidence as well. Conclusions: The accuracy of predator identifications based upon the classification system that we evaluated was not supported at any scale. Implications: Our results suggest that evidence of nest remains can be used to determine nest fate for large-bodied precocial, ground-nesting birds, but accurate identification of nest predators will require alternative methods such as nest cameras.

Wildlife Research↗