Predator‐specific mortality of sage‐grouse nests based on predator DNA on eggshells

Abstract Greater sage‐grouse (hereafter sage‐grouse; Centrocercus urophasianus) populations have declined across their range. Increased nest predation as a result of anthropogenic land use is one mechanism proposed to explain these declines. However, sage‐grouse contend with a diverse suite of nest...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Nolan A. Helmstetter, Courtney J. Conway, Shane Roberts, Jennifer R. Adams, Paul D. Makela, Lisette P. Waits
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2024-10-01
Series:Ecology and Evolution
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.70213
_version_ 1826926512381624320
author Nolan A. Helmstetter
Courtney J. Conway
Shane Roberts
Jennifer R. Adams
Paul D. Makela
Lisette P. Waits
author_facet Nolan A. Helmstetter
Courtney J. Conway
Shane Roberts
Jennifer R. Adams
Paul D. Makela
Lisette P. Waits
author_sort Nolan A. Helmstetter
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Greater sage‐grouse (hereafter sage‐grouse; Centrocercus urophasianus) populations have declined across their range. Increased nest predation as a result of anthropogenic land use is one mechanism proposed to explain these declines. However, sage‐grouse contend with a diverse suite of nest predators that vary in functional traits (e.g., search tactics or hunting mode) and abundance. Consequently, generalizing about factors influencing nest fate is challenging. Identifying the explicit predator species responsible for nest predation events is, therefore, critical to understanding causal mechanisms linking land use to patterns of sage‐grouse nest success. Cattle grazing is often assumed to adversely affect sage‐grouse recruitment by reducing grass height (and hence cover), thereby facilitating nest detection by predators. However, recent evidence found little support for the hypothesized effect of grazing on nest fate at the pasture scale. Rather, nest success appears to be similar on pastures grazed at varying intensities. One possible explanation for the lack of observed effect involves a localized response by one or more nest predators. The presence of cattle may cause a temporary reduction in predator density and/or use within a pasture (the cattle avoidance hypothesis). The cattle avoidance hypothesis predicts a decreased probability of at least one sage‐grouse nest predator predating sage‐grouse nests in pastures with livestock relative to pastures without livestock present during the nesting season. To test the cattle avoidance hypothesis, we collected predator DNA from eggshells from predated nests and used genetic methods to identify the sage‐grouse nest predator(s) responsible for the predation event. We evaluated the influence of habitat and grazing on predator‐specific nest predation. We evaluated the efficacy of our genetic method by deploying artificial nests with trail cameras and compared the results of our genetic method to the species captured via trail camera. Our molecular methods identified at least one nest predator captured predating artificial nests via trail camera for 33 of 35 (94%) artificial nests. We detected nest predators via our molecular analysis at 76 of 114 (67%) predated sage‐grouse nests. The primary predators detected at sage‐grouse nests were coyotes (Canis latrans) and corvids (Corvidea). Grazing did not influence the probability of nest predation by either coyotes or corvids. Sagebrush canopy cover was negatively associated with the probability a coyote predated a nest, distance to water was positively associated with the probability a corvid predated a nest, and average minimum temperature was negatively associated with the probability that either a coyote or a corvid predated a nest. Our study provides a framework for implementing an effective, non‐invasive method for identifying sage‐grouse nest predators that can be used to better understand how management actions at local and regional scales may impact an important component of sage‐grouse recruitment.
first_indexed 2025-02-17T15:12:44Z
format Article
id doaj.art-b69e43bb7f364e3e8474f6442dd4c050
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2045-7758
language English
last_indexed 2025-02-17T15:12:44Z
publishDate 2024-10-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Ecology and Evolution
spelling doaj.art-b69e43bb7f364e3e8474f6442dd4c0502024-12-20T09:05:59ZengWileyEcology and Evolution2045-77582024-10-011410n/an/a10.1002/ece3.70213Predator‐specific mortality of sage‐grouse nests based on predator DNA on eggshellsNolan A. Helmstetter0Courtney J. Conway1Shane Roberts2Jennifer R. Adams3Paul D. Makela4Lisette P. Waits5Idaho Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Fish and Wildlife Sciences University of Idaho Moscow Idaho USAU.S. Geological Survey, Idaho Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit University of Idaho Moscow Idaho USAIdaho Department of Fish and Game Boise Idaho USADepartment of Fish and Wildlife Sciences University of Idaho Moscow Idaho USAU.S. Bureau of Land Management Boise Idaho USADepartment of Fish and Wildlife Sciences University of Idaho Moscow Idaho USAAbstract Greater sage‐grouse (hereafter sage‐grouse; Centrocercus urophasianus) populations have declined across their range. Increased nest predation as a result of anthropogenic land use is one mechanism proposed to explain these declines. However, sage‐grouse contend with a diverse suite of nest predators that vary in functional traits (e.g., search tactics or hunting mode) and abundance. Consequently, generalizing about factors influencing nest fate is challenging. Identifying the explicit predator species responsible for nest predation events is, therefore, critical to understanding causal mechanisms linking land use to patterns of sage‐grouse nest success. Cattle grazing is often assumed to adversely affect sage‐grouse recruitment by reducing grass height (and hence cover), thereby facilitating nest detection by predators. However, recent evidence found little support for the hypothesized effect of grazing on nest fate at the pasture scale. Rather, nest success appears to be similar on pastures grazed at varying intensities. One possible explanation for the lack of observed effect involves a localized response by one or more nest predators. The presence of cattle may cause a temporary reduction in predator density and/or use within a pasture (the cattle avoidance hypothesis). The cattle avoidance hypothesis predicts a decreased probability of at least one sage‐grouse nest predator predating sage‐grouse nests in pastures with livestock relative to pastures without livestock present during the nesting season. To test the cattle avoidance hypothesis, we collected predator DNA from eggshells from predated nests and used genetic methods to identify the sage‐grouse nest predator(s) responsible for the predation event. We evaluated the influence of habitat and grazing on predator‐specific nest predation. We evaluated the efficacy of our genetic method by deploying artificial nests with trail cameras and compared the results of our genetic method to the species captured via trail camera. Our molecular methods identified at least one nest predator captured predating artificial nests via trail camera for 33 of 35 (94%) artificial nests. We detected nest predators via our molecular analysis at 76 of 114 (67%) predated sage‐grouse nests. The primary predators detected at sage‐grouse nests were coyotes (Canis latrans) and corvids (Corvidea). Grazing did not influence the probability of nest predation by either coyotes or corvids. Sagebrush canopy cover was negatively associated with the probability a coyote predated a nest, distance to water was positively associated with the probability a corvid predated a nest, and average minimum temperature was negatively associated with the probability that either a coyote or a corvid predated a nest. Our study provides a framework for implementing an effective, non‐invasive method for identifying sage‐grouse nest predators that can be used to better understand how management actions at local and regional scales may impact an important component of sage‐grouse recruitment.https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.70213cattleCentrocercus urophasianuscorvidcoyotegrazingIdaho
spellingShingle Nolan A. Helmstetter
Courtney J. Conway
Shane Roberts
Jennifer R. Adams
Paul D. Makela
Lisette P. Waits
Predator‐specific mortality of sage‐grouse nests based on predator DNA on eggshells
Ecology and Evolution
cattle
Centrocercus urophasianus
corvid
coyote
grazing
Idaho
title Predator‐specific mortality of sage‐grouse nests based on predator DNA on eggshells
title_full Predator‐specific mortality of sage‐grouse nests based on predator DNA on eggshells
title_fullStr Predator‐specific mortality of sage‐grouse nests based on predator DNA on eggshells
title_full_unstemmed Predator‐specific mortality of sage‐grouse nests based on predator DNA on eggshells
title_short Predator‐specific mortality of sage‐grouse nests based on predator DNA on eggshells
title_sort predator specific mortality of sage grouse nests based on predator dna on eggshells
topic cattle
Centrocercus urophasianus
corvid
coyote
grazing
Idaho
url https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.70213
work_keys_str_mv AT nolanahelmstetter predatorspecificmortalityofsagegrousenestsbasedonpredatordnaoneggshells
AT courtneyjconway predatorspecificmortalityofsagegrousenestsbasedonpredatordnaoneggshells
AT shaneroberts predatorspecificmortalityofsagegrousenestsbasedonpredatordnaoneggshells
AT jenniferradams predatorspecificmortalityofsagegrousenestsbasedonpredatordnaoneggshells
AT pauldmakela predatorspecificmortalityofsagegrousenestsbasedonpredatordnaoneggshells
AT lisettepwaits predatorspecificmortalityofsagegrousenestsbasedonpredatordnaoneggshells