Comparing winter distribution and harvest rates of transmitter‐marked and banded‐only mallards in western Tennessee
Abstract The miniaturization of Global Positioning Systems (GPS) transmitters is providing insights into the ecology and management of migratory bird species at biologically‐relevant spatial scales. However, transmitters and their attachment methods could bias inferred behaviors, demographic rates,...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2024-12-01
|
| Series: | Wildlife Society Bulletin |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.1554 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1846136416351813632 |
|---|---|
| author | Nicholas M. Masto Heath M. Hagy Abigail G. Blake‐Bradshaw Cory J. Highway Jamie C. Feddersen Allison C. Keever Bradley S. Cohen |
| author_facet | Nicholas M. Masto Heath M. Hagy Abigail G. Blake‐Bradshaw Cory J. Highway Jamie C. Feddersen Allison C. Keever Bradley S. Cohen |
| author_sort | Nicholas M. Masto |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract The miniaturization of Global Positioning Systems (GPS) transmitters is providing insights into the ecology and management of migratory bird species at biologically‐relevant spatial scales. However, transmitters and their attachment methods could bias inferred behaviors, demographic rates, and resulting management decisions. We evaluated the effects of external harness‐style GPS transmitters by comparing direct harvest rates, winter dispersal distances, and subsequent harvest distributions of mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) equipped with GPS transmitters (n = 443) to a tarsal banded‐only control group (n = 1,123) captured in western Tennessee during winters 2019–2022. We found that transmitter‐marked mallards had similar harvest rates, winter dispersal distances, and harvest distributions as banded‐only mallards. Time between capture and harvest predicted dispersal distances but there was no effect of marker type. Specifically, the average time from capture to harvest was 30 (SE = 2) and 31 (SE = 3) days for banded‐only and transmitter‐marked mallards, respectively. Harvest rate ( h) was only 2.2% greater for transmitter‐marked mallards compared to banded‐only mallards overall, but GPS transmitters affected harvest susceptibility of juveniles ( ∆ h juv = 14.5%). Based on harvest rates and dispersal distances between transmitter‐marked and banded‐only cohorts, we suggest 7‐ to 10‐day data censoring periods may be warranted, especially for juveniles, as mallards acclimate to GPS transmitters. Overall, we concluded that modern harness‐style GPS transmitters provided reliable information of wintering mallard space use, movements, and harvest mortality and can be used to inform ecology and management of wintering mallards and other dabbling ducks. Future studies should evaluate effects of harness‐style GPS transmitters for other species and during different portions of dabbling ducks' life cycle, such as migration or nesting, when they may experience greater adverse effects. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-c0df9a65bffd4477bf0c3553eabb8cd3 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2328-5540 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-12-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Wildlife Society Bulletin |
| spelling | doaj-art-c0df9a65bffd4477bf0c3553eabb8cd32024-12-09T05:47:17ZengWileyWildlife Society Bulletin2328-55402024-12-01484n/an/a10.1002/wsb.1554Comparing winter distribution and harvest rates of transmitter‐marked and banded‐only mallards in western TennesseeNicholas M. Masto0Heath M. Hagy1Abigail G. Blake‐Bradshaw2Cory J. Highway3Jamie C. Feddersen4Allison C. Keever5Bradley S. Cohen6College of Interdisciplinary Studies Tennessee Technological University Cookeville 38505 TN USAUnited States Fish and Wildlife Service, Habitat and Population Evaluation Team Bismarck 58501 ND USACollege of Interdisciplinary Studies Tennessee Technological University Cookeville 38505 TN USACollege of Interdisciplinary Studies Tennessee Technological University Cookeville 38505 TN USATennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, Migratory Gamebird Program Nashville 37211 TN USACollege of Arts and Sciences Tennessee Technological University Cookeville 38505 TN USACollege of Arts and Sciences Tennessee Technological University Cookeville 38505 TN USAAbstract The miniaturization of Global Positioning Systems (GPS) transmitters is providing insights into the ecology and management of migratory bird species at biologically‐relevant spatial scales. However, transmitters and their attachment methods could bias inferred behaviors, demographic rates, and resulting management decisions. We evaluated the effects of external harness‐style GPS transmitters by comparing direct harvest rates, winter dispersal distances, and subsequent harvest distributions of mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) equipped with GPS transmitters (n = 443) to a tarsal banded‐only control group (n = 1,123) captured in western Tennessee during winters 2019–2022. We found that transmitter‐marked mallards had similar harvest rates, winter dispersal distances, and harvest distributions as banded‐only mallards. Time between capture and harvest predicted dispersal distances but there was no effect of marker type. Specifically, the average time from capture to harvest was 30 (SE = 2) and 31 (SE = 3) days for banded‐only and transmitter‐marked mallards, respectively. Harvest rate ( h) was only 2.2% greater for transmitter‐marked mallards compared to banded‐only mallards overall, but GPS transmitters affected harvest susceptibility of juveniles ( ∆ h juv = 14.5%). Based on harvest rates and dispersal distances between transmitter‐marked and banded‐only cohorts, we suggest 7‐ to 10‐day data censoring periods may be warranted, especially for juveniles, as mallards acclimate to GPS transmitters. Overall, we concluded that modern harness‐style GPS transmitters provided reliable information of wintering mallard space use, movements, and harvest mortality and can be used to inform ecology and management of wintering mallards and other dabbling ducks. Future studies should evaluate effects of harness‐style GPS transmitters for other species and during different portions of dabbling ducks' life cycle, such as migration or nesting, when they may experience greater adverse effects.https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.1554Anas platyrhynchosanimal markersbandingGPS‐GSM telemetryharvest vulnerabilitytransmitter effects |
| spellingShingle | Nicholas M. Masto Heath M. Hagy Abigail G. Blake‐Bradshaw Cory J. Highway Jamie C. Feddersen Allison C. Keever Bradley S. Cohen Comparing winter distribution and harvest rates of transmitter‐marked and banded‐only mallards in western Tennessee Wildlife Society Bulletin Anas platyrhynchos animal markers banding GPS‐GSM telemetry harvest vulnerability transmitter effects |
| title | Comparing winter distribution and harvest rates of transmitter‐marked and banded‐only mallards in western Tennessee |
| title_full | Comparing winter distribution and harvest rates of transmitter‐marked and banded‐only mallards in western Tennessee |
| title_fullStr | Comparing winter distribution and harvest rates of transmitter‐marked and banded‐only mallards in western Tennessee |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparing winter distribution and harvest rates of transmitter‐marked and banded‐only mallards in western Tennessee |
| title_short | Comparing winter distribution and harvest rates of transmitter‐marked and banded‐only mallards in western Tennessee |
| title_sort | comparing winter distribution and harvest rates of transmitter marked and banded only mallards in western tennessee |
| topic | Anas platyrhynchos animal markers banding GPS‐GSM telemetry harvest vulnerability transmitter effects |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.1554 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT nicholasmmasto comparingwinterdistributionandharvestratesoftransmittermarkedandbandedonlymallardsinwesterntennessee AT heathmhagy comparingwinterdistributionandharvestratesoftransmittermarkedandbandedonlymallardsinwesterntennessee AT abigailgblakebradshaw comparingwinterdistributionandharvestratesoftransmittermarkedandbandedonlymallardsinwesterntennessee AT coryjhighway comparingwinterdistributionandharvestratesoftransmittermarkedandbandedonlymallardsinwesterntennessee AT jamiecfeddersen comparingwinterdistributionandharvestratesoftransmittermarkedandbandedonlymallardsinwesterntennessee AT allisonckeever comparingwinterdistributionandharvestratesoftransmittermarkedandbandedonlymallardsinwesterntennessee AT bradleyscohen comparingwinterdistributionandharvestratesoftransmittermarkedandbandedonlymallardsinwesterntennessee |