Predation of loggerhead sea turtle eggs across Georgia's barrier islands

被引:23
作者
Butler, Zachary P. [1 ,2 ]
Wenger, Seth J. [1 ,2 ]
Pfaller, Joseph B. [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Dodd, Mark G. [6 ]
Ondich, Breanna L. [7 ]
Coleman, Scott [8 ]
Gaskin, Jaynie L. [9 ]
Hickey, Nancy [10 ]
Kitchens-Hayes, Kimberly [10 ]
Vance, Robert K. [9 ]
Williams, Kristina L. [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Georgia, Odum Sch Ecol, 140 E Green St, Athens, GA 30602 USA
[2] Univ Georgia, River Basin Ctr, 203 DW Brooks Dr, Athens, GA 30602 USA
[3] Savanah Sci Museum Inc, Caretta Res Project, POB 9841, Savannah, GA 31412 USA
[4] Univ Florida, Archie Carr Ctr Sea Turtle Res, POB 118525, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA
[5] Univ Florida, Dept Biol, POB 118525, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA
[6] Georgia Dept Nat Resources, 1 Conservat Way, Brunswick, GA 31520 USA
[7] Jekyll Isl Author, Georgia Sea Turtle Ctr, 214 Stable Rd, Jekyll Isl, GA 31527 USA
[8] Little St Simons Isl, 1000 Hampton River Club Marina Dr St, Simons Isl, GA 31522 USA
[9] Georgia Southern Univ, Dept Geol & Geog, POB 8149, Statesboro, GA 30460 USA
[10] US Fish & Wildlife Serv, Blackbeard Isl Natl Wildlife Refuge, 5000 Wildlife Dr NE, Townsend, GA 31331 USA
来源
GLOBAL ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION | 2020年 / 23卷
关键词
Caretta caretta; Loggerhead sea turtle; Egg loss; Predation; Predator management; Georgia coast; CARETTA-CARETTA NESTS; CHELONIA-MYDAS; MANAGEMENT; MARINE; CONSERVATION; SUCCESS; BEACH; PROTECT; ECOLOGY; HISTORY;
D O I
10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01139
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Nesting beach management is a vital element of the population recovery efforts for the vulnerable loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) across the globe. In the southeast United Sates, turtle nests are threatened by numerous anthropogenic and natural threats, including predation of eggs by native and non-native predators. We analyzed loggerhead nest predation and other egg; loss using an exceptional 10-year data set (2009-2018) that covered nesting beaches on 12 islands on the Georgia coast. Our objectives were to 1) determine which predators cause the greatest loss of loggerhead sea turtle eggs, 2) evaluate whether non-native species have a higher; rate of predation than native species, and 3) compare predation rates to other major sources of egg loss across these islands. Our results show that under current strategies for nest management: 1) non-native feral hogs and native raccoons have the greatest impact as predators on sea turtle eggs; 2) non-native predators have caused significantly more egg loss across Georgia's coast than native species, but the impact varies greatly by species; and 3) losses to predation are similar in magnitude to post-management losses from tides and storms over the last decade. We recommend the continued use of multiple management techniques, including nest screening and; targeted predator management, but caution that predator controls should be focused on those demonstrated to cause significant losses in order to prioritize conservation funding. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 74 条
  • [1] Success of delayed translocation of loggerhead turtle nests
    Abella, E.
    Marco, A.
    Lopez-Jurado, L. F.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, 2007, 71 (07) : 2290 - 2296
  • [2] Anderson S., 1981, American Museum Novitates, V2713, P1
  • [3] [Anonymous], 1991, WILD PIGS US THEIR H
  • [4] [Anonymous], 1978, FED REGISTER, V43, P32800
  • [5] [Anonymous], 1986, THESIS
  • [6] [Anonymous], 2009, GEORG INV SPEC STRAT
  • [7] Nesting ecology, current status, and conservation of sea turtles on an uninhabited beach in Florida, USA
    Antworth, Rebecca L.
    Pike, David A.
    Stiner, John C.
    [J]. BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2006, 130 (01) : 10 - 15
  • [8] Bain R.E., 1997, REPORT US FISH WILDL
  • [9] Implications of intraguild predation for sea turtle nest protection
    Barton, Brandon T.
    Roth, James D.
    [J]. BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2008, 141 (08) : 2139 - 2145
  • [10] Raccoon removal on sea turtle nesting beaches
    Barton, Brandon T.
    Roth, James D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, 2007, 71 (04) : 1234 - 1237