Competitive interactions and resource partitioning between northern spotted owls and barred owls in western Oregon Interacciones competitivas y repartición de recursos entre S. occidentalis caurina y Strix varia en el Oeste de Oregon Interactions concurrentielles et partages des ressources entre les chouettes tachetées du nord et les chouettes Rayées à l'Ouest de l'Oregon

IF 4.3 1区 生物学 Q1 ECOLOGY Wildlife Monographs Pub Date : 2014-02-24 DOI:10.1002/wmon.1009
J. David Wiens, Robert G. Anthony, Eric D. Forsman
{"title":"Competitive interactions and resource partitioning between northern spotted owls and barred owls in western Oregon\n Interacciones competitivas y repartición de recursos entre S. occidentalis caurina y Strix varia en el Oeste de Oregon\n Interactions concurrentielles et partages des ressources entre les chouettes tachetées du nord et les chouettes Rayées à l'Ouest de l'Oregon","authors":"J. David Wiens,&nbsp;Robert G. Anthony,&nbsp;Eric D. Forsman","doi":"10.1002/wmon.1009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <p>The federally threatened northern spotted owl (<i>Strix occidentalis caurina</i>) is the focus of intensive conservation efforts that have led to much forested land being reserved as habitat for the owl and associated wildlife species throughout the Pacific Northwest of the United States. Recently, however, a relatively new threat to spotted owls has emerged in the form of an invasive competitor: the congeneric barred owl (<i>S. varia</i>). As barred owls have rapidly expanded their populations into the entire range of the northern spotted owl, mounting evidence indicates that they are displacing, hybridizing with, and even killing spotted owls. The range expansion by barred owls into western North America has made an already complex conservation issue even more contentious, and a lack of information on the ecological relationships between the 2 species has hampered recovery efforts for northern spotted owls. We investigated spatial relationships, habitat use, diets, survival, and reproduction of sympatric spotted owls and barred owls in western Oregon, USA, during 2007–2009. Our overall objective was to determine the potential for and possible consequences of competition for space, habitat, and food between these previously allopatric owl species. Our study included 29 spotted owls and 28 barred owls that were radio-marked in 36 neighboring territories and monitored over a 24-month period. Based on repeated surveys of both species, the number of territories occupied by pairs of barred owls in the 745-km<sup>2</sup> study area (82) greatly outnumbered those occupied by pairs of spotted owls (15). Estimates of mean size of home ranges and core-use areas of spotted owls (1,843 ha and 305 ha, respectively) were 2–4 times larger than those of barred owls (581 ha and 188 ha, respectively). Individual spotted and barred owls in adjacent territories often had overlapping home ranges, but interspecific space sharing was largely restricted to broader foraging areas in the home range with minimal spatial overlap among core-use areas. We used an information-theoretic approach to rank discrete-choice models representing alternative hypotheses about the influence of forest conditions, topography, and interspecific interactions on species-specific patterns of nighttime resource selection. Spotted owls spent a disproportionate amount of time foraging on steep slopes in ravines dominated by old (&gt;120 yr) conifer trees. Barred owls used available forest types more evenly than spotted owls, and were most strongly associated with patches of large hardwood and conifer trees that occupied relatively flat areas along streams. Spotted and barred owls differed in the relative use of old conifer forest (greater for spotted owls) and slope conditions (steeper slopes for spotted owls), but we found no evidence that the 2 species differed in their use of young, mature, and riparian-hardwood forest types. Mean overlap in proportional use of different forest types between individual spotted owls and barred owls in adjacent territories was 81% (range = 30–99%). The best model of habitat use for spotted owls indicated that the relative probability of a location being used was substantially reduced if the location was within or in close proximity to a core-use area of a barred owl. We used pellet analysis and measures of food-niche overlap to determine the potential for dietary competition between spatially associated pairs of spotted owls and barred owls. We identified 1,223 prey items from 15 territories occupied by spotted owls and 4,299 prey items from 24 territories occupied by barred owls. Diets of both species were dominated by nocturnal mammals, but diets of barred owls included many terrestrial, aquatic, and diurnal prey species that were rare or absent in diets of spotted owls. Northern flying squirrels (<i>Glaucomys sabrinus</i>), woodrats (<i>Neotoma fuscipes</i>, <i>N. cinerea</i>), and lagomorphs (<i>Lepus americanus</i>, <i>Sylvilagus bachmani</i>) were primary prey for both owl species, accounting for 81% and 49% of total dietary biomass for spotted owls and barred owls, respectively. Mean dietary overlap between pairs of spotted and barred owls in adjacent territories was moderate (42%; range = 28–70%). Barred owls displayed demographic superiority over spotted owls; annual survival probability of spotted owls from known-fate analyses (0.81, SE = 0.05) was lower than that of barred owls (0.92, SE = 0.04), and pairs of barred owls produced an average of 4.4 times more young than pairs of spotted owls over a 3-year period. We found a strong, positive relationship between seasonal (6-month) survival probabilities of both species and the proportion of old (&gt;120 yr) conifer forest within individual home ranges, which suggested that availability of old forest was a potential limiting factor in the competitive relationship between these 2 species. The annual number of young produced by spotted owls increased linearly with increasing distance from a territory center of a pair of barred owls, and all spotted owls that attempted to nest within 1.5 km of a nest used by barred owls failed to successfully produce young. We identified strong associations between the presence of barred owls and the behavior and fitness potential of spotted owls, as shown by changes in movements, habitat use, and reproductive output of spotted owls exposed to different levels of spatial overlap with territorial barred owls. When viewed collectively, our results support the hypothesis that interference competition with barred owls for territorial space can constrain the availability of critical resources required for successful recruitment and reproduction of spotted owls. Availability of old forests and associated prey species appeared to be the most strongly limiting factors in the competitive relationship between these species, indicating that further loss of these conditions can lead to increases in competitive pressure. Our findings have broad implications for the conservation of spotted owls, as they suggest that spatial heterogeneity in vital rates may not arise solely because of differences among territories in the quality or abundance of forest habitat, but also because of the spatial distribution of a newly established competitor. Experimental removal of barred owls could be used to test this hypothesis and determine whether localized control of barred owl numbers is an ecologically practical and socio-politically acceptable management tool to consider in conservation strategies for spotted owls. © 2013 The Wildlife Society</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":235,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Monographs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2014-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/wmon.1009","citationCount":"129","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wildlife Monographs","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wmon.1009","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 129

Abstract

The federally threatened northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) is the focus of intensive conservation efforts that have led to much forested land being reserved as habitat for the owl and associated wildlife species throughout the Pacific Northwest of the United States. Recently, however, a relatively new threat to spotted owls has emerged in the form of an invasive competitor: the congeneric barred owl (S. varia). As barred owls have rapidly expanded their populations into the entire range of the northern spotted owl, mounting evidence indicates that they are displacing, hybridizing with, and even killing spotted owls. The range expansion by barred owls into western North America has made an already complex conservation issue even more contentious, and a lack of information on the ecological relationships between the 2 species has hampered recovery efforts for northern spotted owls. We investigated spatial relationships, habitat use, diets, survival, and reproduction of sympatric spotted owls and barred owls in western Oregon, USA, during 2007–2009. Our overall objective was to determine the potential for and possible consequences of competition for space, habitat, and food between these previously allopatric owl species. Our study included 29 spotted owls and 28 barred owls that were radio-marked in 36 neighboring territories and monitored over a 24-month period. Based on repeated surveys of both species, the number of territories occupied by pairs of barred owls in the 745-km2 study area (82) greatly outnumbered those occupied by pairs of spotted owls (15). Estimates of mean size of home ranges and core-use areas of spotted owls (1,843 ha and 305 ha, respectively) were 2–4 times larger than those of barred owls (581 ha and 188 ha, respectively). Individual spotted and barred owls in adjacent territories often had overlapping home ranges, but interspecific space sharing was largely restricted to broader foraging areas in the home range with minimal spatial overlap among core-use areas. We used an information-theoretic approach to rank discrete-choice models representing alternative hypotheses about the influence of forest conditions, topography, and interspecific interactions on species-specific patterns of nighttime resource selection. Spotted owls spent a disproportionate amount of time foraging on steep slopes in ravines dominated by old (>120 yr) conifer trees. Barred owls used available forest types more evenly than spotted owls, and were most strongly associated with patches of large hardwood and conifer trees that occupied relatively flat areas along streams. Spotted and barred owls differed in the relative use of old conifer forest (greater for spotted owls) and slope conditions (steeper slopes for spotted owls), but we found no evidence that the 2 species differed in their use of young, mature, and riparian-hardwood forest types. Mean overlap in proportional use of different forest types between individual spotted owls and barred owls in adjacent territories was 81% (range = 30–99%). The best model of habitat use for spotted owls indicated that the relative probability of a location being used was substantially reduced if the location was within or in close proximity to a core-use area of a barred owl. We used pellet analysis and measures of food-niche overlap to determine the potential for dietary competition between spatially associated pairs of spotted owls and barred owls. We identified 1,223 prey items from 15 territories occupied by spotted owls and 4,299 prey items from 24 territories occupied by barred owls. Diets of both species were dominated by nocturnal mammals, but diets of barred owls included many terrestrial, aquatic, and diurnal prey species that were rare or absent in diets of spotted owls. Northern flying squirrels (Glaucomys sabrinus), woodrats (Neotoma fuscipes, N. cinerea), and lagomorphs (Lepus americanus, Sylvilagus bachmani) were primary prey for both owl species, accounting for 81% and 49% of total dietary biomass for spotted owls and barred owls, respectively. Mean dietary overlap between pairs of spotted and barred owls in adjacent territories was moderate (42%; range = 28–70%). Barred owls displayed demographic superiority over spotted owls; annual survival probability of spotted owls from known-fate analyses (0.81, SE = 0.05) was lower than that of barred owls (0.92, SE = 0.04), and pairs of barred owls produced an average of 4.4 times more young than pairs of spotted owls over a 3-year period. We found a strong, positive relationship between seasonal (6-month) survival probabilities of both species and the proportion of old (>120 yr) conifer forest within individual home ranges, which suggested that availability of old forest was a potential limiting factor in the competitive relationship between these 2 species. The annual number of young produced by spotted owls increased linearly with increasing distance from a territory center of a pair of barred owls, and all spotted owls that attempted to nest within 1.5 km of a nest used by barred owls failed to successfully produce young. We identified strong associations between the presence of barred owls and the behavior and fitness potential of spotted owls, as shown by changes in movements, habitat use, and reproductive output of spotted owls exposed to different levels of spatial overlap with territorial barred owls. When viewed collectively, our results support the hypothesis that interference competition with barred owls for territorial space can constrain the availability of critical resources required for successful recruitment and reproduction of spotted owls. Availability of old forests and associated prey species appeared to be the most strongly limiting factors in the competitive relationship between these species, indicating that further loss of these conditions can lead to increases in competitive pressure. Our findings have broad implications for the conservation of spotted owls, as they suggest that spatial heterogeneity in vital rates may not arise solely because of differences among territories in the quality or abundance of forest habitat, but also because of the spatial distribution of a newly established competitor. Experimental removal of barred owls could be used to test this hypothesis and determine whether localized control of barred owl numbers is an ecologically practical and socio-politically acceptable management tool to consider in conservation strategies for spotted owls. © 2013 The Wildlife Society

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
竞争性互动和资源partitioning between北方斑点owls and门owls in western俄勒冈Interacciones competitivas o n y repartici世宗之间recursos细辛caurina变量y盖在俄勒冈州的el奥斯特之间竞争互动和资源共享,猫头鹰以西北方斑点猫头鹰和注销,俄勒冈州
受到联邦政府威胁的北方斑点猫头鹰(Strix occidentalis caurina)是密集保护工作的重点,这导致了在美国西北太平洋地区,许多林地被保留为猫头鹰和相关野生物种的栖息地。然而,最近对斑点猫头鹰的一个相对新的威胁以一种入侵的竞争对手的形式出现了:同属的横斑猫头鹰(S. varia)。随着横斑猫头鹰的数量迅速扩大到整个北方斑点猫头鹰的范围,越来越多的证据表明它们正在取代斑点猫头鹰,与它们杂交,甚至杀死它们。横斑猫头鹰在北美西部的活动范围扩大,使本已复杂的保护问题变得更加有争议,而且缺乏关于这两个物种之间生态关系的信息,阻碍了北方斑点猫头鹰的恢复努力。研究了2007-2009年美国俄勒冈州西部同域斑点猫头鹰和横斑猫头鹰的空间关系、栖息地利用、饮食、生存和繁殖。我们的总体目标是确定这些以前的异域猫头鹰物种之间争夺空间、栖息地和食物的潜力和可能的后果。我们的研究包括29只斑点猫头鹰和28只横斑猫头鹰,它们在36个邻近地区被无线电标记,并在24个月的时间里被监测。根据对这两个物种的反复调查,在745平方公里的研究区域内,横斑猫头鹰占据的领地数量(82对)远远超过斑点猫头鹰占据的领地数量(15对)。斑点猫头鹰的平均栖息地面积和核心利用面积(分别为1843公顷和305公顷)是横斑猫头鹰的2-4倍(分别为581公顷和188公顷)。相邻领地的斑斑猫头鹰和横斑猫头鹰个体通常有重叠的活动范围,但种间空间共享主要局限于活动范围内更广泛的觅食区域,核心使用区域之间的空间重叠最小。我们使用信息论方法对离散选择模型进行排序,这些模型代表了关于森林条件、地形和种间相互作用对物种特有的夜间资源选择模式的影响的不同假设。斑点猫头鹰花了大量的时间在陡峭的斜坡上觅食,这些斜坡上长满了古老的(120年)针叶树。横斑猫头鹰比斑点猫头鹰更均匀地利用可利用的森林类型,并且与占据溪流沿线相对平坦地区的大型硬木和针叶树的斑块关系最为密切。斑点猫头鹰和横斑猫头鹰在使用老针叶林(斑点猫头鹰使用更多)和斜坡条件(斑点猫头鹰使用更陡峭的斜坡)方面存在差异,但我们没有发现证据表明这两个物种在使用幼林、成熟林和河岸硬木林类型方面存在差异。斑点猫头鹰和横斑猫头鹰在相邻区域对不同森林类型的比例利用的平均重叠度为81%(范围为30-99%)。斑点猫头鹰栖息地利用的最佳模型表明,如果该地点在横斑猫头鹰的核心使用区域内或附近,则该地点被利用的相对概率大大降低。我们使用颗粒分析和食物生态位重叠测量来确定空间相关的斑点猫头鹰和横斑猫头鹰对之间的饮食竞争潜力。我们从斑点猫头鹰占据的15个领地中鉴定出1223个猎物,从横斑猫头鹰占据的24个领地中鉴定出4299个猎物。这两个物种的饮食都以夜行哺乳动物为主,但横斑猫头鹰的饮食包括许多陆生、水生和日间捕食的物种,这些物种在斑点猫头鹰的饮食中很少或没有。北飞鼠(Glaucomys sabrinus)、木鼠(Neotoma fuscipes, N. cinerea)和狐猴(Lepus americanus, Sylvilagus bachmani)是斑点猫头鹰和横斑猫头鹰的主要猎物,分别占斑点猫头鹰和横斑猫头鹰膳食生物量的81%和49%。在邻近地区,斑点猫头鹰和横斑猫头鹰之间的平均饮食重叠是中等的(42%;范围= 28-70%)。横斑猫头鹰在人口统计学上优于斑点猫头鹰;已知命运分析中斑点猫头鹰的年存活率(0.81,SE = 0.05)低于横斑猫头鹰(0.92,SE = 0.04),在3年的时间里,斑猫头鹰的产仔率平均是斑点猫头鹰的4.4倍。我们发现两种树种的季节性(6个月)存活率与个体栖息地内的老针叶林(&gt;120年)的比例呈正相关,这表明老森林的可利用性是这两种物种之间竞争关系的潜在限制因素。 斑点猫头鹰的年产仔数量随着距离一对横斑猫头鹰领地中心的距离增加而线性增加,并且所有试图在距离横斑猫头鹰巢穴1.5公里范围内筑巢的斑点猫头鹰都未能成功产仔。我们发现横斑猫头鹰的存在与斑点猫头鹰的行为和健康潜力之间存在着强烈的联系,这体现在暴露于不同程度的空间重叠的斑点猫头鹰的运动、栖息地利用和繁殖产出的变化上。从整体上看,我们的研究结果支持了一个假设,即与横斑猫头鹰争夺领土空间的干扰竞争会限制斑点猫头鹰成功招募和繁殖所需的关键资源的可用性。原始森林的可用性和相关的猎物物种似乎是这些物种之间竞争关系中最强烈的限制因素,表明这些条件的进一步丧失可能导致竞争压力的增加。我们的研究结果对斑点猫头鹰的保护具有广泛的意义,因为它们表明,生命率的空间异质性可能不仅仅是因为森林栖息地质量或丰富程度的领土差异,还因为新建立的竞争对手的空间分布。实验移除横斑猫头鹰可以用来验证这一假设,并确定局部控制横斑猫头鹰数量是否是一种生态实用和社会政治上可接受的管理工具,可以考虑斑点猫头鹰的保护策略。©2013野生动物协会
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Wildlife Monographs
Wildlife Monographs 生物-动物学
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Wildlife Monographs supplements The Journal of Wildlife Management with focused investigations in the area of the management and conservation of wildlife. Abstracting and Indexing Information Academic Search Alumni Edition (EBSCO Publishing) Agricultural & Environmental Science Database (ProQuest) Biological Science Database (ProQuest) CAB Abstracts® (CABI) Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database (ProQuest) Global Health (CABI) Grasslands & Forage Abstracts (CABI) Helminthological Abstracts (CABI) Natural Science Collection (ProQuest) Poultry Abstracts (CABI) ProQuest Central (ProQuest) ProQuest Central K-543 Research Library (ProQuest) Research Library Prep (ProQuest) SciTech Premium Collection (ProQuest) Soils & Fertilizers Abstracts (CABI) Veterinary Bulletin (CABI)
期刊最新文献
Issue Information - Cover Associations between a feral equid and the Sonoran Desert ecosystem Asociaciones Entre un Equino Salvaje y el Ecosistema del Desierto Sonorense Issue Information - Cover Less is more: vegetation changes coincide with white-tailed deer suppression over thirty years Issue Information - Cover
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1