InvertebrateAbundanceNearPipingPloverNestsintheEasternUpperPeninsulaofMichigan

ThomasJ.FlanaganandJasonM.Garvon,Ph.D.SchoolofBiologicalSciencesLakeSuperiorStateUniversity

SaultSte.Marie,MI

Abstract

Background

Objec?ves

Methods

Acknowledgements

LiteratureCited

PreservaDonofbreedinghabitatandcarefulmonitoringofnesDngsiteshasaidedintherecoveryoftheendangeredGreatLakesPipingPlovertoarecord73breedingpairsin2015.WhiletherequiredphysicalcharacterisDcsofbreedinghabitats,suchaswidthofshorelineandsubstratecomposiDonarewellunderstood,theroleoffoodabundanceonnestsiteselecDonandnestsuccessispoorlyunderstood,partlyduetothenatureoftradiDonalinvertebratesamplingtechniquesthatmayposeadangertothePipingPloversthemselves.WesoughttocreateapassiveinvertebratesamplingtechniquetocharacterizeinvertebratecommuniDesanddeterminewhetherfoodabundancenearPipingPlovernesDngsitesisgreaterthantheabundanceoffoodinseeminglysimilar,non-selectednesDngsites.BioCamsrecordedinvertebrateswithin0.09m2frameseverytwosecondsforfourhoursateachofthesevennesDnglocaDons(GrandMarais(2),Gulliver(2),Vermilion(2),andPortInland,MI).TheBioCamsweresimultaneouslyplacednearnestsatboththeshoreanddune,andatleast300mawayfromacDvenests.WefoundBioCamsweresuccessfulintheirabilitytoidenDfyinvertebratestotaxonomicOrderandesDmateanabundanceofavailableinvertebrateswithoutdisturbingthePlovers.DipteransdominatedcommuniDesnearnestsandwerethemostabundantofallidenDfiedtaxa(p=0.008).TherewasnovariaDonininvertebrateabundancebyproximity(nearvs.awayfromnest)(p=0.436).WhileoverallinvertebrateabundancewasnotaprimaryfactorinnestsiteselecDonforPipingPlovers,furtherstudyonspecificordersandcreaDonofapreyqualityindexmayprovidevaluableinformaDonforfuturemanagementofGreatLakesPipingPlovers.

PipingPlovers(Charadriusmelodus)areanendemicspeciesthatnestontheshorelinesoftheGreatLakes(Cairns1980)andaredisDnguishedintothreegeographicpopulaDons;theAtlanDcandGreatPlainspopulaDons,whicharefederallythreatened,andtheGreatLakespopulaDon,whicharefederallyendangered(Haffneretal.2009).ConservaDoneffortshavebroughtthePipingPloverpopulaDonfromalowof12maDngpairsto73maDngpairsin2015(Cavalieri2015).TofurtheraidpopulaDonrecovery,weneedtobeaerunderstandtheforaginghabitsanddietinordertoenhancefoodresourceassessmentsandidenDficaDonofsuitablehabitatsforthePipingPlover(Cuthbertetal.1999).Haffneretal.(2009)usedArcGIStechnologytodeterminethatPipingPloversuseanaveragelineardistanceof473±53metersalongthesewetsandysubstratestoforageforinvertebrates.GiventherelaDvelysmallsecDonofbeachthatisusedfornesDng,itseemsprobablethatPipingPloversmayselectnestsitesbasedoninvertebrateabundance.WhileweknowPipingPloversarevisualpredators,usingsitetolocateinvertebratesalongthebeachsurface(Cuthbertetal.1999),onlyCuthbertetal.(1999)haveexaminedgizzardcontentstoreportactualpreyeaten,leavingourbestesDmateofPloverdiettobeadeterminaDonofinvertebrateabundancealongshorelineswherePloversfeed.AcomplicaDngfactorinsuchassessmentisthepotenDalforinjuryofPloversbytradiDonalsDckytraptypeinvertebrateassessments.Therefore,thecreaDonofanon-invasive/non-consumpDve,orpassive,invertebratesamplingtechniqueforuseinPipingPlovernestareasiswarranted.AsimplemodificaDonofNaDonalGeographicphotographerDavidLiaschwager’sBiocubewouldlikelyallowforesDmaDonofinvertebrateabundancewithminimaldisturbance.

ThestudyobjecDveswere(1)developanon-invasivesamplingtechnique(BioCam)todetermineinvertebrateabundancenearpipingplovernests(2)usetheBioCamtocharacterizetheinvertebratefaunaavailabletoPipingPloversonthebeachesoftheEasternUpperPeninsulaofMichigan(3)determinewhetherornotinvertebrateabundanceisgreaternearPipingPloverneststhanareasofadjacentbeach.

Discussion

Results

StudySites•  TwobeachesonLakeMichigan(GulliverandPortInland)•  TwobeachesonLakeSuperior(GrandMaraisandVermilion)BioCamConstruc?on(Figure1)•  Constructedusing¼inchsteelrod•  A20cmhighA-framewasaaachedtoa0.09m2frame•  AGoProcamerawasaaachedtoathreadedrodthatranthroughanut

aaachedtotheapexoftheA-frame•  TheGoProwaspointeddownwardandcenteredabovethesquareExperimentalDesign(Figure1)•  TwoBioCamsplacednearthenestsite

•  OneBioCamwasplacednearthenestattheduneline(within5m)•  OneBioCamwasplacedinfrontofthenestatthehighwaterline

•  TwoBioCamsplaced300mawayfromthenestsite•  OneBioCamwasplacedattheduneline•  OneBioCamwasplacedatthehighwaterline

•  FreezerpaperplacedundertheBioCam•  GoProcameras(3-HeroIIIwhite,1-Herosilverplus)settotakepicturesat

twosecondintervalsforfourhours•  Pictureswereviewedandanyinvertebratewithinthe0.09m2areawas

countedandidenDfiedtoOrderifpossible•  UnidenDfiedinvertebrateswereplacedintotwocategories

•  Largeunknown:anyinvertebratelargerthanahousefly•  Smallunknown:anyinvertebratesmallerthanahousefly

DataAnalysis•  Percentsimilarity(Pielou1975)-InvertebratecommuniDeswithinsiteby

proximity(nearvsaway)•  T-test-Totalinvertebrateabundancesbyproximity(nearvsaway)•  ANOVA(systat)-Invertebratetaxaabundanceandabundancebyproximity

(nearvsaway)

WearegratefultoVinceCavalieri(USF&WS)forhelpfulassistancethroughoutthisprojectalongwiththe2014and2015PipingPlovermonitoringteamsforhelpingwithdatacollecDon.LakeSuperiorStateUniversityUndergraduateResearchFundandtheNaDonalFishandWildlifeFoundaDon,SustainOurGreatLakesGrantprovidedfinancialsupport.

BioCams•  Successfullysurveyedinvertebrates•  Canbeusedforawiderangeofstudies•  ResoluDondependentonGoPromodel

InvertebrateCommunityCharacteriza?on•  Overallcommunitybyproximity(near,away)(Figure2)

•  NearnestsdominatedbyDiptera•  Hymenopteramostrepresentedinsamplesawayfromnests

•  WithinsiteinvertebratecommuniDes(%similarity)(Figure3)•  Meanvalue=52.24%•  Mostsimilar–GrandMaraisAgate:82.65%•  Leastsimilar–VermilionSite1:36.81%

InvertebrateAbundances•  Overallinvertebrateabundancesimilarbyproximity(p=0.436)(Figure4)•  Dipteransmostabundantoverall(p=0.008)butnotbyproximity(p=0.142)

•  Diptera(21.34±4.70m2/h)•  Coleoptera(10.76±4.61m2/h)•  Hymenoptera(3.94±1.29m2/h)

BiocamsweresuccessfulindocumenDnginvertebratestoOrderandesDmaDnginvertebrateabundance.However,theyonlyallowustoseePipingPloverhabitatsin2-dimensions.PipingPloverchickshavebeenobservedgleaninginsectsfrombeachvegetaDon(Cuthbertetal.1999),soa2-dimensionalviewmaynotallowustocollectallabundancedata,butsimplemodificaDonscouldbeaddedtoincorporatethisdata.ResoluDonofsmallerinvertebratescouldbeimprovedwithhigherqualitycamera.ThreetaxadominatedtheinvertebratecommuniDes(Diptera,Hymenoptera,andColeoptera)andwerealsothethreemostabundantofthe6representedorderspresentingizzardcontentsofjuvenilePipingPloversnecropsiedfromGrandMarais,MIin1996and1997(Cuthbertetal.1999).SincetheOrdersidenDfiedbytheBioCamsinthisstudycorrelatetotheOrdersoftheGrandMaraisstudy,thissuggeststhatDiptera,Hymenoptera,andColeopteraareindeedamaindietsourceforPipingPloversintheGreatLakesregion.InvertebratecommunitystructurenearnestsitesappeareddifferentthanthatawayfromthenestasevidentbythepercentofcommunitycomposiDonrepresentedbyDipteransandHymenopterans,respecDvely.Althoughinvertebrateabundancedidnotdifferbynestproximity,theobserveddifferenceincommunitycomposiDonmaybeanindicaDonofqualityinnestsiteselecDon.Giventhelimitedsamplingreplicatesinthisstudydata,collecDoninsubsequentyearsshouldbeconductedtofurtherexplorethishypothesis.WhileoverallinvertebrateabundancewasnotaprimaryfactorinnestsiteselecDon,itmayhaveinfluencedfledgingsuccessandchicksurvivalasstarvaDon-inducedweaknesscanleadtolowerPipingPloverchicksurvival(LoegeringandFraser1995).Chickmortalitymayberelatedtothreefactors-qualityofforaginghabitat,predaDonrates,andhumandisturbance(Paaersonet.al.1991).FutureresearchshouldexaminetheimportanceofinvertebrateabundanceandcommunitystructureinrelaDontonestsiteselecDonandchicksurvivalwithspecialaaenDontodetermininganindexofqualityininvertebratepreysources.

Cairns,W.E.1982.Biologyandbehaviorofbreedingpipingplovers.WilsonBull94(4):531-545.Cavalieri,V.,UnitedStatesFishandWildlifeService,personalcommunicaDon.Cuthbert,F.J.,B.Scholtens,L.C.WemmerandR.McLain.1999.Gizzardcontentsofpipingploverchicksinnorthern

michigan.TheWilsonBulleDn111(1):121-123.Haffner,C.D.,F.J.CuthbertandT.W.Arnold.2009.Spaceusebygreatlakespipingploversduringthebreedingseason.

JournalofFieldOrnithology80(3):270-279.Loegering,J.P.,andJ.D.Fraser.1995.FactorsaffecDngpipingploverchicksurvivalindifferentbrood-rearinghabitats.

JournalofWildlifeManagement59(4):646-655.Paaerson,M.E.,J.D.Fraser,andJ.W.Roggenbuck.1991.FactorsaffecDngpipingploverproducDvityonAssateagueisland.JournalofWildlifeManagement55(3):525-531.Pielou,E.C.,1975.Ecologicaldiversity.JohnWileyandSons,NewYork.

Figure4.TotalabundanceofinvertebratesnearandawayfromPipingPlovernestsatsevenlocaDonsinMichigan’sEasternUpperPeninsula.

Figure3.InvertebratecommunitycomposiDon(%)nearandawaywithpercentsimilarityvaluesfromPipingPlovernestsatsevenlocaDonsinMichigan’sEasternUpperPeninsula.

Figure1.Aerial(toplep),sideview(topright),andplacement(boaom)oftheBioCamsetupsnearandawayfromnests.

Figure2.MeanpercentageofinvertebratecommuniDes(nearandawayfromPipingPlovernest)representedbyidenDfiedtaxa.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Near Away

No.ofInvertebrates(m

2 /hr)

NestProximity

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Near Away Near Away Near Away Near Away Near Away Near Away Near Away

Araneae

Hymenoptera

LargeUnknown

SmallUnknown

Coleoptera

Diptera

GrandMaraisSuckerRiver

VermilionSite1 VermilionSite2 GulliverEast2 GulliverWest PortInland

82.65% 39.29% 36.81% 67.22% 39.64% 49.97% 57.10%

PercentSimilarity

Percen

tCom

posiD

on

NesDngSite

GrandMaraisAgate

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Diptera Coleoptera SmallUnknown LargeUnknown Hymenoptera Aranea

Near

Away