CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 11Avian ecology and behaviorAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesWildlife Ecology and Conservation

Synchrony of Piping Plover breeding populations in the U.S. Northern Great Plains

Open access
Roche, Erin A., Shaffer, Terry L., Dovichin, Colin M., Sherfy, Mark H., Anteau, Michael J., Wiltermuth, Mark T.·2016·The Condor
DOI 10.1650/condor-15-195.1
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Local populations that fluctuate synchronously are at a greater risk of extinction than those that do not. The closer the geographic proximity of populations, the more prone they are to synchronizing. Shorebird species select habitat broadly, and many breed across regions with diverse nesting habitat types. Under these conditions, nearby populations may experience conditions sufficiently different to prevent population synchrony, despite dispersal. In the U.S. Northern Great Plains, the Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus), federally listed as Threatened, is a migratory shorebird species that nests on the shorelines of rivers, reservoirs, and alkaline lakes. We assessed the degree to which local plover breeding population abundances were correlated (population synchrony), changed over time (population stability), and were influenced by environmental factors such as available habitat, precipitation, and within-season reservoir level rise. We found that the abundances of breeding populations nesting in riverine and reservoir habitats were the most synchronous, while populations nesting in alkaline lake habitats exhibited the greatest stability. Changes in local breeding population abundances were not explained by a single factor across habitat types. However, the abundances of local populations nesting in alkaline lake and river shoreline habitats were positively correlated with changes in nesting habitat availability. Our results suggest that dispersal among populations nesting in either river or reservoir and alkaline lake shoreline habitat may have an overall stabilizing effect on the persistence of the Great Plains Piping Plover metapopulation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1650/condor-15-195.1

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Habitat conditions influence bird dispersal between segments of the Missouri River and other nesting habitats in tributaries and prairie pothole wetlands, thereby affecting the distribution of birds over a broad geographic area.

    “Habitat conditions also influence bird dispersal between segments of the Missouri River and other nesting habitats in tributaries and prairie pothole wetlands, thereby affecting the distribution of birds over a broad geographic area (Roche et al. 2016).”

    From Applying cumulative effects to strategically advance large‐scale ecosystem restoration (2021) · cites this paper as Roche et al. 2016

    The Discussion (page unavailable) links changing nesting conditions to Piping Plover dispersal and describes possible movement between Missouri River habitats and alkaline lakes. The Study Area (page unavailable) places those populations across a broad region, but the paper does not identify tributary nesting habitats as part of the dispersal described in the claim; it studies mainstem river and reservoir habitats and Missouri Coteau alkaline lakes. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 34

  1. Abbott, K. C. (2011). A dispersal-induced paradox: Synchrony and stability in stochastic metapopulations. Ecology Letters 14:1158-1169.
  2. Anteau, M. J., M. H. Sherfy, and M. T. Wiltermuth (2012b). Selection indicates preference in diverse habitats: A ground- nesting bird (Charadrius melodus) using reservoir shoreline. PLOS One 7:e30347. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0030347 · DOI
  3. Bart, J., S. Brown, B. Harrington, and R. I. G. Morrison (2007). Survey trends of North American shorebirds: Population declines or shifting distributions? Journal of Avian Biology 38: 73-82.
  4. Briggs, C. J., and M. F. Hoopes (2004). Stabilizing effects in spatial parasitoid-host and predator-prey models: A review. Theo- retical Population Biology 65:299-315.
  5. Brown, S., C. Hickey, B. Harrington, and R. Gill (2001). United States Shorebird Conservation Plan, second edition. Man- omet Center for Conservation Sciences, Plymouth, MA, USA.
  6. Catlin, D. H., R. B. Jacobson, M. H. Sherfy, M. J. Anteau, J. H. Felio, J. D. Fraser, C. Lott, T. L. Shaffer, and J. H. Stucker (2010). Discussion of ''Natural hydrograph of the Missouri River near Sioux City and the Least Tern and Piping Plover'' by Donald G. Jorgensen. Journal of Hydrological Engineering 15:1076- 1078.
  7. Claassen, A. H., T. W. Arnold, E. A. Roche, S. P. Saunders, and F. J. Cuthbert (2014). Factors influencing nest survival and renesting by Piping Plovers in the Great Lakes region. The Condor: Ornithological Applications 116:394-407.
  8. Colwell, M. A., and L. W. Oring (1988). Habitat use by breeding and migrating shorebirds in southcentral Saskatchewan. Wilson Bulletin 100:554-566.
  9. Galbraith, H., D. W. DesRochers, S. Brown, and J. M. Reed (2014). Predicting vulnerabilities of North American shorebirds to climate change. PLOS One 9:e108899. doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0108899 · DOI
  10. Gelman, A., and J. Hill (2006). Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.
  11. Hilbe, J. M. (2011). Negative Binomial Regression, second edition. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.
  12. Inchausti, P., and J. Halley (2003). On the relation between temporal variability and persistence time in animal popula- tions. Journal of Animal Ecology 72:899-908.
  13. Iwamura, T., H. P. Possingham, I. Chad ès, C. Minton, N. J. Murray, D. I. Rogers, E. A. Treml, and R. A. Fuller (2013). Migratory connectivity magnifies the consequences of habitat loss from sea-level rise for shorebird populations. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B 280:20130325. doi:10.1098/ rspb.2013.0325 · DOI
  14. K éry, M. (2010). Introduction to WinBUGS for Ecologists: Bayesian Approach to Regression, ANOVA, Mixed Models and Related Analyses. Academic Press, Burlington, MA, USA.
  15. Kéry, M., and M. Schaub (2012). Bayesian Population Analysis using WinBUGS: A Hierarchical Perspective. Academic Press, Burlington, MA, USA.
  16. Knetter, J. M., R. S. Lutz, J. R. Cary, and R. K. Murphy (2002). A multi-scale investigation of Piping Plover productivity on Great Plains alkali lakes, 1994-2000. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30:683-694.
  17. Kuo, L., and B. Mallick (1998). Variable selection for regression models. Sankhyā: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Series B 60: 65-81.
  18. Liebhold, A., W. D. Koenig, and O. N. Bjørnstad (2004). Spatial synchrony in population dynamics. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 35:467-490.
  19. Martin, T. G., B. A. Wintle, J. R. Rhodes, P. M. Kuhnert, S. A. Field, S. J. Low-Choy, A. J. Tyre, and H. P. Possingham (2005). Zero tolerance ecology: Improving ecological inference by mod- elling the source of zero observations. Ecology Letters 8: 1235-1246.
  20. McCauley, L. A., M. J. Anteau, and M. Post van der Burg (2015). Consolidation drainage and climate change may reduce Piping Plover habitat in the Great Plains. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management 7:e1944-687X. doi:10.3996/072015- JFWM-068 · DOI
  21. Moran, P. A. P. (1953a). The statistical analysis of the Canadian lynx cycle. I. Structure and prediction. Australian Journal of Zoology 1:163-173.
  22. Moran, P. A. P. (1953b). The statistical analysis of the Canadian lynx cycle. II. Synchronization and meteorology. Australian Journal of Zoology 1:291-298.
  23. O'Hara, R. B., and M. J. Sillanpää (2009). A review of Bayesian variable selection methods: What, how and which. Bayesian Analysis 4:85-117.
  24. Piersma, T. (2007). Using the power of comparison to explain habitat use and migration strategies of shorebirds world- wide. Journal of Ornithology 148:45-59.
  25. Plummer, M. (2003). JAGS: A program for analysis of Bayesian graphical models using Gibbs sampling. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Distributed Statistical Computing (DSC 2003), March 20-22, Vienna, Austria (K.
  26. Poff, N. L., and J. K. H. Zimmerman (2010). Ecological responses to altered flow regimes: A literature review to inform the science and management of environmental flows. Freshwa- ter Biology 55:194-205.
  27. Post van der Burg, M., M. J. Anteau, L. A. McCauley, and M. T. Wiltermuth (2016). A Bayesian approach for temporally scaling climate for modeling ecological systems. Ecology and Evolution 6:2978-2987. doi:10.1002/ece3.2092 · DOI
  28. Prindiville Gaines, E. M., and M. R. Ryan (1988). Piping Plover habitat use and reproductive success in North Dakota. Journal of Wildlife Management 52:266-273.
  29. Ranta, E., V. Kaitala, J. Lindstrom, and H. Linden (1995). Synchrony in population dynamics. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B 262:113-118.
  30. Rioux, S., D. L. Amirault-Langlais, and F. Shaffer (2011). Piping Plovers make decisions regarding dispersal based on personal and public information in a variable coastal ecosystem. Journal of Field Ornithology 82:32-43.
  31. Schaub, M., J. Hirschheydt, and M. U. Gr üebler (2015). Differential contribution of demographic rate synchrony to population synchrony in Barn Swallows. Journal of Animal Ecology 84: 1530-1541. doi:10.1111/1365-2656.12423 · DOI
  32. Scheuring, I. (2000). Habitat diversity and stability in a metapopulation. Journal of Theoretical Biology 206:229-233.
  33. Skagen, S. K., and F. L. Knopf (1994). Migrating shorebirds and habitat dynamics at a prairie wetland complex. Wilson Bulletin 106:91-105.
  34. USFWS (2009). Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Region, Hadley, MA, USA, and Midwest Region, East Lansing Field Office, MI, USA.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Roche, E. A., Shaffer, T. L., Dovichin, C. M., Sherfy, M. H., Anteau, M. J., & Wiltermuth, M. T.
Affiliations
Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center (US)
Corresponding author
Roche, Erin A.
ORCID
Venue
The Condor
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2016-08
Volume
118
Issue
3
Pages
558-570
ISSN
  • 0010-5422 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-5129
DOI
10.1650/condor-15-195.1
OpenAlex
W2463030307
Cited by
11
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3
FWCI
1.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Ornithological Applications (publishedVersion)
  • BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
  • U.S. Geological Survey
  • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Keywords
piping plover, Charadrius melodus, population synchrony, population stability, metapopulation dynamics, shorebirds, precipitation, dispersal, extinction risk, Northern Great Plains

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review