6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Subpopulation augmentation among habitat patches as a tool to manage an endangered Mojave Desert wetlands-dependent rodent during anthropogenic restricted water climate regimes

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Intensive management may be necessary to protect some highly vulnerable endangered species, particularly those dependent on water availability regimes that might be disrupted by ongoing climate change. The Amargosa vole ( Microtus californicus scirpensis) is an increasingly imperiled rodent constrained to rare wetland habitat in the Mojave Desert. In 2014 and 2016, we trapped and radio-collared 30 voles, 24 were translocated and six remained at donor and recipient marshes as resident control voles. Soft-release was performed followed by remote camera and radio-telemetry monitoring. Although comparative metrics were not statistically significant, the mean maximum known distance moved (MDM) was longer for translocated (82.3 ± 14.6 m) vs. resident-control voles (74.9 ± 17.5 m) and for female (98.4 ± 19.9 m) vs. male (57.8 ± 9.1 m) voles. The mean area occupied (AO) tended to be greater in female (0.15 ± 0.04 ha) vs. male (0.12 ± 0.03 ha) voles, and control voles (0.15 ± 0.05 ha) compared with translocated voles (0.13 ± 0.03 ha). The mean minimum known time alive (MTA) was 38.2 ± 19.4 days for resident-control voles and 47.0 ± 10.6 days for translocated voles. Female survival (55.7 ± 14.3 days) exceeded that of males (31.5 ± 9.4 days) regardless of study group. Activity in bulrush/rushes mix and bulrush vegetation types was strongly and significantly overrepresented compared with salt grass and rushes alone, and habitat selection did not differ between resident and translocated voles. Our results provide ecological and methodological insights for future translocations as part of a strategy of promoting long-term survival of an extremely endangered small mammal in a wild desert environment.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Translocation as a species conservation tool: status and strategy.

          Surveys of recent (1973 to 1986) intentional releases of native birds and mammals to the wild in Australia, Canada, Hawaii, New Zealand, and the United States were conducted to document current activities, identify factors associated with success, and suggest guidelines for enhancing future work. Nearly 700 translocations were conducted each year. Native game species constituted 90 percent of translocations and were more successful (86 percent) than were translocations of threatened, endangered, or sensitive species (46 percent). Knowledge of habitat quality, location of release area within the species range, number of animals released, program length, and reproductive traits allowed correct classification of 81 percent of observed translocations as successful or not.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            An assessment of the published results of animal relocations

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Developing the science of reintroduction biology.

              With recent increases in the numbers of species reintroduction projects and reintroduction-related publications, there is now a recognizable field of reintroduction biology. Nevertheless, research thus far has been fragmented and ad hoc, rather than an organized attempt to gain reliable knowledge to improve reintroduction success. We reviewed 454 recent (1990-2005) peer-reviewed papers dealing with wildlife reintroductions from 101 journals. Most research has been retrospective, either opportunistic evaluations of techniques or general project summaries, and most inference is gained from post hoc interpretation of monitoring results on a species-by-species basis. Documentation of reintroduction outcomes has improved, however, and the derivation of more general principles via meta-analyses is expected to increase. The fragmentation of the reintroduction literature remains an obstacle. There is scope to improve reintroduction biology by greater application of the hypothetico-deductive method, particularly through the use of modeling approaches and well-designed experiments. Examples of fruitful approaches in reintroduction research include experimental studies to improve outcomes from the release of captive-bred animals, use of simulation modeling to identify factors affecting the viability of reintroduced populations, and the application of spatially explicit models to plan for and evaluate reintroductions. We recommend that researchers contemplating future reintroductions carefully determine a priori the specific goals, overall ecological purpose, and inherent technical and biological limitations of a given reintroduction and that evaluation processes incorporate both experimental and modeling approaches. We suggest that the best progress will be made when multidisciplinary teams of resource managers and scientists work in close collaboration and when results from comparative analyses, experiments, and modeling are combined within and among studies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – original draft
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: Methodology
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                24 October 2019
                2019
                : 14
                : 10
                : e0224246
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Medicine and Epidemiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America
                [2 ] Wildlife Investigations Lab, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Rancho Cordova, California, United States of America
                Museu de Ciències Naturals de Granollers, SPAIN
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8441-1573
                Article
                PONE-D-19-19032
                10.1371/journal.pone.0224246
                6812804
                31648291
                ee5aa392-8be2-41b7-9cf7-ad78b8b614e7
                © 2019 López-Pérez et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 6 July 2019
                : 8 October 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 3, Pages: 15
                Funding
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100006238, California Department of Fish and Wildlife;
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100007149, U.S. Bureau of Land Management;
                Award Recipient :
                This project was funded by the Bureau of Land Management ( https://www.blm.gov/) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife ( https://www.wildlife.ca.gov) to JF. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Animals
                Vertebrates
                Amniotes
                Mammals
                Rodents
                Voles
                Ecology and Environmental Sciences
                Aquatic Environments
                Freshwater Environments
                Marshes
                Earth Sciences
                Marine and Aquatic Sciences
                Aquatic Environments
                Freshwater Environments
                Marshes
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Ecology
                Community Ecology
                Trophic Interactions
                Predation
                Ecology and Environmental Sciences
                Ecology
                Community Ecology
                Trophic Interactions
                Predation
                Ecology and Environmental Sciences
                Habitats
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Animals
                Vertebrates
                Amniotes
                Mammals
                Rodents
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Plants
                Grasses
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Ecology
                Ecosystems
                Deserts
                Ecology and Environmental Sciences
                Ecology
                Ecosystems
                Deserts
                Ecology and Environmental Sciences
                Terrestrial Environments
                Deserts
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Animals
                Animal Types
                Wildlife
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Zoology
                Animal Types
                Wildlife
                Custom metadata
                Data regarding the exact location of this endangered species are sensitive in order to protect the species and its habitat. However, as the work has been funded by federal and state governmental agencies, data are fully available upon written request to Scott Hoffman, Biologist, Palm Springs Office, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Palm Springs, California, email scott_hoffmann@ 123456fws.gov .

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article