Exposure to risk factors experienced during migration is not associated with recent Vermivora warbler population trends

Gunnar R. Kramer, David E Andersen, David A. Buehler, Petra B. Wood, Sean M. Peterson, Justin A. Lehman, Kyle R. Aldinger, Lesley P. Bulluck, Sergio Harding, John A. Jones, John P. Loegering, Curtis Smalling, Rachel Vallender, Henry M. Streby

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Context: Understanding the factors limiting populations of animals is critical for effective conservation. Determining which factors limit populations of migratory species can be especially challenging because of their reliance on multiple, often geographically distant regions during their annual cycles. Objectives: We investigated whether distribution-wide variation in recent breeding population trends was more strongly associated with exposure to risk factors experienced during migration (i.e., natural and anthropogenic threats often associated with increased mortality or carry-over effects) or factors associated with breeding and nonbreeding areas in golden-winged warblers (Vermivora chrysoptera) and blue-winged warblers (V. cyanoptera), two Nearctic-Neotropical migrants experiencing regionally variable population trends. Methods: We used geolocator data from 85 Vermivora warblers (n = 90 geolocator tracks) tracked from North American breeding locations and Central American nonbreeding locations from 2013 to 2017 to determine variation in space use among populations. We assessed whether differences in space use among populations of Vermivora warblers during migration were associated with exposure to migration risk-factors and whether increased relative exposure to migration risk factors was associated with population declines at regional and subregional scales. Results: Regional and subregional populations of Vermivora warblers exhibited variation in space use and exposure to anthropogenic and natural risk-factors. However, we found no evidence that recent variation in population trends of Vermivora warblers was associated with risk-factors experienced by different populations during migration. Instead, factors associated with land cover-types in breeding and nonbreeding areas were more strongly associated with recent population trends. Conclusions: Understanding how populations of migratory birds are affected by factors experienced during migration is critical for their conservation. We did not find evidence that variation in exposure to migration risk-factors is associated with recent regional or subregional variation in Vermivora warbler population trends. Consequently, our results suggest that efforts to reverse ongoing population declines of Vermivora warblers may be more effective if directed toward conservation actions targeting limiting factors within the breeding and nonbreeding periods versus those directed at conditions encountered during migration. We caution that geographic variation in projected land-use change may differentially affect areas used by different populations of Vermivora warblers during migration, posing a potential threat to these species in the future.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2357-2380
Number of pages24
JournalLandscape Ecology
Volume38
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2023

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
We thank M. Barber, M. Barnes, J. Bell, J. Chancey, L. Coe-Starr, C. Colley, E. Davis, J. Dodson, K. Eckert, R. Eckstein, R. Fenty, C. Fiss, M. Gallagher, B. Gray, A. Grupenhoff, C. Henderson, L. Hendrixson, N. Henke, E. Hess, L. Hoehn, J. Kawlewski, B. Keinath, J. Koberdahl, L. Loegering, S. McLaughlin, S. Midthune, L. Mielke, D. Miles, M. Morin, N. Moy, J. Nelson, A. Pesano, S. Prevost, J. Reubesam, M. Schilling, N. Seeger, L. Schofield, A. Tomcho, S. Wallace, J. Warmbold, J. Wessels, A. Worm, B. Yliniemi, and others for assistance in the field. We are especially grateful to N. Hill, K. Maley, D. McNeil, R. Pagel, P. Rodrigues, K. Stein, and C. Ziegler for their commitment to the project, and to W. Ford, W. Brininger, A. Hewitt, D. King, J. Larkin, and H. Saloka for providing logistical support. We thank J. Bossenbroek, J. Luscier, and two anonymous reviewers for comments improving earlier drafts of this manuscript. Data used in this manuscript were gathered from publicly available repositories and therefore required no permits. Funding for this project was provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Geological Survey through Research Work Order 98 at the U.S. Geological Survey, Minnesota Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, and by the National Science Foundation through Postdoctoral Research Fellowship 1202729. Additional funding was provided by the University of Toledo College of Graduate Studies through a Graduate Dean’s Fellowship, the Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources and the Grace Jones Richardson Trust. None of our funders had any influence on the content of the submitted or published manuscript, and only the U.S. Geological Survey required approval of the final manuscript prior to publication as required in their Fundamental Sciences Practices protocols. Use of trade names does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey or any other institutions affiliated with this study. Code and metadata necessary to recreate these analyses are available at https://hdl.handle.net/11299/250610 (Kramer et al. 2023 ).

Funding Information:
We thank M. Barber, M. Barnes, J. Bell, J. Chancey, L. Coe-Starr, C. Colley, E. Davis, J. Dodson, K. Eckert, R. Eckstein, R. Fenty, C. Fiss, M. Gallagher, B. Gray, A. Grupenhoff, C. Henderson, L. Hendrixson, N. Henke, E. Hess, L. Hoehn, J. Kawlewski, B. Keinath, J. Koberdahl, L. Loegering, S. McLaughlin, S. Midthune, L. Mielke, D. Miles, M. Morin, N. Moy, J. Nelson, A. Pesano, S. Prevost, J. Reubesam, M. Schilling, N. Seeger, L. Schofield, A. Tomcho, S. Wallace, J. Warmbold, J. Wessels, A. Worm, B. Yliniemi, and others for assistance in the field. We are especially grateful to N. Hill, K. Maley, D. McNeil, R. Pagel, P. Rodrigues, K. Stein, and C. Ziegler for their commitment to the project, and to W. Ford, W. Brininger, A. Hewitt, D. King, J. Larkin, and H. Saloka for providing logistical support. We thank J. Bossenbroek, J. Luscier, and two anonymous reviewers for comments improving earlier drafts of this manuscript. Data used in this manuscript were gathered from publicly available repositories and therefore required no permits. Funding for this project was provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Geological Survey through Research Work Order 98 at the U.S. Geological Survey, Minnesota Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, and by the National Science Foundation through Postdoctoral Research Fellowship 1202729. Additional funding was provided by the University of Toledo College of Graduate Studies through a Graduate Dean’s Fellowship, the Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources and the Grace Jones Richardson Trust. None of our funders had any influence on the content of the submitted or published manuscript, and only the U.S. Geological Survey required approval of the final manuscript prior to publication as required in their Fundamental Sciences Practices protocols. Use of trade names does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey or any other institutions affiliated with this study. Code and metadata necessary to recreate these analyses are available at https://hdl.handle.net/11299/250610 (Kramer et al. ).

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.

Keywords

  • Annual cycle
  • Bird migration
  • Geolocators
  • Limiting factors

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Exposure to risk factors experienced during migration is not associated with recent Vermivora warbler population trends'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this