Linking Climate and Habitat to Nutrition and Reproduction in Moose

Transcription

1 Linking Climate and Habitat to Nutrition and Reproduction in Moose Brett Jesmer1,2, Jacob Goheen1, Kevin Monteith1,2, and Matthew Kauffman1,3 1Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming 2Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Wyoming 3USGS, Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Wyoming

2 Density-Dependence Population Size Adult Survival Juvenile Survival c Adapted from Gaillard et al. 1997

3 Density-Dependence and Life History K Density adult survival pregnancy recruitment nutritional condition, habitat condition Eberhardt 2002, Keech et al. 2000, Boertje et al Time

4 Density-Dependence and Density-Independence Recruitment Drought K Density adult survival pregnancy recruitment nutritional condition, habitat condition Recruitment Time Drought Adapted from Bowyer et al. 2000

5 Hypotheses and Predictions Density-Dependence Hypothesis: Populations with increasing calf recruitment are in good nutritional condition (i.e., below carrying capacity). Recruitment Trend Nutritional Condition Boertje et al. 2007

6 Hypotheses and Predictions Nutritional Buffer Hypothesis: For populations closer to nutritional carrying capacity, recruitment is sensitive to climatic variation. Population Size Time Nutritional Carrying Capacity McCullough 1999, Monteith et al. 2015

7 Jackson Sublette Uinta Bighorn Snowy Range North Park

8 Uinta Sublette Bighorn stable slight decline stable Snowy Range North Park Jackson Calf:Cow Ratio Calf:Cow Ratio stable/decline historic decline, current increase historic decline, current increase Year Year 2015 Year

9 Recruitment

10 n=554 Dead Live Dead Nutrition n=435 transects n=7660 plants Live LD index < 0 LD index > 0 Habitat

11 Climate Low High

12 Climate

13 Support for the Density-Dependence Hypothesis Salix boothii Kidney Fat Index (male) Salix planifolia Calf:Cow Trend Kidney Fat Index (male) Live-Dead Index (cm)

14 Support for the Nutritional Buffer Hypothesis Stable Populations Declining Populations Calf:Cow Ratio (detrended) P=0.03 Hot, Dry poor growing conditions PCA1 t-1 Cool, Wet good growing conditions Hot, Dry poor growing conditions PCA1 t-1 Cool, Wet good growing conditions

15 Support for the Nutritional Buffer Hypothesis ⁰ Declining Populations Declining Populations Calf:Cow Ratio (detrended) P<0.01 P<0.01 Growing Season Temp ( o C) t-1 Growing Season Precip (mm) t-1

16 Management Applications Aldo Leopold. Game Management [wildlife] management boiled down to its essentials is the control of population density and is essential to successful practice.

17 Management Applications K Density population A vs. population B Time

18 Management Applications Calf:Cow Trend Kidney Fat Index (male) Population Size Time Nutritional Carrying Capacity

19 Partners and Funding WGFD Gary Fralick Scott Smith Aly Courtemanch Dean Clause Mark Zornes Jeff Short Tim Thomas Dan Theile Doug Brimeyer Tim Fuchs Terry Creekmore Will Shultz Ben Wise Jill Randall Bert Jellison Travis Cundy Steve Kilpatrick Bob Lanka Grant Frost And Many Others! CPW Jeff Yost Josh Dilley Jeremiah Rummel Shannon Schwab Darby Finley USFS Meg McElveen (MRNF) Kerry Murphy (BTNF) Joe McFarlane (WCUNF) Luke Decker (BNF) USFWS Ann Timberman (AWR) Lizzy Berkley (AWR) Eric Cole (NER) NPS Sarah Dewey Lab Mates Jerod Merkle Brendan Oates Contributors Wyoming Game and Fish Department WY NASA Space Grant Consortium UWYO- NPS Research Center Colorado Parks and Wildlife NSF-DDIG

20 Questions?

21 Calf Recruitment Large Decline Mod. Decline Stable Monteith et al. 2015

22 Additional Pieces of the Puzzle (Cont d Work) Quantity (winter) vs. Quality (winter & summer) Live Dead LD index

23 Additional Pieces of the Puzzle (Cont d Work) Pregnancy Nutritional Condition (% body fat) P=0.003, n=48