IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v24y2013i6p1348-1355..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why woodcock commute: testing the foraging-benefit and predation-risk hypotheses

Author

Listed:
  • Roger J. Masse
  • Brian C. Tefft
  • José A. Amador
  • Scott R. McWilliams

Abstract

Moving between sites is a common behavior employed by prey in order to balance trade-offs associated with acquiring resources and avoiding predators. At dusk during summer, American woodcock frequently fly from diurnal coverts in forests to nocturnal roost fields. We tested 2 hypotheses, the foraging-benefit hypothesis and predation-risk hypothesis, to determine the benefit gained by woodcock that commute. We used telemetry to identify the diurnal coverts and nocturnal roost fields used by woodcock in Rhode Island, USA, during 2 summers. At each site, we measured the availability and diversity of woodcock prey, soil properties, and mammalian predator activity. Earthworms were 3–4 times more abundant at diurnal coverts than nocturnal roost fields. The richness and diversity of woodcock foods was greater at diurnal coverts during 2011 but similar between sites during 2012. Soil moisture content was about 1.5 times greater at diurnal coverts, whereas other soil properties were similar between sites. At night, mammalian predators visited diurnal coverts more frequently than nocturnal roost fields for 73% of the woodcock we monitored during 2011. During 2012, the number of days until initial predator visit was 1.8 times greater at nocturnal roost fields. Our results provide the first empirical support for the predation-risk hypothesis. During summer, woodcock fly from diurnal coverts to nocturnal roost fields to avoid predators and not to feed.

Suggested Citation

  • Roger J. Masse & Brian C. Tefft & José A. Amador & Scott R. McWilliams, 2013. "Why woodcock commute: testing the foraging-benefit and predation-risk hypotheses," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 24(6), pages 1348-1355.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:24:y:2013:i:6:p:1348-1355.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/art073
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:24:y:2013:i:6:p:1348-1355.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.