Does culling predatory gulls enhance the productivity of breeding common terns?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Summary Large gulls Larus spp. are voracious predators of eggs and chicks of other colonial birds and may threaten rare or endangered species. In this study we tested the effectiveness of removing individual predatory gulls as a management technique for enhancing the productivity of common terns Sterna hirundo nesting in Carleton, Québec, Canada. The productivity and fate of common tern chicks were assessed by following ringed individuals from hatching to fledging during three breeding seasons (1993–95). Concurrently, predation and consumption rates of all predatory gulls were measured before and after the culling started. The culling programme was conducted serially in 1994 by removing the most important predator first until all predators were removed. The rate of chick disappearance was lower and the life span of tern broods was higher in 1994 when the culling was conducted, compared with 1993 and 1995. As a result, the productivity of the tern colony was zero in 1993 and 1995, but positive in 1994 (0·33 chicks pair −1 ). Measurements of chick mass in 1993 and 1994 showed that growth was normal, indicating that poor feeding conditions or disease were not the cause of chick disappearance. Average predation rates for 1993 (23·3 chicks day −1 ) and 1995 (14·8 chicks day −1 ) equated to 61% and 66% of available chicks being taken by gulls, respectively. The predation rate before the culling started in 1994 was similar to 1993 and 1995, with 15·9 chicks day −1 , but dropped to 5·1 chicks day −1 after the first gull was shot, and decreased to zero once all predatory gulls were removed. Only five individual predatory gulls were identified during the cull. Predation rates differed markedly amongst specialist predatory gulls, with one individual accounting for 85% of all successful attempts made during the baseline period. Once that gull was removed, the remaining predators increased their predation rate in a manner suggestive of a despotic system. Observations conducted in 1995 showed that the predation rate was almost zero at the beginning of the season but increased dramatically later in the summer, with two gulls together making about 60% of the captures. It is concluded that culling predatory gulls can be an effective management tool to enhance productivity in sensitive or endangered species. However, our data suggest that such culling would need to be repeated each year in order to protect a sensitive species over consecutive years.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».