Advertisement

The influence of biotic and abiotic factors on banded common loon (Gavia immer) reproductive success in a remote, mountainous region of the northeastern United States

  • Valerie L. BuxtonEmail author
  • David C. Evers
  • Nina Schoch
Article

Abstract

Habitat degradation resulting from anthropogenic activities can threaten wildlife populations. Even wildlife existing in seemingly pristine areas are at risk of airborne pollutants and urban development. The common loon (Gavia immer), a top-trophic level predator in freshwater aquatic ecosystems, has previously experienced detrimental changes in reproductive success as a result of anthropogenic activities. However, long-term studies and large sample sizes are necessary to ascertain the impacts of various anthropogenic activities on this long-lived species. Using a multi-year dataset, we investigated the effects of multiple biotic and abiotic factors on the probability of adult male and female common loon hatching and fledging success. From 1998–2017, we banded individual loons, collected blood samples to assess mercury (Hg) exposure of the birds, and monitored their reproductive success. Adult female loon hatching success was negatively associated with the amount of rainfall received in a given year while fledging success was positively associated with the amount of shoreline development. Adult male loon hatching success was positively associated with the amount of shoreline development and fledging success was negatively associated with the number of other loon pairs on a lake.

Keywords

Common loon Reproductive success Mercury Development Adirondack Park Rainfall 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the many dedicated field technicians who have collected data for this study over the past 20 years. A special thanks to Gary Lee, who has been banding loons with us since 1998. Additionally, we are grateful to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the Wildlife Conservation Society’s Zoological Health Program, and Calvin College for providing in-kind support, staff, and field equipment for loon capture and sampling. We also thank the Adirondack Watershed Institute of Paul Smiths College and the Adirondack Ecological Center of SUNY ESY for aiding in data collection. This work was generously funded by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, the Wildlife Conservation Society, The Wild Center, Freed Foundation, the Raquette River Advisory Council, and numerous other private foundations and individual donors.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics

All applicable national and institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.

References

  1. Arnold (2010) Uninformative parameters and model selection using Akaike’s information criterion. J Wildl Manag 74:1175–1178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Badzinski SS, Timmermans STA (2006) Factors influencing productivity of common loons (Gavia immer) breeding on circumneutral lakes in Nova Scotia, Canada. Hydrobiologia 567:215–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burgess NM, Evers DC, Kaplan JD (2005) Mercury and other contaminants in common loons breeding in Atlantic Canada. Ecotoxicology 14:241–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Caron JA, Robinson SL (1994) Response of breeding common loons to human activity in upper Michigan. Hydrobiologia 280:431–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Castro MS, Sherwell J (2015) Effectiveness of emission controls to reduce the atmospheric concentrations of mercury. Env Sci Tec 49:14000–14007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dudgeon D, Arthington AH, Gessner MO, Kawabata Z-I, Knowler DJ, Lévêque C, Naiman RJ, Prieur-Richard A-H, Soto D, Stiassny MLJ, Sullivan CA (2006) Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 81:163–182.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S1464793105006950 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eagles-Smith CA, Wiener JG, Eckley CS, Willacker JJ, Evers DC, Marvin-DiPasquale M, Obrist D, Fleck JA, Aiken GR, Lepak JM, Jackson AK, Webster JP, Stewart AR, Davis JA, Alpers CN, Ackerman JT (2016) Mercury in western North America: a synthesis of environmental contamination, fluxes, bioaccumulation, and risk to fish and wildlife. Sci Total Environ 568:1213–1226.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.05.094 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Evers D (2018) The effects of methylmercury on wildlife: a comprehensive review and approach for interpretation. In: DellaSalla A, Goldstein MI (eds) The Encyclopedia of the Anthropocene, vol 5. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 181–194Google Scholar
  10. Evers DC, Han Y-J, Driscoll CT, Kamman NC, Goodale MW, Lambert KF, Holsen TM, Chen CY, Clair TA, Butler T (2007) Biological mercury hotspots in the northeastern United States and southeastern Canada. Bioscience 57:29–43.  https://doi.org/10.1641/B570107 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Evers DC, Kaplan JD, Meyer MW, Reaman PS, Braselton WE, Major A, Burgess N, Scheuhammer AM (1998) Geographic trend in mercury measured in common loon feathers and blood. Environ Toxicol Chem 17:173–183.  https://doi.org/10.1897/1551-5028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Evers DC, Savoy LJ, Desorbo CR, Yates DE, Hanson W, Taylor KM, Siegel LS, Cooley Jr JH, Bank MS, Major A, Munney K, Mower BF, Vogel HS, Schoch N, Pokras M, Goodale MW, Fair J (2008) Adverse effects from environmental mercury loads on breeding common loons. Ecotoxicology 17:69–81.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10646-007-0168-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fevold BM, Meyer MW, Rasmussen PW, Temple SA (2003) Bioaccumulation patterns and temporal trends of mercury exposure in Wisconsin common loons. Ecotoxicology 12:83–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Field M, Gehring TM (2015) Physical, human disturbance, and regional social factors influencing common loon occupancy and reproductive success. Condor 117:589–597.  https://doi.org/10.1650/CONDOR-14-195.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gerson JR, Driscoll CT (2016) Is mercury in a remote forested watershed of the Adirondack Mountains responding to recent decreases in emissions? Env Sci Tech 50:10943–10950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Glennon MJ, Kretser HE (2013) Size of the ecological effect zone associated with exurban development in the Adirondack Park, NY. Landsc Urban Plan 112:10–17.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.12.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Guilbert J, Betts AK, Rizzo DM, Beckage B, Bomblies A (2015) Characterization of increased persistence and intensity of precipitation in the northeastern United States. Geophys Res Lett 42:1888–1893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hake M, Dahlgren T, Åhlund M, Lindberg P, Eriksson MOG (2005) The impact of water level fluctuation on the breeding success of the Black-throated Diver Gavia arctica in South-west Sweden. Ornis Fenn 82:1–12Google Scholar
  19. Hammond CAM, Mitchell MS, Bissell GN (2012) Territory occupancy by common loons in response to disturbance, habitat, and intraspecific relationships. J Wildl Manag 76:645–651.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.298 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heimberger M, Euler D, Barr J (1983) The impact of cottage development on common loon reproductive success in central Ontario. Wilson Bull 95:431–439Google Scholar
  21. Jukkala G, Piper W (2015) Common loon parents defend chicks according to both value and vulnerability. J Avian Biol 46:551–558.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jav.00648 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Larkin AM, Beier CM (2014) Wilderness perceptions versus management reality in the Adirondack Park, USA. Landsc Urban Plan 130:1–13.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.06.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mao H, Ye Z, Driscoll C (2017) Meteorological effects on Hg wet deposition in a forested site in the Adirondack region of New York during 2000–2015. Atmos Environ 168:90–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McCarthy KP, DeStefano S (2011) Effects of spatial disturbance on common loon nest site selection and territory success. J Wildl Manag 75:289–296.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.50 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McCarthy KP, DeStefano S, Laskowski T (2010) Bald eagle predation on common loon egg. J Raptor Res 44:249–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Centers for Environmental Information. https://ncdc.noaa.gov. Accessed 9 Sep 2018
  27. Paruk J (1999) Territorial takeover in common loons (Gavia immer). The Wilson Bulletin 111:116–117Google Scholar
  28. Piper WH, Tischler KB, Klich M (2000) Territory acquisition in loons: the importance of take-over. Anim Behav 59:385–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Piper WH, Walcott C, Mager JN, Spilkner FJ (2008) Fatal battles in common loons: a preliminary analysis. Anim Behav 75:1109–1115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Radomski PJ, Carlson K, Woizeschke K (2014) Common loon (Gavia immer) nesting habitat models for north-central Minnesota lakes. Waterbirds 37:102–117.  https://doi.org/10.1675/063.037.sp113 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Saalfield ST, Conway WC (2010) Local and landscape habitat selection of nesting bald eagles in east Texas. Southeast Naturalist 9:731–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schoch N, Glennon MJ, Evers DC, Duron M, Jackson AK, Driscoll CT, Ozard JW, Sauer AK (2014) The impact of mercury exposure on the common loon (Gavia immer) population in the Adirondack Park, New York, USA. Waterbirds 37(sp1):133–146.  https://doi.org/10.1675/063.037.sp112
  33. Schoch N, Yang Y, Yanai RD, Buxton VL, Evers DC, Driscoll DC (in press) Spatial patterns and temporal trends in mercury concentrations in common loons (Gavia immer) from 1998 to 2016 in New York’s Adirondack Park: Has this top predator benefited from mercury emission controls? EcotoxicologyGoogle Scholar
  34. Schoof JT, Robeson SM (2016) Projecting changes in regional temperature and precipitation extremes in the United States. Weather Clim Extremes 11:28–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Scheuhammer AM, Atchison CM, Wong AHK, Evers DC (1998) Mercury exposure in breeding common loons (Gavia immer) in central Ontario, Canada. Environ Toxicol Chem 17:191–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Shanley JB, Kamman NC, Clair TA, Chalmers A (2005) Physical controls on total and methylmercury concentrations in streams and lakes of the northeastern USA. Ecotoxicology 14:125–134.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10646-004-6264-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Spilman CA, Schoch N, Porter WF, Glennon MJ (2014) The effects of lakeshore development on common loon (Gavia immer) productivity in the Adirondack Park, New York, USA. Waterbirds 37:94–101.  https://doi.org/10.1675/063.037.sp112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Thomson VE, Huelsman K, Ong D (2018) Coal-fired power plant regulatory rollbacks in the United States: implications for local and regional public health. Energy Policy 123:558–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tuttle CM, Heintzelman MD (2013) The value of forever wild: an economic analysis of land use in the adirondacks. Agric Resour Econ Rev 42:119–138.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S1068280500007656 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ullrich SM, Tanton TW, Abdrashitova SA (2001) Mercury in the aquatic environment: a review of factors affecting methylation. Crit Rev Env Sci Tech 31:241–293Google Scholar
  41. Vliestra LS, Paruk JD (1997) Predation attempts on common loons, Gavia immer, and the significance of shoreline nesting. Can F-Nat 111:656–657.Google Scholar
  42. Watts BD, Mojica EK, Pazton BJ (2015) Seasonal variation in space use by nonbreeding bald eagles within the upper Chesapeake bay. J Raptor Res 49:250–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Weiss-Penzias PS, Gay DA, Brigham ME, Parsons MT, Gustin MS, ter Schure A (2016) Trends in mercury wet deposition and mercury air concentrations across the U.S. and Canada. Sci Total Environ 568:546–556.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.01.061 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wilcove DS, Rothstein D, Dubow J, Phillips A, Losos E (1998) Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. Bioscience 48:607–615.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1313420 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Windels SK, Beever EA, Paruk JD, Brinkman AR, Fox JE, MacNulty CC, Evers DC, Siegel LS, Osborbe DC (2013) Effects of water-level management on nesting success of common loons. J Wildl Manag 77:1626–1638.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.608 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Witt EL, Kolka RK, Nater EA, Wickman TR (2009) Influence of the forest canopy on total and methyl mercury deposition in the boreal forest. Water Air Soil Pollut 199:3–11.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-008-9854-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wolfe MF, Atkeson T, Bowerman W, Burger K, Evers DC, Murrary MW, Zillioux E (2007) Wildlife indicators. In: Harris R, Murray MW, Saltman T, Mason R, Krabbenhoft DP, Reash R (eds) Ecosystem responses to mercury contamination: indicators of change. CRC Press, New York, pp 546–556Google Scholar
  48. Zhang Y, Jacob DJ, Horowitz HM, Chen L, Amos HM, Krabbenhoft DP, Slemr F, St. Louis VL, Sunderland EM (2016) Observed decrease in atmospheric mercury explained by global decline in anthropogenic emissions. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113:526–531.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516312113 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Adirondack Center for Loon ConservationRay BrookUSA
  2. 2.Biodiversity Research InstitutePortlandUSA

Personalised recommendations