Does maternal oviposition site influence offspring dispersal to suitable habitat?
- 356 Downloads
Orientation and dispersal to suitable habitat affects fitness in many animals, but the factors that govern these behaviors are poorly understood. In many turtle species, hatchlings must orient and disperse to suitable aquatic habitat immediately after emergence from subterranean nests. Thus, the location of nest sites relative to aquatic habitats ideally should be associated with the direction of hatchling dispersal. At our study site, painted turtles (Chrysemys picta) nest to the west (on an island) and east (on the mainland) of a wetland, which determines the direction that hatchlings must travel to reach suitable aquatic habitat. To determine if hatchling orientation is intrinsically influenced by the location where their mothers nest, we employed a two-part cross-fostering experiment in the field, whereby half the eggs laid in mainland nests were swapped with half the eggs laid in island nests. Moreover, because C. picta hatchlings overwinter inside their nests, we performed a second cross-fostering experiment to fully decouple the effects of (1) the maternally chosen nest location, (2) the embryonic developmental location, and (3) the overwinter location. We released hatchlings into a circular arena in the field and found that turtles generally dispersed in a westerly direction, regardless of the maternally chosen nest location and independent of the locations of embryonic development and overwintering. Although this westerly direction was towards suitable aquatic habitat, we could not distinguish whether naïve hatchling turtles (i) use environmental cues/stimuli to orient their movement, or (ii) have an intrinsic bias to orient west in the absence of stimuli. Nevertheless, these findings suggest that the orientation behavior of naïve hatchling turtles during terrestrial dispersal is not dependent upon the location of maternally-chosen nest sites.
KeywordsCross-fostering experiment Maternal effects Nest-site selection Orientation Turtle
We thank R. Alverio, A. Durso, J. Maciel, A. Sethuraman, J. Strickland, and J. Ward for assistance in the field and laboratory. We are grateful to E. Britton and the staff with the Army Corps of Engineers for making this research possible. Thanks to G. Cordero, F. Janzen, J. Refsnider, A. Sethuraman, and R. Telemeco for insightful comments on earlier drafts of this paper. This research was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at Iowa State University (protocol # 12-03-5570-J), the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (permit # 0A022), and the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (permit # NH10.0073). This work was supported by the National Science Foundation (LTREB DEB-0640932 to F.J. Janzen).
- Able K (1991) Common themes and variations in animal orientation systems. Am Zool 31:157–167Google Scholar
- Bowen BW, Karl SA (1996) Population structure, phylogeography, and molecular evolution. In: Lutz PL, Musick JA (eds) The biology of sea turtles. CRC, Boca Raton, pp 29–50Google Scholar
- Bowen BW, Bass AL, Chow SM, Bostrom M, Bjorndal KA, Bolten AB, Okuyama T, Bolker BM, Epperly S, Lacasella E, Shaver D, Dodd M, Hopkins-Murphy SR, Musick JA, Swingle M, Rankin-Baransky K, Teas W, Witzell WN, Dutton PH (2004) Natal homing in juvenile loggerhead turtles (Caretta caretta). Mol Ecol 13:3697–3808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Clobert J, Danchi E, Dhondt AA, Nichols JD (2001) Dispersal. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Ernst CH (1970) Homing ability in the painted turtle, Chrysemys picta (Schneider). Herpetologica 26:339–403Google Scholar
- Lohmann KJ, Witherington BE, Lohmann CMF, Salmon M (1997) Orientation, navigation and natal beach homing in sea turtles. In: Lutz PL, Musick JA (eds) The biology of sea turtles. CRC, Boca Raton, pp 107–135Google Scholar
- McNeil JA, Herman TB, Standing KL (2000) Movement of hatchling Blanding’s turtles (Emydoidea blandingii) in Nova Scotia in response to proximity to open water: a manipulative experiment. Chel Conserv Biol 3:611–617Google Scholar
- Resetarits WJ (1996) Oviposition site choice and life history evolution. Am Zool 36:205–215Google Scholar
- SAS Institute Inc. (1997) SAS/STAT user’s guide. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute, Inc., CaryGoogle Scholar
- Steen DA, Gibbs JP, Buhlman KA, Carr JL, Compton BW, Congdon JD, Doody JS, Godwin JC, Holcomb KL, Jackson DR, Janzen FJ, Johnson G, Jones MT, Lamer JT, Langen TA, Plummer MV, Rowe JW, Saumure RA, Tucker JK, Wilson DS (2012) Terrestrial habitat requirements of nesting freshwater turtles. Biol Conserv 151:121–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Valenzuela N (2001) Genetic differentiation among nesting beaching in the highly migratory giant river turtle (Podocnemis expansa) from Colombia. Herpetologica 57:48–57Google Scholar
- Valenzuela N, Janzen FJ (2001) Nest-site philopatry and the evolution of temperature-dependent sex determination. Evol Ecol Res 3:779–794Google Scholar
- Van De Pol M, Bakker T, Saaltink DJ, Verhulst S (2006) Rearing conditions determine offspring survival independent of egg quality: a cross-foster experiment with oystercatchers Haematopus ostralegus. Ibis 148:203–210Google Scholar
- Wilbur HM, Morin PJ (1988) Life history evolution in turtles. In: Gans C, Huey RB (eds) Biology of the Reptilia, vol 16. Alan R. Liss, New York, pp 387–439Google Scholar