hurdles for turtles: modeling nesting suitability of
Post on 04-Oct-2021
2 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
HURDLES FOR TURTLES: MODELING THE NESTING SUITABILITY OF LOGGERHEAD SEA TURTLES (CARETTA CARETTA) IN NORTH
CAROLINA (2005-2014)
Alyssa L. Randall Department of Geography and GeologyUniversity of North Carolina Wilmington
Advisor: Dr. Joanne Halls
Nesting ProcessFirst Emergence Body Pit Dig Egg Chamber
Oviposition Camouflage Return Crawl
ww
w.c
cctu
rtle.
org
ww
w.S
eych
elle
s-tu
rtles
.blo
gspo
t.com
ww
w.n
mlc
.org
Introduction
Nesting Biology
• Nesting season: May-August
• Nest 2-4 years (not every year)
• Lay 3-6 clutches per season (12-14 days apart)
• Roughly 120 eggs per clutch
• Nests located between high water line and toe of dune
Introduction
False Crawl
www.unc.edu
Critical Terrestrial Loggerhead Habitats in N.C.• NW Atlantic
Distinct Population Segment
• Northern Recovery Unit
• Designated Threatened
• 154.6 Km (96.1 miles) of critical habitat
• No management plans have been implemented at this time
Introduction
Project Significance• Very little work has been done to
merge the study of sea turtle conservation with Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
• Very few studies have used a combination of multiple variables over a large geographic area
• Results may have important implications for the designations of critical habitats and the future management of loggerhead rookeries
Introduction
(Lopez et al., 2015)
Research Questions1. Which transects within the study area are the
most prevalent for nesting?
2. What independent variables have the most statistically significant relationship with nesting locations?
3. Which statistical technique is the most useful at explaining nesting distribution?
4. Can an accurate nesting suitability predictive model be generated from independent variables?
Introduction
Independent Variables
Environmental• Elevation• Slope• Aspect• Distance to inlets• Beach width• Proximity to the Gulf
Stream (SST)
Human• Distance to hardened
structures• Beach nourishment• Housing density• Population density
Introduction
Environmental InfluencesPreference for:
• Wider (> 8.5m) beaches (Garmestani et al., 2000)
• Steeper slopes (Provancha & Erhart, 1987)
• Higher elevations (Wood & Bjorndal, 2000)
• Average sea-surface temperatures between 26°C -29°C (Coles & Musick, 2000)
Introduction
ww
w.m
arin
as.c
om
Human InfluencesPreference for:
• Low levels of artificial light (Mazor et al., 2015)
• Presence of tall buildings or dunes (Salmon et al., 1995)
• Lack of coastal armoring (Witherington et al., 2011)
• Un-nourished beaches (Long et al., 2011)
Introduction
Study Area• 515 Km (320 miles) of
potential nesting habitat
• 25 beaches
• Monitored by state and local organizations
• No monitoring at Brown’s Island (Onslow County)
Introduction
Data Collection, Preparation and Processing1. Created 81 beach transect polygons
• Shorelines (2004, 2009, 2012)• Digitize dune line • Digitize transect boundaries
2. Digitize oceanfront houses3. Hard structures – NCDCM4. Calculate beach width5. Import nest and false crawls
(2005-2014)
Methodology
Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR)Methodology
• Full coverage: 2005, 2010, 2013
• Used to derive average elevation, slope, and aspect
• Ability to quickly highlight small elevational differences across the coastal landscape (Yamamota et al., 2012)
Night-time SST and Proximity to the Gulf Stream
• Query to extract the areas of water within 26°C - 29°C (May, June, July, August)
• Create polygons for these boundaries
• Calculate distance from each beach polygon to the preferred temperature polygons
Methodology
Distance to Structures and InletsCategories Inlets
1 5,000 m from inlet
2 10,000 m from inlet
3 > 10,000 m from inlet
Categories Structures
1 0
2 1-2
3 3-5
4 6-8
5 > 9
Methodology
Housing and Population DensitiesMethodology
Inverse Distance Weighted Interpolation Seasonal Housing (2010)
Beach Nourishment
• Shoreline protection and emergency beach nourishment events
• 2003-2014 to account for the gradual return of the berm to its natural state
• Comparison of the number of nests and false crawls to the occurrence of events and post-events
Methodology
http://beachnourishment.wcu.edu/
Statistical AnalysesMethodology
Negative Binomial Distribution (NBD)
in SAS
Identify significant independent
variables
Use significant variables as input for
GWR model
Select significant variables for
regions; run GWR
Final nesting predictions
Yearly nesting/false crawl trends
Results
• Fluctuations in nest counts corresponded with the female nesting interval of two to four years
• Most developed beaches consistently see more false crawls than nests• Used to determine low, average, and high nesting years
Real-time Kinematic Elevation DataField work
SiteBeach Average Difference
(m)1 NTS 0.752 SFC 0.63 TSB N/A4 NWB -0.165 SWB 0.516 MBI 0.037 EBHI -1.978 SBHI N/A
Results
• Compared 2014 RTK elevations with 2013 LiDAR elevations
• RTK data reflected elevation patterns found in the LiDAR data
• RTK beneficial for capturing the nearshore environment when LiDAR data is unavailable
Negative Binomial Distribution Model
Positive RelationshipIndividual Variables Coupled Variables
Elevation Structure Category & Geographic RegionHouse Density & Slope
Structure Category & Inlet CategoryInverse RelationshipIndividual Variables Coupled Variables
Hard Structures House Density & ElevationNourishment Elevation & Geographic Region
Width & Geographic Region
log(𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛) = −1.82201 − 0.97328 ∗ 𝑆𝑆 + 0.295318 ∗ 𝑆𝑆 ∗ 𝐺𝐺 + 0.061339 ∗ 𝑆𝑆 ∗
𝐼𝐼 + 0.075497 ∗ 𝐺𝐺 ∗ 𝑌𝑌 + 0.4714 ∗ 𝐸𝐸 − 0.01704 ∗ 𝐻𝐻 ∗ 𝐸𝐸 − 0.12336 ∗ 𝐺𝐺 ∗ 𝐸𝐸 + 0.006527 ∗ 𝐻𝐻 ∗
𝑃𝑃 + 0.024062 ∗ 𝑆𝑆 ∗ 𝐼𝐼 − 0.00324 ∗ 𝐺𝐺 ∗ 𝑊𝑊 − 0.23065 ∗ 𝑁𝑁
Where: E = Elevation S = Structure Category P = Slope G = Geographic Category Y = Year Category (1 = low nesting, 2 = medium nesting, 3 = high nesting)
I = Inlet Category N = Nourishment
H = House Density W = Width
Results
Geographically Weighted Regression Model
Geographic Regions
Variables 1 2 3 4 5Structure Category 0.04159 0.52711 0.37088 0.65236 0.68728Elevation 0.85881 0.24426 0.42989 0.55894 0.86017House Density & Elevation 0.20506 0.30431 0.44286 0.58119 0.097House Density & Slope 0.53558 0.08025 0.02098 0.65224 0.76533Structure Category & Inlet Category 0.37746 0.70042 0.66109 0.6392 0.56445Slope & Inlet Category 0.72128 0.39419 0.41802 0.14075 0.59414Width 0.16035 0.05575 0.00172 0.63766 0.80199
Region Most Significant Combination of Variables R2 1 Elevation & House Density & Slope & Inlet Category 0.750012 Structure Category & Inlet Category 0.700423 Structure Category & Inlet Category 0.661094 House Density & Slope & Structure Category 0.805385 Elevation & Width 0.83459
Results
Low nesting years (2007, 2009, 2014)
GWR model performed better
Average nesting years(2005, 2006, 2008)
GWR model performed better
High nesting years (2010, 2011, 2012, 2013)
Both models had some difficulty
Results
Final Prediction of Nesting DensitiesResults
Elevation, House Density, Slope, Inlets
Structures, Inlets
Structures, Inlets
House Density, Slope,
StructuresElevation,
Width
Discussion1. Which transects within the study area are the most prevalent for
nesting?Areas of Cape Hatteras, Cape Lookout, Topsail Island, Bald Head Island, Caswell Beach, and Oak Island
2. What independent variables have the most statistically significant relationship with nesting locations?
Distance to structures, nourishment, elevation
3. Which statistical technique is the most useful at explaining nesting distribution?
Geographically Weighted Regression by regions was the most useful
4. Can an accurate nesting suitability predictive model be generated from independent variables?
Yes. Between 66-83% or nesting variance was explained for geographic regions
Discussion
Contributions• Possible to develop predictive geographic model that covers a
large area
• Similar findings: higher elevations favorable (Wood & Bjorndal, 2000), width is significant (Garmestani et al., 2000), hard structures can affect nesting (Witherington et al., 2011), nourishment can deter nesting (Brock et al., 2009)
• Use of LiDAR highly recommended for future studies
• Different factors found significant in the distinct regions
• Using the NBD and GWR model in conjunction, by geographic region, is the most successful method for modeling nesting trends (2005-2014)
Discussion
Recommendations • Accurate and consistent nesting data
• Improved GPS technology for recording nest/false crawl sites
• Access to dredging/nourishment final reports
Discussion
ww
w.w
itn.c
om
top related