Reproduction and denning by San Clemente Island Foxes: Age, sex, and polygamy

Emily E. Hamblen; William F. Andelt; Thomas R. Stanley

doi:10.1894/0038-4909-64.3-4.164

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70216686

Reproduction and denning by San Clemente Island Foxes: Age, sex, and polygamy

Emily E. Hamblen·William F. Andelt·Thomas R. Stanley

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Channel Island foxes ( Urocyon littoralis ) live on six of the eight California Channel Islands, and each island is inhabited by a distinct subspecies. Until recently, four of these subspecies were listed under the Endangered Species Act as endangered. Although three of the four subspecies have been delisted, and one subspecies was downlisted to threatened, all subspecies are still vulnerable because of small population sizes and potential threats from predation and disease. Consequently, information on reproductive behavior for each subspecies, including the San Clemente Island fox ( Urocyon littoralis clementae ), is important for understanding fox population dynamics. We determined reproductive status of 28 island foxes through observations of radio collared yearlings and adults with or without juveniles between 25 February and 8 October 2009. We found a greater number of adult foxes than yearling foxes and a greater number of female foxes than male foxes observed with juveniles. Also, there was a significantly greater probability of observing adult female foxes with juveniles than yearling males with juveniles. Only 1 of 28 radio collared foxes exhibited either polygamous or “helper” behaviors. Parturition started approximately 2 months earlier than historically recorded for other Channel Island fox subspecies. Our results suggest that in future studies of reproductive success more effort should be placed on monitoring adult females than yearling males. If emergence from dens continues to occur earlier than previously recorded, the current recommended time period for trapping (20 June–31 January) might need revision to exclude January to reduce stress to pregnant females. If all foxes have similar probabilities of transmitting disease on a given contact with juveniles, our data suggest that it may be appropriate to focus more vaccination efforts on females than males and adults than yearlings because they contact juveniles more frequently.

Explore related subjects

The Southwestern Naturalist Article

Source-reported bounding extent: 32.759562025650126° to 34.109530506665884° latitude; -120.47607421874999° to -118.25958251953124° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Emily E. Hamblen, William F. Andelt, Thomas R. Stanley. 2020. Reproduction and denning by San Clemente Island Foxes: Age, sex, and polygamy. https://doi.org/10.1894/0038-4909-64.3-4.164

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2025

Serological assessment of pathogen exposure among desert bighorn sheep in southwestern Arizona

Bighorn sheep ( Ovis canadensis ) are influenced by infectious diseases. Although Mycoplasma ovipneumoniae has been the main focus of bighorn sheep managers since early 2010, other pathogens may also influence bighorn sheep populations. We sampled desert bighorn sheep ( Ovis canadensis mexicana ) captured for a study on the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge in southwestern Arizona, USA, 2001–2005, for a suite of pathogens: bluetongue (BT), epizootic hemorrhagic disease (EHD), parainfluenza 3, bovine respiratory syncytial virus, Clamydia , seven Leptospira serovars, bovine herpesvirus 1 (causative agent of infectious bovine rhinotracheitis), bovine viral diarrhea virus, and bovine respiratory syncytial virus. We recorded evidence of exposure to seven of these pathogens, with two Leptospira serovars ( hardjo and bratislava ), five strains of BT, and two strains of EHD detected. Seroprevalence rates of detected pathogens varied between 12–49%. We observed high levels of co-occurrence for EHD and BT. These results highlight that multiple pathogens may influence desert bighorn sheep populations. These data also provide historical context to pathogen exposure for a region where few such data are available.

Arizona↗

USGS2022

Use of regional breeding bird surveys to estimate bird populations in Big Thicket National Preserve

We used data collected during surveys of seven North American Breeding Bird Survey routes in eastern Texas to estimate avian populations within Big Thicket National Preserve. On only 61 of the 350 count locations located along these routes did observers monitor birds within the boundaries of this preserve. On selected routes, we recorded initial bird detections during the 3-min bird count within 1-min time intervals and within two distance classes (≤50 or >50 m). We used these data, combined with data collected using standard Breeding Bird Survey protocols during 2009–2016, to estimate detection probabilities and effective detection radii for commonly detected species. For species often detected in flocks, we estimated these parameters for group detections. From these parameters, we estimated regional densities for 60 species. Because habitat within Big Thicket National Preserve differed from habitat along surveyed routes, for each species we adjusted the projected population estimate to account for the relationship between density of detected birds and habitat descriptors from the National Land Cover database. On the basis of our estimates of regional density of each species, and accounting for differences in habitat availability, we estimated that commonly detected avian species comprises a population of 192,201 breeding birds (95% confidence interval = 144,269–340,790) within Big Thicket National Preserve.

Texas↗

USGS2022

Small-scale variation in trap placement affects arthropod capture rates on sticky traps in riparian woodlands

Arthropods are important prey for many avian taxa, particularly during the breeding season. Many studies have used sticky traps to estimate relative abundance of arthropods as avian prey, but we know little about the potential biases associated with sticky traps. We evaluated the effect of small-scale variation in trap placement on the biomass of arthropods caught on sticky traps in six riparian woodlands in southeastern Arizona. We detected differences in arthropod biomass between two height categories (1 and 4 m off the ground) for three insect orders and between two sampling locations (0 and 10 m from the center of the stream bed) for two insect orders. These differences indicate that placement of sticky traps affects arthropod capture rates and, hence, small variation in trap placement can bias investigators' ability to document spatial and temporal differences in arthropod abundance. Investigators who use sticky traps to make comparisons of arthropod abundance need to ensure that placement is consistent over time or across treatments to ensure that comparisons are not biased.

The Southwestern Naturalist↗