Strategic nest site selection in one of the world's largest loggerhead turtle nesting colonies, on Maio Island, Cabo Verde
JUAN PAT I N O-MARTINEZ,LEN O DOS PASSOS,RAQUEL AMADOR,ARNAU TEI XIDOR S ERG I O CARDOSO,ADOLFO MARCO,FRA NZISKA KOE N E N
AMANDA DUTRA,CHRIST O PH E E IZAGUIRRE,ELI SA G. DIERI CKX MAN J U LA TIWARI,TAMÁS S ZÉK E L Y and ROCÍO MORE N O
Abstract For species without parental care, such as sea tur- tles, nest site selection is particularly important for embryo development, hatchling survival and, ultimately, reproduc- tive success. We conducted an 8-year (2012–2019) capture– mark–recapture study of the re-nesting behaviour of loggerhead turtles Caretta caretta to identify both inter- and intra-beach patterns of nest site selection. Our study site, Maio Island in the archipelago of Cabo Verde, hosts one of the largest loggerhead turtle nesting colonies globally. Of 1,060 females analysed, 77% laid repeated clutches within 15 km of their previous nesting sites both between and within nesting seasons. This site fidelity was particularly high (64–71%) for turtles nesting on the east coast of Maio Island. In two areas of the island (north-west and south- east) individual nesting zone consistency was extremely low (10–25%). In all cases extra-zone re-nesting events mainly occurred on the east coast. We also found that females avoided re-nesting near the shoreline, which is par- ticularly relevant in the context of rising sea levels. Overall, loggerhead turtles nesting in Maio Island are philopatric but are using a bet-edging strategy to distribute nests amongst several beaches, choosing the safest area within each beach to maximize their reproductive success. This study highlights the priority sites for protection onMaio Island and could help to optimize capture–mark–recapture programmes. The data reveal the potential for adaptive responses to projected sea level rises.
JUAN PATINO-MARTINEZ (Corresponding author,
orcid.org/0000-0002-7136-
4616,
juan.patino@
fmb-maio.org), LENO DOS PASSOS,RAQUEL AMADOR*, ARNAU TEIXIDOR,SERGIO CARDOSO,FRANZISKA KOENEN,AMANDA DUTRA,ELISA G. DIERICKX,TAMÁS SZÉKELY† and ROCÍO MORENO Maio Biodiversity Foundation, Cidade Porto Inglês, Ilha do Maio, Cabo Verde
ADOLFO MARCO Estación Biológica de Doñana, Seville, Spain CHRISTOPHE EIZAGUIRRE Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
MANJULA TIWARI Ocean Ecology Network, Research Affiliate to NOAA – National Marine Fisheries Service, Marine Turtle Ecology and Assessment Programme South West Fisheries Science Center, La Jolla, USA
*Also at: Center for Public Policy and Administration, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal †Also at: Department of Biology & Biochemistry, Milner Centre for Evolution, University of Bath, Bath, UK
Received 25 March 2021. Revision requested 30 April 2021. Accepted 5 October 2021. First published online 1 August 2022.
Keywords Cabo Verde, Caretta caretta, conservation man- agement, nesting behaviour, philopatry, plasticity, sea-level rise, sea turtle
Introduction P
hilopatry, the return to a natal place to breed, is a common life-history strategy used by both terrestrial
and aquatic species (Koenig et al., 1996), including sea turtles. They often follow circuitous routes during their migrations, but despite this crude map sense in the open ocean, they can find the oceanic islands where they were born and that they will use to nest (Hays et al., 2020). Once in their natal area, turtles are faced with dynamic
beaches that can vary in terms of morphology, type of sand and vegetation (Conrad et al., 2011;Ditmer&Stapleton, 2012). Because of their use of bet-edging strategies or because of their inaccurate navigation mechanisms some females distribute their nests amongst several beaches (Weishampel et al., 2003; Kamel & Mrosovsky, 2004). In sea turtles there is no parental care for the eggs or the hatchlings and therefore the selection of both a particular beach and the microhabitat within a beach determines hatching success, the physical condition of the hatchlings (Patrício et al., 2018), the reproductive fitness of the adults, and subsequently the survival of the population (Hays & Speakman, 1993). Clutches deposited near the ocean are more likely to be lost because of erosion and flooding, where- as nest placement further inland leads to a greater likelihood of hatchling misorientation and in some colonies greater predation (Wood & Bjorndal, 2000; Caut et al., 2010; Patino-Martinez et al., 2017). In some turtle species, nests located in open sand areas have also been observed to pro- duce more viable hatchlings per clutch than nests located under vegetation (Ditmer & Stapleton, 2012). The variable environmental conditions in the nests during incubation induce variation in the phenotypes, sex and vitality of the hatchlings (Ditmer & Stapleton, 2012; Patino-Martinez et al., 2014; Kobayashi et al., 2017). Here we describe the degree of nesting beach selection and the consistency of intra-beach site selection for egg
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms ofthe Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial licence (
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use. Oryx, 2023, 57(2), 152–159 © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605321001496
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140
