Responses of turkey vultures to unmanned aircraft systems vary by platform.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 11 2021
04 11 2021
Historique:
received:
25
06
2021
accepted:
21
10
2021
entrez:
5
11
2021
pubmed:
6
11
2021
medline:
6
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
A challenge that conservation practitioners face is manipulating behavior of nuisance species. The turkey vulture (Cathartes aura) can cause substantial damage to aircraft if struck. The goal of this study was to assess vulture responses to unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) for use as a possible dispersal tool. Our treatments included three platforms (fixed-wing, multirotor, and a predator-like ornithopter [powered by flapping flight]) and two approach types (30 m overhead or targeted towards a vulture) in an operational context. We evaluated perceived risk as probability of reaction, reaction time, flight-initiation distance (FID), vulture remaining index, and latency to return. Vultures escaped sooner in response to the fixed-wing; however, fewer remained after multirotor treatments. Targeted approaches were perceived as riskier than overhead. Vulture perceived risk was enhanced by flying the multirotor in a targeted approach. We found no effect of our treatments on FID or latency to return. Latency was negatively correlated with UAS speed, perhaps because slower UAS spent more time over the area. Greatest visual saliency followed as: ornithopter, fixed-wing, and multirotor. Despite its appearance, the ornithopter was not effective at dispersing vultures. Because effectiveness varied, multirotor/fixed-wing UAS use should be informed by management goals (immediate dispersal versus latency).
Identifiants
pubmed: 34737377
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-01098-5
pii: 10.1038/s41598-021-01098-5
pmc: PMC8569017
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
21655Subventions
Organisme : Federal Aviation Administration
ID : IA No: 692M15-19-T-00017
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Christie, K. S., Gilbert, S. L., Brown, C. L., Hatfield, M. & Hanson, L. Unmanned aircraft systems in wildlife research: Current and future applications of a transformative technology. Front. Ecol. Environ. 14, 241–251 (2016).
doi: 10.1002/fee.1281
Anderson, K. & Gaston, K. J. Lightweight unmanned aerial vehicles will revolutionize spatial ecology. Front. Ecol. Environ. 11, 138–146 (2013).
doi: 10.1890/120150
Chabot, D. & Bird, D. M. Wildlife research and management methods in the 21st century: Where do unmanned aircraft fit in?. J. Unmanned Veh. Syst. 3, 137–155 (2015).
doi: 10.1139/juvs-2015-0021
Sasse, D. B. Job-related mortality of wildlife workers in the United States, 1937–2000. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 4, 1015–1020 (2003).
Wiegmann, D. A. & Taneja, N. Analysis of injuries among pilots involved in fatal general aviation airplane accidents. Accid. Anal. Prev. 35, 571–577 (2003).
pubmed: 12729820
doi: 10.1016/S0001-4575(02)00037-4
Vas, E., Lescroël, A., Duriez, O., Boguszewski, G. & Grémillet, D. Approaching birds with drones: first experiments and ethical guidelines. Biol. Lett. 11, 20140754 (2015).
pubmed: 25652220
pmcid: 4360097
doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2014.0754
Hodgson, J. C., Baylis, S. M., Mott, R., Herrod, A. & Clarke, R. H. Precision wildlife monitoring using unmanned aerial vehicles. Sci. Rep. 6, 22574. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep22574 (2016).
doi: 10.1038/srep22574
pubmed: 26986721
pmcid: 4795075
Egan, C. C., Blackwell, B. F., Fernández-Juricic, E. & Klug, P. E. Testing a key assumption of using drones as frightening devices: Do birds perceive drones as risky?. The Condor 122, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/condor/duaa014 (2020).
doi: 10.1093/condor/duaa014
Hahn, N. et al. Unmanned aerial vehicles mitigate human–elephant conflict on the borders of Tanzanian Parks: A case study. Oryx 51, 513–516 (2017).
doi: 10.1017/S0030605316000946
FAA. Protocol for the Conduct and Review of Wildlife Hazard Site Visits, Wildlife Hazard Assessments, and Wildlife Hazard Management Plan. (2018).
Dolbeer, R. A., Begier, M. J., Miller, P. R., Weller, J. R. & Anderson, A. L. Wildlife strikes to civil aircraft in the United States 1990–2019. 124 (Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, D.C., USA, 2021).
Bivings, A. in Bird Strike Committee Europe. 481–487.
Wandrie, L. J., Klug, P. E. & Clark, M. E. Evaluation of two unmanned aircraft systems as tools for protecting crops from blackbird damage. Crop Prot. 117, 15–19 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2018.11.008
Ydenberg, R. C. & Dill, L. M. The economics of fleeing from predators. Adv. Study Behav. 16, 229–249 (1986).
doi: 10.1016/S0065-3454(08)60192-8
Cooper, W. E., Samia, D. S. & Blumstein, D. T. Chapter five-FEAR, spontaneity, and artifact in economic escape theory: A review and prospectus. Adv. Study Behav. 47, 147–179 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/bs.asb.2015.02.002
Lima, S. L., Blackwell, B. F., DeVault, T. L. & Fernandez-Juricic, E. Animal reactions to oncoming vehicles: A conceptual review. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 90, 60–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12093 (2015).
doi: 10.1111/brv.12093
pubmed: 24661508
Bernhardt, G. E., Blackwell, B. F., DeVault, T. L. & Kutschbach-Brohl, L. Fatal injuries to birds from collisions with aircraft reveal anti-predator behaviours. Ibis https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2010.01043.x (2010).
doi: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2010.01043.x
McEvoy, J. F., Hall, G. P. & McDonald, P. G. Evaluation of unmanned aerial vehicle shape, flight path and camera type for waterfowl surveys: Disturbance effects and species recognition. PeerJ 4, e1831 (2016).
pubmed: 27020132
pmcid: 4806640
doi: 10.7717/peerj.1831
Mulero-Pázmány, M. et al. Unmanned aircraft systems as a new source of disturbance for wildlife: A systematic review. PLoS ONE 12, e0178448 (2017).
pubmed: 28636611
pmcid: 5479521
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178448
Tinbergen, N. Social releasers and the experimental method required for their study. Wilson Bull., 6–51 (1948).
Kirk, D. A. & Mossman, M. J. in Bird of the World (ed Cornell Lab of Ornithology) (Poole, A.F.,Gill, F.B., Ithaca, NY, USA, 2020).
FAA. Wildlife Strike Database, wildlife.faa.gov (2020).
DeVault, T. L. et al. Estimating interspecific economic risk of bird strikes with aircraft. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 42, 94–101 (2018).
doi: 10.1002/wsb.859
DeVault, T. L., Blackwell, B. F., Seamans, T. W. & Belant, J. L. Identification of off airport interspecific avian hazards to aircraft. J. Wildl. Manag. 80, 746–752 (2016).
doi: 10.1002/jwmg.1041
Kluever, B. M., Pfeiffer, M. B., Barras, S. C., Dunlap, B. G. & Humberg, L. A. Black vulture conflict and management in the United States: Damage trends, management overview, and research needs. Hum. Wildl. Interact. 14, 8 (2020).
Walters, J. R. Anti-predatory behavior of lapwings: field evidence of discriminative abilities. Wilson Bull., 49–70 (1990).
Septon, G. Peregrine falcon strikes turkey vulture. Passenger Pigeon 53, 192 (1991).
Coleman, J. S. & Fraser, J. D. Predation on black and Turkey vultures. Wilson Bull. 98, 600–601 (1986).
Rush, G. P., Clarke, L. E., Stone, M. & Wood, M. J. Can drones count gulls? Minimal disturbance and semiautomated image processing with an unmanned aerial vehicle for colony-nesting seabirds. Ecol. Evol. 8, 12322–12334 (2018).
pubmed: 30619548
pmcid: 6308878
doi: 10.1002/ece3.4495
Bennitt, E., Bartlam-Brooks, H. L. A., Hubel, T. Y. & Wilson, A. M. Terrestrial mammalian wildlife responses to unmanned aerial systems approaches. Sci. Rep. 9, 2142. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-38610-x (2019).
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-38610-x
pubmed: 30765800
pmcid: 6375938
Weston, M. A., O’Brien, C., Kostoglou, K. N. & Symonds, M. R. Escape responses of terrestrial and aquatic birds to drones: Towards a code of practice to minimize disturbance. J. Appl. Ecol. 57, 777–785 (2020).
doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.13575
Belant, J. L., Seamans, T. W., Gabrey, S. W. & Dolbeer, R. A. Abundance of gulls and other birds at landfills in northern Ohio. Am. Midl. Nat. 134, 30–40 (1995).
doi: 10.2307/2426480
Barnas, A. F. et al. A standardized protocol for reporting methods when using drones for wildlife research. J. Unmanned Veh. Syst. 8, 89–98 (2020).
doi: 10.1139/juvs-2019-0011
DeVault, T. L., Blackwell, B. F., Seamans, T. W., Lima, S. L. & Fernández-Juricic, E. Effects of vehicle speed on flight initiation by turkey vultures: implications for bird-vehicle collisions. PLoS ONE 9, e87944 (2014).
pubmed: 24503622
pmcid: 3913678
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087944
Doppler, M. S., Blackwell, B. F., DeVault, T. L. & Fernández-Juricic, E. Cowbird responses to aircraft with lights tuned to their eyes: Implications for bird–aircraft collisions. The Condor 117, 165–177 (2015).
doi: 10.1650/CONDOR-14-157.1
Blackwell, B. F., Fernandez-Juricic, E., Seamans, T. W. & Dolan, T. Avian visual system configuration and behavioural response to object approach. Anim. Behav. 77, 673–684 (2009).
doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.11.017
DeVault, T. L., Reinhart, B. D., Brisbin, I. L., Rhodes, O. E. & Bechard. Flight Behavior of Black and Turkey Vultures: Implications for reducing bird–aircraft collisions. J. Wildl. Manag. 69, 601–608. https://doi.org/10.2193/0022-541X(2005)069[0601:FBOBAT]2.0.CO;2 (2005).
Runyan, A. M. & Blumstein, D. T. Do individual differences influence flight initiation distance?. J. Wildl. Manag. 68, 1124–1129 (2004).
doi: 10.2193/0022-541X(2004)068[1124:DIDIFI]2.0.CO;2
Rebolo-Ifrán, N., Grilli, M. G. & Lambertucci, S. A. Drones as a threat to wildlife: YouTube complements science in providing evidence about their effect. Environ. Conserv. 46, 205–210 (2019).
doi: 10.1017/S0376892919000080
Fernández-Juricic, E., Deisher, M., Stark, A. C. & Randolet, J. Predator detection is limited in microhabitats with high light intensity: An experiment with Brown-headed Cowbirds. Ethology 118, 341–350 (2012).
doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2012.02020.x
Koch, D. D. Glare and contrast sensitivity testing in cataract patients. J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 15, 158–164 (1989).
pubmed: 2724116
doi: 10.1016/S0886-3350(89)80004-5
Vorobyev, M. & Osorio, D. Receptor noise as a determinant of colour thresholds. Proc. Royal Soc. B. 265, 351–358 (1998).
doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0302
Ödeen, A. & Håstad, O. The phylogenetic distribution of ultraviolet sensitivity in birds. BMC Evol. Biol. 13, 36 (2013).
pubmed: 23394614
pmcid: 3637589
doi: 10.1186/1471-2148-13-36
Hill, G. E., Hill, G. E., McGraw, K. J. & Kevin, J. Bird coloration: mechanisms and measurements. Vol. 1 (Harvard University Press, 2006).
Maia, R., Eliason, C. M., Bitton, P. P., Doucet, S. M. & Shawkey, M. D. pavo: Asn R package for the analysis, visualization and organization of spectral data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 4, 906–913 (2013).
Lakens, D. Sample Size Justification. (2021).
Nakagawa, S. & Cuthill, I. C. Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists. Biol. Rev. 82, 591–605 (2007).
pubmed: 17944619
doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2007.00027.x
Hurlbert, S. H. Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecol. Monogr. 54, 187–211. https://doi.org/10.2307/1942661 (1984).
doi: 10.2307/1942661
Garamszegi, L. Z. A simple statistical guide for the analysis of behaviour when data are constrained due to practical or ethical reasons. Anim. Behav. 120, 223–234 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.11.009
Burnham, K. P. & Anderson, D. R. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. (Springer Science & Business Media, 2002).
Nauman, L. E. Spatial distribution in a turkey vulture roost, The Ohio State University, (1965).
Bertram, B. C. Living in groups: predators and prey. Behavioural ecology: an evolutionary approach, 221–248 (1978).
Blackwell, B. F. et al. Social information affects Canada goose alert and escape responses to vehicle approach: Implications for animal–vehicle collisions. PeerJ 7, e8164. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.8164 (2019).
doi: 10.7717/peerj.8164
pubmed: 31871837
pmcid: 6924344
Blackwell, B. F., Seamans, T. W., Fernández-Juricic, E., Devault, T. L. & Outward, R. J. Avian responses to aircraft in an airport environment. J. Wildl. Manag. 83, 893–901 (2019).
doi: 10.1002/jwmg.21650
Beauchamp, G. Social predation: how group living benefits predators and prey. (Elsevier, 2013).
Fox, J., Friendly, M. & Weisberg, S. Hypothesis tests for multivariate linear models using the car package. The R Journal 5, 39–52 (2013).
doi: 10.32614/RJ-2013-004
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. arXiv preprint arXiv:1406.5823 (2014).
DeVault, T. L., Blackwell, B. F., Seamans, T. W., Lima, S. L. & Fernandez-Juricic, E. Speed kills: Ineffective avian escape responses to oncoming vehicles. Proc. R. Soc. B. 282, 20142188. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.2188 (2015).
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2014.2188
pubmed: 25567648
pmcid: 4308997
DeVault, T. L. et al. Can experience reduce collisions between birds and vehicles?. J. Zool. 301, 17–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/jzo.12385 (2016).
doi: 10.1111/jzo.12385
Rhoades, E. & Blumstein, D. T. Predicted fitness consequences of threat-sensitive hiding behavior. Behav. Ecol. 18, 937–943 (2007).
doi: 10.1093/beheco/arm064
Cooper Jr, W. E. Factors affecting risk and cost of escape by the broad-headed skink (Eumeces laticeps): predator speed, directness of approach, and female presence. Herpetologica, 464–474 (1997).
Cooper, W. E. Jr., Hawlena, D. & Pérez-Mellado, V. Interactive effect of starting distance and approach speed on escape behavior challenges theory. Behav. Ecol. 20, 542–546 (2009).
doi: 10.1093/beheco/arp029
Fernández-Juricic, E., Jimenez, M. D. & Lucas, E. Alert distance as an alternative measure of bird tolerance to human disturbance: Implications for park design. Environ. Conserv. 28, 263–269. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892901000273 (2001).
doi: 10.1017/S0376892901000273
Dill, L. M. The escape response of the zebra danio (Brachydanio rerio) I. The stimulus for escape. Anim. Behav. 22, 711–722 (1974).
doi: 10.1016/S0003-3472(74)80022-9
Sun, H. & Frost, B. J. Computation of different optical variables of looming objects in pigeon nucleus rotundus neurons. Nat. Neurosci. 1, 296–303 (1998).
pubmed: 10195163
doi: 10.1038/1110
Pfeiffer, M. B., Iglay, R. B., Seamans, T. W., Blackwell, B. F. & DeVault, T. L. Deciphering interactions between white-tailed deer and approaching vehicles. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 79, 102251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102251 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2020.102251
Collins, S. A., Giffin, G. J. & Strong, W. T. Using flight initiation distance to evaluate responses of colonial-nesting Great Egrets to the approach of an unmanned aerial vehicle. J. Field. Ornithol. 90, 382–390 (2019).
doi: 10.1111/jofo.12312
Kane, S. A., Fulton, A. H. & Rosenthal, L. J. When hawks attack: Animal-borne video studies of goshawk pursuit and prey-evasion strategies. J. Exp. Biol. 218, 212–222 (2015).
pubmed: 25609783
pmcid: 4302165
doi: 10.1242/jeb.108597
Frid, A. & Dill, L. Human-caused disturbance stimuli as a form of predation risk. Conserv. Ecol. 6 (2002).
Lambertucci, S. A., Shepard, E. L. & Wilson, R. P. Human-wildlife conflicts in a crowded airspace. Science 348, 502–504 (2015).
pubmed: 25931541
doi: 10.1126/science.aaa6743
Ballejo, F., Plaza, P., Speziale, K. L., Lambertucci, A. P. & Lambertucci, S. A. Plastic ingestion and dispersion by vultures may produce plastic islands in natural areas. Sci. Total Environ. 755, 142421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142421 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142421
pubmed: 33035984
Conover, M. R. Resolving human-wildlife conflicts: the science of wildlife damage management. (CRC press, 2001).
Pfeiffer, M. B., Blackwell, B. F. & DeVault, T. L. Collective effect of landfills and landscape composition on bird–aircraft collisions. Hum.–Wildl. Interact. 14, 43–54 (2020).
Dolbeer, R. A. Aerodrome bird hazard prevention: case study at John F. Kennedy International Airport. (1999).
Blackwell, B. F. et al. Exploiting avian vision with aircraft lighting to reduce bird strikes. J. Appl. Ecol. 49, 758–766 (2012).
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02165.x
Goller, B., Blackwell, B. F., DeVault, T. L., Baumhardt, P. E. & Fernández-Juricic, E. Assessing bird avoidance of high-contrast lights using a choice test approach: Implications for reducing human-induced avian mortality. PeerJ 6, e5404 (2018).
pubmed: 30280013
pmcid: 6163032
doi: 10.7717/peerj.5404