APPENDIX A.

Effects of grazing and prescribed fire on resource selection and nest survival

of upland sandpipers in an experimental landscape

Brett K. Sandercock Matilde Alfaro-Barrios Ashley E. Casey Tracey N. Johnson

Tony W. Mong Karan J. Odom Khara M. Strum Virginia L. Winder

B.K. Sandercock () A.E. CaseyDivision of Biology, Kansas State University, 116 Ackert Hall, Manhattan, KS 66506, USAe-mail: bsanderc@ksu.edu

M. Alfaro-BarriosPrograma de Desarrollo de las Ciencias Básicas, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de la República, Iguá 4225, CP 11400, Montevideo, Uruguay

T.N. JohnsonWyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Wyoming, 1000 E. University Ave, Box 3166, Laramie, WY 82071, USA

T.W. MongWyoming Fish and Game Department, Baggs, WY 82321, USA

K.J. OdomDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, MD 21250, USA

K.M. StrumPoint Blue Conservation Science, No. 11 - 3820 Cypress Drive, Petaluma, CA 94954, USA

V.L. WinderDepartment of Biology, Benedictine College, Atchison, KS 66002, USA

Submitted to: Landscape EcologyDate: June 5, 2014Manuscript word count: 8,615

1

Table A.1 Mean standardized resource utilization function coefficients ( 95% CI) and

percentage of individual upland sandpipers or nests with negative (neg), nonsignificant (ns), or

positive relationships (pos) between space use and each explanatory factor. Resource utilization

functions were calculated for home ranges of radio-marked upland sandpipers at Konza Prairie,

Kansas during April to July, 2003-2004 (n = 37 birds), and for sandpiper nests during April to

July, 2001-2008 (n = 246 nests). Asterisks denote factors that were significant drivers of space

use where 95% CI do not overlap zero

Explanatory factors 95% CIa neg ns pos

Individuals Grazing treatment +0.126* 0.029, 0.222 22 22 56 Year of burn -0.124* -0.195, -0.053 65 11 24 Burn frequency +0.065 -0.040, 0.169 30 14 56 Elevation +0.241* 0.142, 0.341 14 8 78 Distance to edge -0.199* -0.312, -0.086 60 16 24

Nests Grazing treatment +0.177* 0.062, 0.299 0 25 75 Year of burn -0.002 -0.266, 0.261 37.5 25 37.5 Burn frequency +0.618* 0.301, 0.936 0 25 75 Elevation +0.142* 0.004, 0.280 100 0 0 Distance to edge -0.285* -0.556, -0.014 100 0 0

aStandard errors were conservative and adjusted for variation among individuals (Marzluff et al.

2004: eqn 3-eqn 2).

2

Table A.2 Mean unstandardized coefficients ( ) for resource utilization functions calculated for

home ranges of radio-marked upland sandpipers at Konza Prairie, Kansas during April to July,

2003-2004

Landscape metric ¯(SE)a

Intercept -4.836 (1.701)Grazing treatment 0.283 (0.109)Years of burn -0.563 (0.155)Burn frequency 0.177 (0.126)Elevation 0.017 (0.004)Distance to edge -0.0003 (0.0004)

aStandard errors were conservative and adjusted for variation among individuals (Marzluff et al.

2004: eqn 3-eqn 2).

3

Table A.3 Model selection results for candidate models of daily nest survival for upland

sandpipers at Konza Prairie, Kansas for a 72-d exposure period from 29 April through 9 July,

2001-2008

Modela k AICcb wi

Years since burn + Elevation 3 0.000 0.111Nest age + Years since burn 3 0.269 0.097Years since burn 2 0.537 0.085Nest age + Elevation 3 0.830 0.073Elevation 2 1.229 0.060Nest age 2 1.374 0.056Frequency of burn + Elevation 3 1.675 0.048Years since burn + Distance to unit edge 3 1.721 0.047Distance to unit edge + Elevation 3 1.861 0.044Nest age + Frequency of burn 3 1.893 0.043Constant 1 1.919 0.042Years since burn + Grazing treatment 3 2.267 0.036Frequency of burn 2 2.298 0.035Years since burn + Frequency of burn 3 2.519 0.031Nest age + Distance to unit edge 3 3.037 0.024Grazing treatment + Elevation 3 3.162 0.023Nest age + Grazing treatment 3 3.187 0.022Frequency of burn + Distance to unit edge 3 3.425 0.020Distance to unit edge 2 3.567 0.019Grazing treatment 2 3.731 0.017Quadratic effect of time 3 3.842 0.016Linear effect of time 2 3.904 0.016Frequency of burn + Grazing treatment 3 3.992 0.015Years since burn + Grazing treatment + Frequency of burn 6 4.194 0.014Grazing treatment + Distance to unit edge 3 5.061 0.009

a Models were fit with the nest survival model of Program Mark. Model fit was assessed by: k =

number of parameters, AICc = difference in corrected Akaike’s Information Criterion value

from the minimum AICc model, and wi = Akaike’s weight.

bThe minimum AICc model had AICc = 790.0.

4

Table A.4 Slope coefficients () for single factor nest survival models in Program Mark. We

monitored 238 upland sandpiper nests at Konza Prairie, Kansas for a 72-d exposure period from

29 April through 9 July, 2001-2008

5

Fig. A.1

Estimates of home range size (99% percent volume contour) for upland sandpipers as a function

of the number of locations per bird at Konza Prairie, Kansas during April to July 2003-2004.

Symbols include: 2003: open circles and solid line; 2004: filled circles and dashed line

Landscape metric ¯(SE) 95% CIsDistance to experimental unit edge 0.0004 (0.0006) -0.0008, 0.0016Grazing treatment -0.0730 (0.1661) -0.3984, 0.2527Frequency of burn 0.2270 (0.1761) -0.1182, 0.5721Years since burn 0.3070 (0.1663) -0.0193, 0.6327Absolute elevation 0.0075 (0.0045) -0.0013, 0.0163

6

Fig. A.2 Representative variation in home range size and shape for three radio-marked upland sandpipers at Konza Prairie, Kansas

during April to July, 2003-2004. The legend includes number of locations per bird, smoothing factors for the utilization distribution

(h), estimated area of the home range (99% volume contour), and the number of 30 × 30 m grid cells in the utilization distribution.

Home range maps denote bird locations (white circles), low use areas (cool colors), and high use areas (warm colors)

7

Fig. A.3 Distribution of predicted use for upland sandpipers at Konza Prairie, Kansas in 2003 (n = 22 birds) and 2004 (n = 15 birds).

Insets show the experimental units with spring burns in each year (gray = burned, white = unburned). Quartiles for predicted relative

use were based on population means of unstandardized coefficients from resource utilization functions for individual sandpipers

8