IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v14y2003i3p433-437.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empirical support for a despotic distribution in a California spotted owl population

Author

Listed:
  • Guthrie S. Zimmerman
  • William S. LaHaye
  • R. J. Gutie´rrez

Abstract

Territorial species, such as the spotted owl (Strix occidentalis), are predicted to follow an ideal despotic distribution. However, debate exists on whether wild populations actually meet the assumptions of an ideal distribution, such as perfect perceptual abilities (i.e., the ability to recognize high- and low-quality sites without error). Because this hypothesis has important life history ramifications for spotted owls, we investigated whether occupancy rates of California spotted owl (S. o. occidentalis) territories in the San Bernardino Mountains of southern California positively correlated with a qualitative "potential fitness" (denoted by λ-sub-pf) estimated from survival and reproduction of territorial owls. Spotted owls in our study tended to occupy territories with the highest λ-sub-pf, supporting the assumption of ideal perceptual abilities within this population. However, this relationship was noisy, and we suggest that some individuals do not assess site quality accurately because of perceptual limitations, prey dynamics, and large territory sizes. Furthermore, dispersal processes, high survival rates, and long life spans of spotted owls may be other key factors preventing some individuals from selecting sites of the highest quality and, consequently, our ability to precisely estimate λ-sub-pf. Copyright 2003.

Suggested Citation

  • Guthrie S. Zimmerman & William S. LaHaye & R. J. Gutie´rrez, 2003. "Empirical support for a despotic distribution in a California spotted owl population," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 14(3), pages 433-437, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:14:y:2003:i:3:p:433-437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:14:y:2003:i:3:p:433-437. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.