Sand type influences the energetics of nest escape in Brisbane river turtle hatchlings
Mohd Uzair Rusli A B C and David T. Booth B D
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A School of Marine and Environmental Sciences, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu 21030, Malaysia.
B School of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia.
C Institute of Oceanography and Environment, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu 21030, Malaysia.
D Corresponding author. Email: d.booth@uq.edu.au
Australian Journal of Zoology 66(1) 27-33 https://doi.org/10.1071/ZO17043
Submitted: 3 August 2017 Accepted: 16 November 2017 Published: 14 December 2017
Abstract
Freshwater turtles can construct their nest in a wide range of soil types, and because different soil types have different physical characteristics such as particle size distribution and compactness, soil type presumably affects digging performance and the energetics of nest escape of turtle hatchlings. Previous studies have reported how cohort size affects the energetic cost of nest escape in turtle hatchlings, but no studies have reported the influence of substrate type on the energetic cost of nest escape. The time taken and the energy required by the same number of hatchlings to dig through two different sand types were quantified by open-flow respirometry. Brisbane river turtle hatchlings digging through fine sand escaped faster and spent less energy than hatchlings digging through coarse sand, and a larger cohort size provided a clear energetic advantage while digging in both sand types. Across all group sizes, hatchlings digging through fine sand spent 33.8% less energy compared with hatchlings digging through coarse sand. We conclude that hatchlings emerging from nests constructed in fine sand have an energetic advantage over hatchlings emerging from nests constructed in course sand because they would have greater energy reserves upon reaching the nest’s surface.
Additional keywords: digging, net cost of transport, reptile, social facilitation.
References
Ackerman, R. A. (1997). The nest environment and the embryonic envelopment of sea turtles. In ‘The Biology of Sea Turtles’. (Eds P. L. Lutz, and J. A. Musick.) pp. 83–106. (CRC Press: New York.)Booth, D. T. (1998). Effects of incubation temperature on the energetics of embryonic development and hatchling morphology in the Brisbane River turtle Emydura signata. Journal of Comparative Physiology B: Biochemical, Systemic, and Environmental Physiology 168, 399–404.
| Effects of incubation temperature on the energetics of embryonic development and hatchling morphology in the Brisbane River turtle Emydura signata.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK1cznt1Sjtw%3D%3D&md5=15ed73a9fed065c6d757270139b8dd30CAS |
Booth, D. T. (2010). The natural history of nesting in two Australian freshwater turtles. Australian Zoologist 35, 198–203.
| The natural history of nesting in two Australian freshwater turtles.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cann, J. (1998). ‘Australian Freshwater Turtles.’ (Beaumont Publishing: Singapore.)
Carr, A., and Hirth, H. (1961). Social facilitation in green turtle siblings. Animal Behaviour 9, 68–70.
| Social facilitation in green turtle siblings.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dehn, M. (1990). Vigilance for predators: detection and dilution effects. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 26, 337–342.
Doody, J. S. (2011). Environmentally cued hatching in reptiles. Integrative and Comparative Biology 51, 49–61.
| Environmentally cued hatching in reptiles.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3MnjsVWjtg%3D%3D&md5=7ae65fb1090f69db009438017a5ba3d9CAS |
Doody, J. S., Georges, A., Young, J. E., Pauza, M., Pepper, A. L., Alderman, R. L., and Welsh, M. A. (2001). Embryonic aestivation and emergence behavior in the pig-nosed turtle, Carettochelys insculpta. Canadian Journal of Zoology 79, 1062–1072.
| Embryonic aestivation and emergence behavior in the pig-nosed turtle, Carettochelys insculpta.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Foley, A. M., Peck, S. A., and Harmann, G. R. (2006). Effect of sand characteristics and inundation on the hatching success of loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) clutches on low-relief mangrove islands in southwest Florida. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 5, 32–41.
| Effect of sand characteristics and inundation on the hatching success of loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) clutches on low-relief mangrove islands in southwest Florida.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Folk, R. L. (1974). ‘Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks.’ (Hemphill Publishing: Austin.)
Folk, R. L., and Ward, W. C. (1957). Brazos River Bar: a study in the significance of grain size parameters. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 27, 3–26.
| Brazos River Bar: a study in the significance of grain size parameters.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Grain, D. A., Bolten, A. B., and Bjorndal, K. A. (1995). Effects of beach nourishment on sea turtles: review and research initiatives. Restoration Ecology 3, 95–104.
| Effects of beach nourishment on sea turtles: review and research initiatives.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Horrocks, J. A., and Scott, N. M. (1991). Nest site location and nest success in the Hawksbill turtle Eretmochelys imbricata in Barbados West-Indies. Marine Ecology Progress Series 69, 1–8.
| Nest site location and nest success in the Hawksbill turtle Eretmochelys imbricata in Barbados West-Indies.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hughes, E. J., and Brooks, R. J. (2006). The good mother: does nest-site selection constitute parental investment in turtles? Canadian Journal of Zoology 84, 1545–1554.
| The good mother: does nest-site selection constitute parental investment in turtles?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kenny, A. J., and Sotheran, I. (2013). Characterising the physical properties of seabed habitats. In ‘Methods for the Study of Marine Benthos’. 4th edn. (Ed. A. Eleftheriou.) pp. 47–95. (JohnWiley & Sons: Chichester.)
Kuchling, G. (1999). ‘The Reproductive Biology of the Chelonia.’ (Springer-Verlag: New York.)
McCosker, J. (2004). The reproductive ecology of the Brisbane River turtle (Emydura macquarii signata) and the long-necked turtle (Chelodina expansa). Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Micheli-Campbell, M. A. (2012). Habitat requirements for nesting and early life-stages of the endangered Mary River turtle (Elusor macrurus): insights for conservation. Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Miller, J. D. (1985). Embryology of marine turtles. In ‘Biology of the Reptilia’. (Eds C. Gans, F. Billett, and P. F. A. Maderson.) pp. 270–328. (Wiley-Interscience: New York.)
Mortimer, J. A. (1990). The influence of beach sand characteristics on the nesting behavior and clutch survival of green turtles (Chelonia mydas). Copeia 1990, 802–817.
| The influence of beach sand characteristics on the nesting behavior and clutch survival of green turtles (Chelonia mydas).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Nagle, R. D., Lutz, C. L., and Pyle, A. L. (2004). Overwintering in the nest by hatchling map turtles (Graptemys geographica). Canadian Journal of Zoology 82, 1211–1218.
| Overwintering in the nest by hatchling map turtles (Graptemys geographica).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Peters, A., Verhoeven, K. J. F., and Strijbosch, H. (1994). Hatching and emergence in the Turkish Mediterranean loggerhead turtle, Caretta caretta: natural cause for egg and hatchling failure. Herpetologica 50, 369–373.
Pilcher, N. J. (1999). Cement dust pollution as a cause of sea turtle hatchling mortality at Ras Baridi, Saudi Arabia. Marine Pollution Bulletin 38, 966–969.
| Cement dust pollution as a cause of sea turtle hatchling mortality at Ras Baridi, Saudi Arabia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3cXkt1yqsQ%3D%3D&md5=93b80c06a9aa5f6ffaef5e43e0b8e126CAS |
Rattan, L. (2017). ‘Encyclopedia of Soil Science.’ 3rd edn. (CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL.)
Ratterman, R. J., and Ackerman, R. A. (1989). The water exchange and hydric microclimate of painted turtle (Chrysemys picta) eggs incubated in field nests. Physiological Zoology 62, 1059–1079.
| The water exchange and hydric microclimate of painted turtle (Chrysemys picta) eggs incubated in field nests.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rusli, M. U., and Booth, D. T. (2016). Bigger clutch sizes save offspring energy during nest escapes. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 70, 607–616.
| Bigger clutch sizes save offspring energy during nest escapes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rusli, M. U., Booth, D. T., and Joseph, J. (2016). Synchronous activity lowers the energetic cost of nest escape for sea turtle hatchlings. The Journal of Experimental Biology 219, 1505–1513.
| Synchronous activity lowers the energetic cost of nest escape for sea turtle hatchlings.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Schwartz, F. J. (1982). Correlations of nest sand asymmetry and percent loggerhead sea turtle nest hatch in North Carolina determined by geological sorting analyses. ASB Bulletin 29, 83.
Shine, R. (2004). Seasonal shifts in nest temperature can modify the phenotypes of hatchling lizards, regardless of overall mean incubation temperature. Functional Ecology 18, 43–49.
| Seasonal shifts in nest temperature can modify the phenotypes of hatchling lizards, regardless of overall mean incubation temperature.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Smith, C. C., and Fretwell, S. D. (1974). The optimal balance between size and number of offspring. American Naturalist 108, 499–506.
| The optimal balance between size and number of offspring.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Spencer, R. J. (2001). The Murray River turtle, Emydura macquarii: population dynamics, nesting ecology and impact of the introduced red fox, Vulpes vulpes. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Sydney.
Spencer, R. J. (2002). Experimentally testing nest site selection: fitness trade-offs and predation risk in turtles. Ecology 83, 2136–2144.
| Experimentally testing nest site selection: fitness trade-offs and predation risk in turtles.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Spencer, R., Thompson, M., and Banks, P. (2001). Hatch or wait? A dilemma in reptilian incubation. Oikos 93, 401–406.
| Hatch or wait? A dilemma in reptilian incubation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Thompson, M. (1989). Patterns of metabolism in embryonic reptiles. Respiration Physiology 76, 243–255.
| Patterns of metabolism in embryonic reptiles.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaL1Mzhs1yrsA%3D%3D&md5=85e0c95a8e2663b53166462bff062cb9CAS |
Tucker, M. E. (1996). ‘Sedimentary Rocks in the Field.’ (John Wiley & Sons: Chichester.)
Withers, P. C. (1992). ‘Comparative Animal Physiology.’ (Saunders College Publishing: New York.)
Wu, N. C., Alton, L. A., Clemente, C. J., Kearney, M. R., and White, C. R. (2015). Morphology and burrowing energetics of semi-fossorial skinks (Liopholis spp.). The Journal of Experimental Biology 218, 2416–2426.
| Morphology and burrowing energetics of semi-fossorial skinks (Liopholis spp.).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
