Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Tree squirrel seed predation patterns may influence American chestnut restoration success

  • Published:
New Forests Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Restoration of the functionally extirpated American chestnut (Castanea dentata) to landscapes of the eastern United States is planned with the successful propagation of a blight-resistant hybrid tree. Predicting the response of rodent seed consumers to this novel source of mast will be critical to restoration success, as rodents are important seed predators and dispersers in forests that once included chestnut. In particular, frequency-dependent foraging responses by rodents could affect the rate of spread of rare chestnuts following reintroductions. We conducted field trials to test for seed preferences and frequency-dependent selection by fox squirrels (Sciurus niger) when combinations of American chestnut and two common associates [northern red oak (Quercus rubra) and white oak (Q. alba)] were available in varying frequencies. Fox squirrels tended toward positive frequency-dependent seed predation when combinations of white oak and chestnuts were available, consuming more common mast items at a higher rate than expected based on availability. No preferences were observed between American chestnut and either red or white oak independent of frequency, but red oak was preferred over white oak. Frequency-dependent consumption of more common white oak acorns could benefit rarer chestnut during restoration, as squirrels would feed disproportionately on established white oak; however, this management strategy should only be considered following larger-scale and longer-term studies that consider impacts on white oak regeneration. Lack of preference or frequency dependence for chestnut when paired with red oak suggests that negative impacts of fox squirrel consumption on restoration will vary with the relative availability of the two seed types.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  • Abrams MD (2003) Where has all the white oak gone? Bioscience 53:927–939

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen JA (1968) Evidence for apostatic selection by wild passerines. Nature 220:501–502

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Anagnostakis SL (2012) Chestnut breeding in the United States for disease and insect resistance. Plant Dis 96:1392–1403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bronson FH (1989) Mammalian reproductive biology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham CR, Rutter PA, French DW (1986) Breeding blight-resistant chestnuts. Plant Breed Rev 4:347–397

    Google Scholar 

  • Celis-Diez JL, Bustamante RO (2005) Frequency-dependent seed size selection on Cryptocarya alba (Mol.) Looser (Lauraceae): testing the effect of background. Biol J Linn Soc 84:137–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark SL, Schlarbaum SE, Saxton AM, Hebard FV (2011) Making history: field testing of blight-resistant American chestnut (Castanea dentata) in the southern region. In: Fei S, Lhotka JM, Stringer JW, Gottschalk KW, Gary W (eds) Proceedings, 17th central hardwood forest conference, USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station, Lexington, pp 656–657

  • Dalgleish HJ, Swihart RK (2012) American chestnut past and future: implications of restoration for resource pulses and consumer populations of Eastern US Forests. Restor Ecol 20:490–497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellison AM, Bank MS, Clinton BD et al (2005) Loss of foundation species: consequences for the structure and dynamics of forested ecosystems. Front Ecol Environ 3:479–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood JJ (1985) Frequency-dependent selection by seed-predators. Oikos 44:195–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood JJ, Elton RA (1979) Analysing experiments on frequency-dependent selection by predators. J Anim Ecol 48:721–737

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoshizaki K, Hulme PE (2002) Mast seeding and predator-mediated indirect interactions in evidence from post-dispersal fate of rodent-generated caches. In: Levey DJ, Silva WR, Galetti M (eds) Seed dispersal and frugivory: ecology, evolution and conservation. CAB International, Cambridge, pp 227–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes RN (1979) Optimal diets under the energy maximization premise: the effects of recognition time and learning. Am Nat 113:209–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hulme PE (1996) Herbivory, plant regeneration, and species coexistence. J Ecol 84:609–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hulme PE (1998) Post-dispersal seed predation: consequences for plant demography and evolution. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 1:32–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hulme PE, Hunt M (1999) Rodent post-dispersal seed predation in deciduous woodland: predator response to absolute and relative abundance of prey. J Anim Ecol 68:417–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs DF, Dalgleish HJ, Nelson CD (2013) A conceptual framework for restoration of threatened plants: the effective model of American chestnut (Castanea dentata) reintroduction. New Phytol 197:378–393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen PA, Bongers F, Hemerik L (2004) Seed mass and mast seeding enhance dispersal by a neotropical scatter-hoarding rodent. Ecol Monogr 74:569–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janzen DH (1971) Seed predation by animals. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 2:465–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keever C (1953) Present composition of some stands of the former oak-chestnut forest in the southern Blue Ridge Mountains. Ecology 34:44–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichti NI, Steele MA, Zhang H, Swihart RK (2014) Mast species composition alters seed fate in North American rodent-dispersed hardwoods. Ecology 95:1746–1758

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McShea WJ, Healy WM (2002) Oak forest ecosystems: ecology and management for wildlife. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2011) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele MA, Smallwood PD (2002) Acorn dispersal by birds and mammals. In: McShea WJ, Healy WM (eds) Oak forest ecosystems: ecology and management for wildlife. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 182–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele MA, Turner G, Smallwood PD, Wolff JO, Radillo J (2001) Cache management by small mammals: experimental evidence for the significance of acorn embryo excision. J Mammal 82:35–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vander Wall SB (2001) The evolutionary ecology of nut dispersal. Bot Rev 67:74–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woods FW, Shanks RE (1959) Natural replacement of chestnut by other species in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Ecol 40:349–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao Z, Gao X, Steele MA, Zhang Z (2010) Frequency-dependent selection by tree squirrels: adaptive escape of nondormant white oaks. Behav Ecol 21:169–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwolak R, Crone EE (2012) Quantifying the outcome of plant–granivore interactions. Oikos 121:20–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Funding for this work was provided by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Fish and Wildlife (State Wildlife Grant T7R12). K. Leffel assisted with seed preference trials. J. McKenna helped procure chestnut seed. N. Lichti, M. Saunders, P. Zollner, and two anonymous reviewers provided helpful comments on the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rita M. Blythe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Blythe, R.M., Smyser, T.J. & Swihart, R.K. Tree squirrel seed predation patterns may influence American chestnut restoration success. New Forests 46, 593–600 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-015-9475-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-015-9475-7

Keywords

Navigation