"Bit.

.2 .1

.2113:
{5:131

‘IV I
r.u«?L.
— , :u‘éin
1211.3!
. I '3.

. ‘ .
£31.31
.. amen?“ a

Ih‘bg'firiqglgn‘
uh”...
2.14

.2...

 

,r 1333......"
> v 5)
iv .x. "K await...
.11...
u:

 

i .1) II:
239...}?

 

,. .2 Luann

 

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
Ur IlVb'lSlly

 

 

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

BEHAVIORAL AND ECOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE
SPOTTED TURTLE, CLEMMYS GUTTATA (SCHNEIDER)

presented by

DIANA JANE LUTZ

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

MS. degree in ZOOLOGY

 

/ ° /
[11.144-I1'//11-“"/"

' Major ‘ ofe 3Vure
01/26/ / 02

Date

MSU is an Affinnative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer

—A—.—.-o-I-I-I-o-l-e-O-

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5/08 KIProj/Acc8Pres/ClRC/DateDue indd

BEHAVIORAL AND ECOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE SPOTTED TURTLE,
CLEMMYS GUTTATA (SCHNEIDER)

By

Diana Jane Lutz

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
Zoology

2009

ABSTRACT

BEHAVIORAL AND ECOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE SPOTTED TURTLE,
CLEMMYS GUTTATA (SCHNEIDER)

By
Diana Jane Lutz
The specific objectives of this study were to determine habitat
requirements, movement patterns, population dynamics, demography and
seasonal activities of the Spotted Turtle, Clemmys guffata in a southwestern
Michigan fen. Habitat areas were identified with lower fen elevation areas which
contained low-growing hydrophytes preferred. Population overlapping and
homing were found to occur, with male home ranges larger than female home
ranges. Population size appeared to be a 1:1 sex ratio. Morphometric
measurements and male and female comparisons are presented, with females
shown larger than males. Aestivation was found to occur. Communal
hibemaculae and site fidelity also occurred with preferred hibemaculae habitats

descfibed.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My passion and love for turtles started at a very early age. Every waking
minute growing up at Rose Lake (in Branch County, MI) was spent catching,
observing and then releasing turtles. This passion has never stopped-nor will it
ever. Now that I am older, being able to spend my time working and studying
these amazing creatures is a dream come true.

I would like to express a big thank you to my committee members. With
different areas of expertise and specializations, they were able to provide me
with the tools to create and achieve a successful research project. I would like to
thank Dr. Richard Snider, my advisor, for his help in providing me with the
opportunity to “do my turtle research” at MSU. A special thanks to Jim Harding,
who was instrumental in finding the location for my research and encouraging me
throughout my education as a “non-traditional” student. The support and
guidance given to me by Dr. Kelly Millenbah was greatly appreciated. Dr. J.
Whitfield Gibbons-thanks for taking on a long distance student and taking the
time to visit the project and being involved.

I am most appreciative to Melinda Freeland. Melinda’s help over the last
few years has been immeasurable. Her computer knowledge is like no others,
as well as her science, math, and biology skills. She is a “natural” when it comes
to teaching. The quality of my research and the final Thesis is due to her input.
The endless hours (and days), we have spent together has blossomed into a true

and cherished friendship. She has more patience than any person I have known.

iii

A special thanks to Dave Mifsud for his enormous help with the Arcview
program. The maps created provided invaluable information about these
animals. I owe you more brownies.

A big thank you to Paul Dziepak, for his help in the research field. Thank
you for allowing me the opportunity to study Spotties in your area. I appreciate
all your work and knowledge in the field, with transmitters and telemetry. Thanks
for all your input and for being such a good friend.

Additionally, I would like to thank those who helped with field work. Thank
you to Pete Wilson, Jerry Stampsky, and Jim and Harrison Barzyk. It is fun
sharing days in the field with kindred spirits. Thanks also, to Dr. Thomas Burton
for his help in the “bug lab” and for his insight with my project.

A big thank you to my great friends, and fellow students, Edi Sonntag and
Cole Provence. Edi, thanks for teaching me what is expected in the field of a real
“techie”. Cole, I appreciate your field and lab help! Jeff Schier, thank you for all
your late night assistance in the early days of returning to school.

I would like to thank the Conservancy and the private landowners for
allowing me to research the area. Thanks to Michigan State University, Michigan
Society of Herpetologists and Chicago Herpetological Society for their financial
suppon.

Lastly, I would like to thank my family for their support throughout my
college years. Thanks to Dece and Fred Lyons; Rindi, Mark, Brady and Taylor

Baildon; Jodi, Bobby, Kylee and Jordan Dooley; Alice Conrad and Karin

iv

Kennedy. Special thanks and love to J.T., Lisonn, Addalynn and Dominic
Delcamp. Sorry, I made you all so crazy. I love you!

Aunt Jane Hurley, thank you for allowing me to grow up and spend so
much time with you at Rose Lake, and for all our “turtle hunting” trips! Thanks for
all your love and support.

Most of all, I thank my mom, Helen Conrad. Thanks to her, I grew up with
the appreciation for, and knowledge of, the wildlife all around me. She is the
reason I returned to school-she was my biggest supporter and my biggest
cheerleader! I cherish a small framed picture that was my mom’s. It reads: “The

goal of life is to live in agreement with nature”. I’m sure trying.....

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................. vii
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................ viii
CHAPTER 1: HABITAT AND MOVEMENT OF CLEMMYS GUTTATA ............ 1
CHAPTER 2: POPULATION DYNAMICS AND DEMOGRAPHY ................... 49
CHAPTER 3: SEASONAL ACTIVITIES ................................................... 55
APPENDIX ....................................................................................... 69
LITERATURE CITED ......................................................................... 144

vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Specific habitat preferences documented throughout

Spotted Turtle range. ......................................................... 70
Table 2. Non-woody plants located in southwestern Michigan fen. 71
Table 3. Woody plants located in southwestern Michigan fen. ...................... 73
Table 4. Wildlife documented in southwestern Michigan fen. 74
Table 5. Amphibians and reptiles documented in southwestern

Michigan fen. ................................................................... 74
Table 6. Bird species present in southwestern Michigan fen. ........................ 75
Table 7. Example of Microsoft Excel individual turtle data worksheet. ............ 77
Table 8. Example of the Microsoft Excel radio telemetry data sheet. .............. 78
Table 9. Compilation of 2007 and 2008 data for the 187 turtles of

southwestern Michigan fen. 79

vii

Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Figure 8.
Figure 9.
Figure 10
Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

Figure 15
Figure 16
Figure 17
Figure 18
Figure 19
Figure 20

Figure 21

LIST OF FIGURES

Presettlement land cover of southwestern Michigan fen. ................ 84
Outlying regions of southwestern Michigan fen. ........................... 85
Open wetland in middle of fen. ................................................ 86
Thick growth of Chara in study site Chara pond. .......................... 87
Large transmitter attached to turtle carapace. ............................. 88
Alphabetical turtle marking system diagram. .............................. 89
Diagram of sample markings for turtle ABX. ............................... 90
Turtle with notched markings. ................................................. 91
Small transmitter attached to carapace. .................................... 92
. Labeled diagram of study site. 93
. Compilation of habitat utilization for transmitter turtles 2007. ......... 94
. Compilation of habitat utilizations for turtles without transmitters

in 2007. .......................................................................... 95
. Compilation of habitat utilizations for transmitter turtles in 2008. ......96
. Compilation of habitat utilizations for turtles without transmitters

in 2008. .......................................................................... 97
. Predated Nesting Site. .......................................................... 98
. Hatchling found in successful nesting location. ........................... 98
. Channel 0 male IKL habitat utilization in 2007. ............................ 99
. Channel 1 male KVW habitat utilization in 2007. ....................... 100
. Channel 2 male ABCK habitat utilization in 2007. ....................... 101
. Channel 3 female KVX habitat utilization in 2007. ....................... 102
. Channel 4 female HKU habitat utilization in 2007. ...................... 103

viii

Figure 22
Figure 23
Figure 24
Figure 25
Figure 26
Figure 27
Figure 28
Figure 29

Figure 30

Figure 31.
Figure 32.
Figure 33.
Figure 34.
Figure 35.
Figure 36.
Figure 37.
Figure 38.

Figure 39.

Figure 40
Figure 41
Figure 42
Figure 43

Figure 44

. Channel 6 female DKVWX habitat utilization in 2007. ................. 104
. Channel 7 female KLU habitat utilization in 2007. ....................... 105
. Channel 8 female HKV habitat utilization in 2007. ....................... 106
. Channel 10 male IKW habitat utilization in 2007. ....................... 107
. Channel 11 female KV habitat utilization in 2007. ...................... 108
. Channel 1 female HJKV habitat utilization in 2008. ..................... 109
. Channel 2 male KUV habitat utilization in 2008. ........................ 110
. Channel 3 female HJK habitat utilization in 2008. ....................... 111
. Channel 4 female ABKW habitat utilization in 2008. .................... 112
Channel 5 female CHJKLVW habitat utilization in 2008. ............. 113
Channel 6 female BDKW habitat utilization in 2008. ................... 114
Channel 7 female AKX habitat utilization in 2008. ...................... 115
Channel 8 female FKS habitat utilization in 2008. ...................... 116
Channel 9 female BKW habitat utilization in 2008. ..................... 117
Channel 11 female CKU habitat utilization in 2008. .................... 118
Channel 12 female ABCKW habitat utilization in 2008. ............... 119
Channel 13 female DKP habitat utilization in 2008. .................... 120
Channel 14 female BHK habitat utilization in 2008. .................... 121
. Channel 15 female ADKO habitat utilization in 2008. .................. 122
. Channel 16 male ABCK habitat utilization in 2008. ..................... 123
. Channel 17 male IKW habitat utilization in 2008. ....................... 124
. Habitat utilization for male ABCK in 2007 and 2008. .................. 125
. Habitat utilization for male IKW in 2007 and 2008. ..................... 126

ix

Figure 45. Overlapping areas of all females tracked in 2007. ..................... 127

Figure 46. Overlapping areas of all males tracked in 2007. ........................ 128
Figure 47. Channel 1 overlapping with all transmittered females

during 2007. ................................................................... 129
Figure 48. Male overlapping home ranges in 2008. .................................. 130
Figure 49. Female overlapping home ranges in 2008. .............................. 131
Figure 50. Picture of Sphagnum spp. moss mounds. ................................ 132

Figure 51. C. gulfata basking on top of sedge on Sphagnum spp. moss
mounds. ........................................................................ 132

Figure 52. Channel 4 aestivation and hibernation locale. ........................... 133

Figure 53. Fallen Shrubby Cinquefoil petals with comparison

Spotted Turtle. ................................................................ 134
Figure 54. Fallen Shrubby Cinquefoil petals. ........................................... 134
Figure 55. Deer trails in the study site. ................................................... 135
Figure 56. Total utilization area for all turtles in 2007 and 2008. .................. 136
Figure 57. 2007 and 2008 Spotted Turtle sex distribution. ......................... 137
Figure 58. Main aggregations of Spotted Turtles during 2007. .................... 138
Figure 59. Main aggregations of Spotted Turtles during 2008. .................... 139
Figure 60. 25 September 2007 possible hibemaculum. ............................. 140
Figure 61. 2 October 2007 possible hibemaculum. .................................... 141
Figure 62. 12 October 2007 possible hibemaculum. .................................. 142
Figure 63. 16 October 2007 possible hibemaculum. ................................. 143

*lmages in this thesis are presented in color.

Chapter 1: Habitat and Movement of Clemmys guttata (Schneider)
Introduction

The Spotted Turtle, Clemmys guttata (Schneider), is a semi-aquatic North
American turtle in the family Emydidae. Spotted Turtles are endemic to eastern
North America and range from southern Great Lakes region (Illinois, lower
Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, southern Ontario) east through Pennsylvania and New
York to southern Quebec, and New England, and southward along the eastern
seaboard (piedmont and coastal plain east of the Appalachian Mountains) to
northern Florida (Ernst etal, 1994; Conant and Collins, 1991).

C. guttata is a small turtle with a smooth, keeless, low, oval black/brown
carapace overlaid with small rounded yellow spots. The carapace is widest at
the posterior. Occasionally appearing rust colored from staining, which may
result from dissolved tannins or iron deposits. Spot number varies with some
specimens lacking spots, while others have up to 125 scattered across the
carapace and face (Roach, 2006). The hingeless, orangish-yellow plastron may
display variable black/brown blotching. Secondary sexual characteristics are
usually marked: males typically with tan chins, brown eyes, slightly concave
plastra, and long, thick tails with vent beyond posterior carapacial rim. Females
with yellow chins, orange eyes, flat or convex plastra, and shorter, thinner tails
with vent beneath posterior marginals (Blake, 1922; Roach, 2006). In both
sexes, heads mostly black with usually a few yellow spots and laterally one or

more irregular orange or yellow blotch. The outer surfaces of legs are black,

usually with a few yellow spots, while the lower leg surfaces, neck and other soft
parts often orange or pinkish mottled with black (Harding, 1997).

At hatching, the blue-black young Spotted Turtle is about 2.8 cm long.
Carr (1952) reports that its width may be up to 95% of its length, making it
appear almost round. Coloration that of the adult, but with usually one yellow
spot per carapace scute; although, initially, some hatchlings may lack carapace
spots. The head always spotted, with possible neck spotting (Ernst et al, 1994).
Plastron yellowish-orange with central dark blotch (Harding, 1997). Hatchling’s
tail proportionally longer than adult. The egg tooth (caruncle) drops off by end of
the first week (Ernst et al, 1994).

Unfortunately, Spotted Turtles are small and colorful, as well as shy, timid
creatures with an easy-going disposition, exhibiting no trace of aggressiveness,
thus creating a high demand as an aquarium or terrarium pet (Cahn, 1937).
Roach (2006) describes the Spotted Turtle as, one of God’s greatest
creations; one of the prettiest turtles on the face of the earth.” This kind of
testament contributes to its over-collection and pet trade popularity. In addition,
overgrazing (Minton, 1972), agricultural equipment such as plows, excavators
(Fowle, 2001) and mowers (Ernst, 1976), vandalistic shooting (Harding, 1997),
predation of individuals and nestlings by raccoons (Procyon Iota!) and skunks
(Mephitis mephitis) (Ernst, 1976; Cahn, 1937), along with road-crossing
mortalities (Ernst, 1976) are additional major factors impacting population
decline. Muskrat (Ondatra zibethica) predation has also been recorded in

several populations of Spotted Turtles (Grant, 1936; Nemuras, 1966).

Based on the slow growth rate, delayed maturity, small clutch size, and
low egg and juvenile survivorship, the species is considered especially
vulnerable (Wilson etal, 1999; Harding, 1997). These factors further exacerbate
local population susceptibility extinctions (Oldham, 1991).

C. guttata research has been conducted in other areas of its range, but
remains poorly studied in Michigan. Prior to this study little has been
documented on the Spotted Turtle in Michigan (Ruthven etal, 1928; Harding,
1997; Lutz, 2008). C. guttata studies and research have been conducted in
Ontario (Litzgus etal, 1999; Litzgus, 1996; Chippindale, 1989; Haxton and Berrill,
2001), Maine (Joyal etal, 2001), Maryland (Nemuras, 1966; Ward etal, 1976),
Massachusetts (Fowle, 2001; Graham, 1995), South Carolina (Lovich, 1990;
Litzgus and Mousseau, 2004), Georgia (Folkerts and Skorepa, 1967),
Connecticut (Perillo, 1997), Florida (Bamwell etal, 1997; Berry, 1978),
Pennsylvania (Ernst and Zug, 1994; Ernst, 1970; Ernst, 1975), Ohio (Lewis and
Ritzenthaler, 1997), Indiana (Minton, 1972) and Illinois (Cahn, 1937).

In the United States, the Spotted Turtle is not currently listed under the
US. Federal Endangered Species Act; however, it is listed as endangered and
threatened where it occurs in several states and Canada. Nature Serve’s
Conservation Status Ranks classify the species status anywhere from 85 (most
secure) to SI (critically imperiled). In Michigan, not only is the Spotted Turtle
threatened, but it is listed as 32, meaning imperiled (six to twenty occurrences or

restricted range) (www.natureserve.org)

helm
Previous Studies

Habitat requirements vary depending on range and topographic
conditions. General habitat preferences include shallow ponds, wet meadows,
tamarack swamps, bogs, fens, marsh channels, Sphagnum spp. seepages, slow
streams and clear shallow water with mud or muck bottom and ample aquatic
and emergent vegetation (Harding, 1997). Habitat preferences documented by
other researchers are compiled in Table 1. Little data has been documented on
preferred Michigan habitat requirements.

Females typically produce one, occasionally two clutches, of one to eight
eggs per year (Ernst, 1970; Wilson, 1989, Ernst and Zug, 1994; Litzgus and
Brooks, 1998). Besides some nests being dug into Sedge spp. tussocks (Ernst,
2001 ), nest sites include hummocks of moist Sphagnum moss and loamy soil of
marshy pastures (Ernst, 1970; Belmore, 1980; Chippindale, 1989).

C. guttata is comparatively cold tolerant, actually preferring cooler
environments (Ernst, 1982; Nemuras, 1966). It generally emerges earlier in
spring, than other turtle species, often as soon as the snow cover melts (Ernst,
1982). It is considered most active in cool, early spring (Ward et al, 1976; Lovich,
1988; Litzgus and Brooks, 2000). Unlike other turtle species, the Spotted Turtle
does not tolerate heat, with inactivity observed when an average mean
temperature of 203°C is reached (Ernst et al, 1994). Basking for long lengths of
time is also minimized with increased temperatures. Being heliotherrnic, it can

often be observed first thing in the morning basking in the sun, but will disappear

into the muck, mud or vegetation as the temperature begins to increase. Later,
as temperatures fall, the turtle may once again emerge to bask.

Spotted Turtles are specialized in habitat preferences. Habitat choice may
vary in different portions of its range. Unpolluted, shallow, mud and muck
bottomed water bodies, such as marshes, bogs, swamps, small streams,
drainage ditches, and vernal ponds (Ernst and Zug, 1994; Graham, 1995;
Ditmars, 1933; Harding, 1997) are preferred. Other habitats may include fens
(Lewis and Ritzenthaler, 1997; Lovich, 1987), grassy areas (Ward etal, 1976;
Ditmars, 1933) and terrestrial environments (Berry, 1978; Fowle, 2001).

Many factors have led to decline of C. guttata populations correlating to
their S2 ranking. Habitat destruction caused by development, marshland
drainage, pollution, and fragmentation (roads, fences, curbs, railroad tracks, and
retaining walls) are a few documented reasons for reported declines (Lovich and
Jaworski, 1988; Cook etal, 1980; Harding, 1997; Conant and Collins, 1991;
Fowle, 2001).

Introduction of invasive plant species (Conant and Collins, 1991;
COSEWIC, 2004) also plays a major role in habitat destruction and is becoming
a major threat to turtle populations. Once a habitat becomes overgrown with
later successional plant species, it may be unsuitable for Spotted Turtles (Burke
etal, 2000; Graham, 1995). These invasives include, but are not limited to,
Glossy Buckthom (Fihamnus frangula), Phragmites (Phragmites australis), and

Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria).

Movement Patterns
Previous Studies

Cagle (1944) defines three major turtle movement categories: first, local
activity resulting from food foraging, seeking basking sites, or mating impulse;
second, seasonal migrations; third, irregular periods of migration.

Important studies in Pennsylvania of C. guttata, were conducted by Ernst
(1976), who thought the annual activity cycle of C. guttata was apparently
controlled by two major factors: water temperature and reproductive drive. Water
temperature influenced all of the normal activities such as feeding, basking, and
dormancy, and also possibly limited reproductive activity when too low. At
normal seasonal temperatures in his study site, reproductive drive controlled
many spring activities of C. guttata.

Ernst (1967) also reported that feeding does not occur until water
temperatures reach 14°C. Active feeding continued as long as water
temperature remained above this temperature. Initial activity after cold weather
dormancy was spent mostly basking to gain heat and maintain relatively high
body temperatures.

Ernst (1976) found daily periods of basking and foraging varied in length
depending upon environmental conditions. In periods of cool weather, Spotted
Turtles either bask for most of the day, and feed only sparingly or become
inactive by burrowing into the mud or entering muskrat burrows. During rainy

weather, few C. guttata were active.

Activity was not only triggered by temperature, but also daylight hours. As
darkness approached, the turtles burrowed into the mud bottom of some
watenivay or crawled into muskrat burrows and became inactive after dusk
(Ernst, 1976).

Home Rage
Previous Studies

Home range is defined as the area in which turtles are observed during a
given year (Ernst 1970). There are several methods to measure home range,
constantly being revised and upgraded. Two common methods are Minimum
Convex Polygon (MCP) and Kernel Home Range Analysis (KHRA), both were
used for this study. Minimum Convex Polygon is the home range that includes
outer boundaries (peripheral) of observation, including most outliers. It takes into
account most location points, including 95% of those observed. MCP is well
defined and straight forward.

Worton (1989) described Kernel Home Range Analysis as the utilization
distribution (how much area an individual animal is using in a given time period)
based on points observed. Kernel Home Range Analysis tends to give the most
accurate home range data compared to other analyse (i.e. Minimum Convex
Polygon). The 95%, 85%, 75%, and 50% Kernel estimation based on utilization
distribution was used to eliminate any “outliers” that would artificially inflate home
range.

Ernst (1970) used minimum and modified minimum home ranges which

are similar to Minimum Convex Polygon and Kernel Home Range Analysis. The

ind!

her
and

SUE!

and
dele
du'ir

sulfa

P0!!!

hecte

fang.

Cher

two methods were used to measure home ranges of both male and female
individuals. His study concluded that females had a mean minimum range of
1.31 acres (0.53 hectares) and a modified minimum range of 1.25 acres (0.509
hectares), while males had a mean minimum range of 1.3 acres (0.53 hectares)
and a modified minimum range of 1.23 acres (0.498 hectares). His data
suggested that there was no significant difference between male and female
home ranges.

Home ranges studied by Ernst (1970) in Pennsylvania overlapped in time
and space, but no territoriality was displayed. Territory defined as an area of
defended space. Interest in other individual Spotted Turtles was shown only
during the mating period. Home ranges of females usually did not include a
suitable nesting area and individuals had to migrate out of their range to nest.

Litzgus (1996) determined home range estimates using Minimum Convex
Polygon and found that the mean home range size for females was 3.22
hectares and 3.58 hectares for males. No significant difference between home
range sizes for males and females was reported.

Breisch (2006), using combined data, stated that the mean home range
for West Virginia male and female Spotted Turtles was 0.39 hectares using
Minimum Convex Polygon. In Indiana, Barlow (1999) documented a home range
of 2.03 hectares for males and 2.82 hectares for females also using Minimum
Convex Polygon (MCP). No differences in home range sizes were found in her
Indiana study, although overlapping of home ranges was extensive. On the

other hand, Haxton and Berrill (1999) in Ontario, Canada found an average home

range using MCP of 3.7 hectares, with females having a significantly larger home
range than males. Differences in numbers, methodology, locale, and habitat
could explain the varied findings by Spotted Turtle researchers.

Homin

Previous Studies

In Michigan, Cagle (1944) reported a tendency for turtles to return to a
given area, displaying homing behavior. The study showed seasonal
movements away from the home range occurred during early spring and late fall,
when either the need for hibernating quarters or “...the period of spring
wandering led the turtle to new areas.” Turtles, forced from their home area by
aberrant habitat changes, either followed the last remnants of water or moved at
random in search of a suitable environment. Cagle (1944) found individuals
forced from their home ranges may return to them when conditions are again
suitable.

Previous studies suggested some turtle species, including C. guttata, have
homing ability even after being removed from their home range (Breder, 1927;
Nichols, 1939; Medsger, 1919; Schneck, 1886; Grant, 1936). Ernst (1968) found
small numbers of C. guttata in a Pennsylvania population returned to the original
capture point 4 to 64 days after being moved 805 m upstream from his study site.
He suggested that the turtles could have recognized the current, temperature
gradient, and aromatic characteristics of a certain creek and followed it home, but

provided no evidence as to which of these are most important.

Objectives

The specific goal of this study was to observe Spotted Turtles in their
natural habitat with the purpose of determining:
. Habitat preferences:
0 hydrophyte identification
0 Nesting
0 location
0 vegetation used
0 nest building activity
0 egg/hatchling observation
0 Movement and movement patterns:
0 home range
0 homing ability (does it occur?)
0 Overlapping of home range (does it occur?)
0 comparisons between male and female movement
0 Population dynamics and demography
0 Comparisons of male/femaIe/juvenile
0 Seasonal Activities:
0 Aestivation (does it occur?)
0 location
0 Hibernation
. Locaflon

o Communal hibemaculum (does it occur?)

10

iii!

an

AU

Tan

31’
.,,

3‘!

0 Site fidelity (does it occur?)
This was accomplished through radio telemetry, hand capturing, mark and
recapture methods and thousands of hours of observation and recording data.
Study Site Description

This study was conducted in a southwestern Michigan fen. Defined by
Chadde (2002), a fen is a peat covered wetland with a constant flow of mineral
rich groundwater which may appear dry at the surface in later summer months.
During drier periods, the water table is present just below the ground surface.
Fen soil is characterized as alkaline (pH ranging from 7.9 to 8.3) and hydric
which means it is flooded or saturated long enough during the growing season so
that anaerobic conditions develop in the upper strata. Groundwater contributes
both calcium and magnesium minerals to the wetland.

Chadde (2002) also stated wetlands, which include fens, have at least one
of the following three attributes regarding vegetation, soils and hydrology: (1)
predominant plants are hydrOphytes, (2) soils are largely undrained, hydric soils,
and (3) water will either permanently or periodically cover the area during some
or all of the growing season each year.

The fen in this study was approximately 30 hectares in size. In the early
1800’s (presettlement era) land descriptions were recorded by people walking
and surveying section lines. Areas where no survey section lines were available,
a “best guess” was used. Extrapolation was determined from what little
information was provided by surveyors. The habitat and area where today this

study took place, was referred to as a “Shrub Swamp/Emergent Marsh” by Arc

11

View 9.2 (Figure 1); said to contain taller, woody hydrophytes, including
Dogwood and Willow plant species. This suggests that the survey may have
commenced from a section line that was near where the main road is today. If
that is the case, the surveyor may not have been able to see beyond the taller
shrub species to record an existing area of short vegetation.

The plant majority within the study site were hydrophytes, defined by
Chadde (2002) as plants that grow in water or soil that is at least periodically
deficient in oxygen resulting from high water saturation. Today, the study site
center would be considered an open Sedge meadow; shorter hydrophytes
(61cm) included Sphagnum spp., Sedge tussocks including Common
Threesquare (Scirpus pungens), and Sh rubby Cinquefoil (Potenti/la fruticosa),
which created safe havens for C. guttata.

Beyond the Sedge meadow, a taller (2 to 5 m) growth of vegetation
containing both woody and non-woody plants included, but not limited to, cattails
(Typha Iatifolia and Typha angustifolia) both of which will be referred to as Typha
throughout the paper, Red-osier Dogwood (Cornus sericea), Poison Sumac
(Toxicodendron vernix), Northern Swamp Dogwood (Cornus racemosa), Swamp
Rose (Rosa palustris), and many species of Sedges and Rushes (Table 2 and
Table 3). At the lake’s edge, thick canopies of Glossy Buckthom (Rhamnus
frangula) dominated making some areas practically impenetrable (Figure 2).
Prescribed burns by The Southwest Michigan Land Conservancy were initiated in
the past near the lake’s edge in attempt to eradicate the thick stand of Glossy

Buckthom.

12

Surrounding this area in presettlement times were Mixed Oak
Savanna and Oak-History Forests. These areas are still visible but housing
developments and infrastructure have altered the original habitat. During this
study, all nearby surrounding habitats, including ponds, lakes, marshes, and
wetlands were surveyed, but turtles were only observed in the study site.

The fen was surrounded by housing developments on two sides, a lake on
the third side, and a main road on the fourth side. This was described as a
“shelf” that attaches to a nearby lake, protected by The Southwest Michigan Land
Conservancy and private land owners.

In addition, the site included various protected species plants which
included, but were not limited to, Northern Grass-Of-parnassus (Parnassia
palustris) and Lesser Fringed Gentian (Gentiana procera).

Wildlife sighted in the fen included Coyote (Canis Iatrans), Red Fox
(Vulpes fulva), Raccoon (Procyon Iotor), Meadow Vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus)
and Muskrat (Ondatra zibethica) (Table 4). Reptiles and amphibians
documented included, but were not limited to, Eastern Box Turtle (Terrapene
carolina carolina), Eastern Massasauga Rattlesnake (Sistrurus catenatus
catenatus), Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata) and Spring Peeper
(Pseudacris crucifer) (Table 5). Lastly, the site included a variety of nesting
wetland bird species including Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax trail/r), Swamp
Sparrow (Melospiza Georgiana), Common Snipe (Gallinago gallinago), Common
Yellowthroat Warbler (Geothlypis trichas), and Yellow Warbler (Dendroica

petechia) (Table 6).

13

 

man

dlStr

i038:

On the fen’s east side was a pond dominated by thick growths of algae
(Chara spp.), characterized as a Chara pond (Michigan Dept. of Env. Quality
Water Bureau, 2005). Chara spp. (common names: Stonewart, Muskgrass) is an
advanced form of algae. It has a musky odor and gritty texture caused by
mineral deposits on its surface. It grows in low, dense mats. In a Chara pond,
water is clear and rich in calcium and some magnesium. The water remains
relatively unaffected by intensive land use or other surface nutrients and most
often found in areas supporting mosaics of semi-aquatic vegetation (Joint Nature
Conservation Committee, 2005). Chara spp. grows densely because, like other
algae filters dissolved nutrients out of the water instead of sediments. In this
respect, Chara spp. are highly beneficial vegetation (Michigan Dept. of Env.
Quality Water Bureau, 2005). However, Chara spp. develops undenivater, grows
rapidly, and as a dominant species, is usually considered undesirable, causing
oxygen depletion (Brinlee 2009). Anchored to the bottom, it develops into large
green mats with thin leaf-like structures, and has proven difficult for fish
maneuverability (Peterson and Lee, 2005). It is very common and widely
distributed throughout Michigan.

Muskrats and their burrows were present in the pond. This pond had
loose, muddy, marl deposits which, when stepped on, seemed “bottomless” and
made it very dangerous for humans and perhaps turtles. Chara spp. appeared to
play an important role in the life history of this Spotted Turtle population. It was
a factor in mortality of Spotted Turtles. Discussion in results section of Chapter

2.

14

Methods

Ernst (1970) defined sexual maturity in both sexes as when the individual
reached a carapace length of 8.0 cm. For purposes of sexual determination at
the start of this project, Ernst’s 8.0 cm limit was used for obvious male and
females. However, female characteristics are juvenile characteristics, and male
characteristics (when it comes to secondary characteristics) are yet to be
defined. Thus in this study, Ernst’s definition may not hold true.

From March 2007 to March 2009, telemetry equipment was used for
tracking movement of selected male and female Spotted Turtles. In early spring
(late March, early April), adult turtles were equipped with transmitters. During the
two year study period, 29 turtles with an average age of 12.3 years and carapace
length of 9.1 cm were telemetered. In 2007, twelve transmitters (model # 51-2FT
Holohil Systems Ltd., Ontario, Canada) were attached to the study turtles.
Transmitter battery life was at least ten months, lasting an entire year. Two small
holes on the carapace’s posterior left side were drilled into the marginal scutes.
The transmitter with a 22.9 cm whip antenna was attached using fine gauge
copper wire. The transmitter was additionally secured with a waterproof epoxy to
keep out debris, or prevent catching on vegetation. Black permanent marker was
used to camouflage the epoxy for better blending into carapace color. When
complete, the transmitter weight was 12 g or approximately 10% to 11% of the
turtle’s original body weight (Figure 5). This was within the range used by other
researchers. For example, Breisch (2006) described transmitter weight to be

10.2% body weight. The receiver used in this study was a Telonics TR-4

15

(Telonics Inc. Products, Mesa, AZ). A hand-held Yagi 3 element folding antenna
(Wildlife Materials lntemational, Murphysboro, IL) was also used in conjunction
for tracking.

Turtles were tracked two to three times a week until November, then once
a month. When a turtle was located, morphometric data was recorded. Using
dial calipers, carapace length, plastron width at the bridge, plastron length and
height were recorded. Sex determinations, as well as weight calculated with
Salter Housewares Ltd. Scale, and age (by counting annuli) were also recorded.
Also documented were injuries, behavior at capture time, GPS coordinates at
observed location (Garmin etrex) and vegetation description.

Carapace temperature (Pro Exotics Tempgun), as well as air temperature
(Kestrel 2000), and water temperature (if not available, substrate temperature
was recorded); also recorded were general weather conditions. All data were
recorded in a field notebook, then transferred to Microsoft Excel data sheet for
each individual turtle (Table 7). Radio telemetry data for each of the
transmittered turtles were also transferred to a Microsoft Excel data sheet (Table
8).

All turtles were hand captured and data were obtained and recorded
during daylight hours. Most turtles were located by traversing through the fen.
During fall, turtles were found by “mucking”, which is the process of probing
through the mud, muck and water by hand to locate turtles.

Turtles were marked by filing notches in the marginal scutes. A marking

system using the alphabet letters was used (Figure 6, Figure 7, and Figure 8).

16

For hatchlings, a pair of small scissors was used to clip a single triangular
shaped notch into the marginal scute.

In 2008, six additional transmitters (model SB-2 modified, Holohil Systems
Ltd., Ontario, Canada) were employed. Transmitter attachment, with a 15.2 cm
whip antenna, was done by drilling one hole into a marginal scute. A fine gauge
copper wire was used to attach the transmitter to the carapace, with waterproof
epoxy for final transmitter securement. The transmitter battery life was six
months, thus, transmitters were removed before turtles proceeded with
hibernation. Total transmitter weight was 6 g which was approximately 4.5% to
6% of the total body weight (Figure 9).

Turtles were tracked one to three times per week until November, then
one to two times per month. Morphometric protocol and data collection methods
were the same as 2007.

During 2007 and 2008, the transmitters (model # S1-2FT) provided
pulses, which when counted, applied to a calculation, then plotted to a
temperature graph (supplied by Holohil Systems Ltd.) identified the turtle’s
hibemaculum temperature. Litzgus and Brooks (2000) suggested a correlation
between turtle’s hibemaculum temperature and actual body temperature.

Maps of Spotted Turtle distribution and analysis were created using Arc
Map 9.2 and Arc View 3.3 (ESRI, Redlands, CA). The Arc View programs were
used to determine MCP and Kernel Home Range Analysis for turtles with
transmitters. Only MCP was generated for turtles without transmitters. MCP

included outer boundaries of observation including most outliers, taking into

17

 

an

ice!

Eve

account most location points. On maps, yellow dots represent turtle observations
and may include more than one observation.
Habitat Results

One of the study objectives was to discover Spotted Turtle habitat
preference. Aggregations and possible preferred habitat locations were indeed
identified. A diagram of the entire fen, pointing out areas of heavy aggregations
was presented (Figure 10).

Turtles with and without transmitters, located during 2007, were plotted in
the study area (Figure 11 and 12). Two 50% Kernel estimation areas were
identified. The first area included was centrally located at the lowest elevation.
Even with 2007’s drought-like conditions, the substrate was similar to saturated
mud. This area, during drier times, tended to be more saturated than most other
areas and aggregations of Spotted Turtles occurred here. The main hydrophytes
varied in height from short (less than one meter) which included Sphagnum spp.,
Sedge, and Shrubby Cinquefoil to taller heights (2-3 meters) including Typha,
Willow, Northern Swamp Dogwood and Red-osier Dogwood.

Within the second 50% Kernel estimator area was an overflow channel,
referred to as “the outlet.” This originated at the lake’s edge and allowed lake
water to flow approximately 15 meters inland. Even during the driest part of
2007, the outlet generally had water in it or was thoroughly saturated, leaving a
thick, organic, mucky substrate. Channel 4 (HKU- female) was tracked and

located deep beneath this muck on several occasions.

18

The area around the outlet was populated by taller (2-5 m) woody and
non-woody hydrophytes including Glossy Buckthom, Swamp Rose, Poison
Sumac, Northern Swamp Dogwood, Red-osier Dogwood, Sedge, Fern and
Sphagnum spp.

Included within one of the four 75% Kernel estimator areas was a locale
designated “the ditch.” The ditch was located at the fen’s southern end, running
east and west perpendicular to a nearby road. Besides rainfall and overflow from
the fen, it collected run-off water. In 2007, during the driest of times, 10 cm of
water was recorded in the ditch. At no time during the two year study was this
location completely dry. Adjacent to the edge, tall emergent vegetation included
Typha, Willow, Poison Sumac, Red-osier Dogwood and Northern Swamp
Dogwood, Sedge, Bulrush and Shrubby Cinquefoil. Turtles with and without
transmitters, frequented this area.

The other three 75% Kernel estimator areas were lower elevation areas,
where turtle aggregations were documented. This included areas where
substrate moisture was present, even during drier months. One of these areas
contained approximately 3 m high, thick canopies of Typha. The second area
was located in a more open area of the fen, just north of the ditch and contained
Bulrush, Sedge and Typha. The third area was referred to as the Chara pond,
dominated by dense Chara species.

Maps of all turtles with and without transmitters found during 2008 study
are found in Figures 13 and 14. This was a much wetter year, with rainfall far

exceeding 2007. Activity and frequency of individuals with and without

19

transmitters were more scattered. This suggests larger area utilization may have
been the result of additional precipitation.

Using Kernel Home Range Analysis, the 50% Kernel estimator area, was
located in two areas of the fen. The first included the study site center a low
elevation area described earlier.

The second area was a 2 m wide trail to the lake, located on the
southeastern edge. This path appears to have been made years ago by the
property owners as an access to the lake. On either side of this path, tall woody
and non-woody plant vegetation was present. The hydrophytes included, but
were not limited to, Swamp Rose, Poison Sumac, Typha, Red-osier Dogwood,
Glossy Buckthom, Sedge and Bulrush. The mud and muck path was trampled
down, forming depressions that allowed for water collection. Tall emergent
vegetation, next to the trail, consisted of many deer trails. These trails also
supported trapped water. These trails opened to the lake’s edge, where there
was low growing vegetation including Sedge, Shrubby Cinquefoil and Bulrush.
With the large amounts of rainfall in 2008, the lake was at capacity causing shore
overflow. In 2008, the turtle activity level was heavy with and without transmitters
in this area.

The 75% Kernel estimation was determined in three fen areas in 2008.
The first area was known as the ditch, which was described above in 2007. The
second area contained short hydrophytes that were less than 1 m in height in a
low elevation area. The main hydrophytes included Sedge, Sphagnum spp., and

Shrubby Cinquefoil. The third area was located near the southwestern lake

20

edge, a low vegetation area which included Shrubby Cinquefoil, Sedge and
Bulrush. Water was present throughout the year.

Sphagnum mounds, with Sedge and Shrubby Cinquefoil growth on top of
the mounds, appeared to provide nesting locations for Spotted Turtles. Although
no turtles were observed nesting in this study, six presumable successful nest
sites were located. Eggshells found deep in the soil indicated successful hatching
seemed likely. All of these nests were found in the previously described
vegetation. Nests were placed in well drained areas exposed to full sunlight.
One predated nest was found in 2008, soon after the eggs had been deposited.
This nest had been dug up, with eggshells on top of the substrate (Figure 15).

On 16 June 2008, a single egg was observed lying on top of a Sphagnum
spp. mound, with Shrubby Cinquefoil growing from the top of the mound. With
further investigation, a nest with additional eggs was located buried in the
Sphagnum spp. mound. The egg observed had a weight of 4 grams, length of 3
cm, and width of 1.7 cm. Major rain storms deluged the site on 2 July 2008 and
most deer trails contained at least 20 cm of water. On 4 July 2008, the nest was
observed underwater, submerged for at least three days. On 4 September 2008,
a hatchling was located with the empty eggshell from one additional hatchling
(suggesting successful emergence). Also included in this nest, was a dead
embryo still in its shell (Figure 16). Ernst et al (1994) reported Spotted Turtle
incubation periods between 70-83 days in length. The incubation period for this

nest was 81 days which fell within this range.

21

Movement Results
2007 Radio Telemetry and Climatic Conditions

Transmitters were attached to 12 turtles in 2007. This included four males
and eight females. In 2007, the total annual rainfall was documented at 33.82
inches (approximately 86 cm). During summer months, the precipitation was well
below normal, causing drought-like conditions throughout the fen. Only areas of
lower elevation contained standing water during this drought period. Included
were six areas previously described in Chapter 1: 1) outlet, 2) area containing
approximately three meter high canopies of Typha, 3) open area in middle of
fen, 4) Chara pond, 5) ditch, and 6) area just north of ditch which contained
hydrophytes Bulrush, Sedge and Typha.

A short summary of each radio telemetered turtles’ movements and
habitat utilization is described below.

Channel 0 - IKL (Male)

Male IKL was first captured and telemetry attached 24 March 2007. He
was observed a total of 72 times throughout the 2007 season. Using Minimum
Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of habitat utilization was 1.60 hectares (Figure
17). Main activity occurred in the ditch. Hydrophytes occupying this area
included Typha, Red-osier Dogwood, Sedge, Willow, and Shrubby Cinquefoil.
Throughout this season, the ditch usually contained more than 10 cm of water.

Male IKL was originally captured coming out of hibemaculum in the ditch.
At the end of the 2007 season, he returned to the ditch to hibernate suggesting

hibemaculum site fidelity.

22

Channel 1 — KVW (Male)

Male KVW was first captured and telemetry attached 25 March 2007. He
was observed a total of 76 times throughout the 2007 season. Using Minimum
Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 2.37 hectares (Figure 18).
Main activity occurred in the open area in middle of fen. This area of lower
elevation held water more frequently than other areas. Hydrophytes occupying
this area included Typha, Red-osier Dogwood, Sedge, Willow, and Shrubby
Cinquefoil.

Male KVW was originally captured coming out of hibemaculum in the fen’s
open middle area. At the end of the 2007 season, he hibernated in same area
from which he emerged earlier in spring, suggesting hibemaculum site fidelity.
Channel 2 — ABCK (Male)

Male ABCK was first captured and telemetry attached 24 March 2007. He
was observed a total of 77 times throughout 2007 season. Using Minimum
Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 3.30 hectares (Figure 19).
Channel 2 movement was extensive throughout fen in 2007, covering a wide
variety of habitats. Two main areas of activity included big trail to lake and lake’s
edge, as well as fen’s open middle area. The big trail to lake was a wide trail that
led from an open area to lake. Both sides of this trail had tall hydrophytes
including Red-osier Dogwood, Poison Sumac, Typha and Glossy Buckthom.
Hydrophytes occupying the middle open area included Typha, Red-osier
Dogwood, Sedge, Willow, and Shrubby Cinquefoil. This area of lower elevation

held water more frequently than other areas.

23

The exact initial spring emergence location of Channel 2 was not
observed but he was found near the middle area of fen with a lower elevation.
The hibernation locale was documented in this same area. This suggests
possible hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 3 — KVX (Female)

Female KVX was first captured and telemetry attached on 20 April 2007.
She was Observed a total of 65 times throughout the 2007 season. Using
Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 0.48 hectares
(Figure 20). Main activity occurred near the road. Hydrophytes included Typha,
Red-osier Dogwood, Swamp Rose and Willow. This turtle was originally located
in close proximity to the main road. After the transmitter was attached, she was
released into a more open area, located some distance from the main road, to
ensure safety. In less than 24 hours, the turtle returned to its original home
range. This finding suggests that homing ability may be present in Spotted
Turtles in this southwestern Michigan fen.

At the end of the 2007 season, she was sighted going into a hibemaculum
near the same location where originally captured in the spring. Further studies of
this turtle need to be completed to assess hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 4 - HKU (Female)

Female HKU was first captured and telemetry attached 11 May 2007. She
was observed a total of 58 times throughout the 2007 season. Using Minimum
Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 0.35 hectares (Figure 21).

Main activity occurred near the lake. Hydrophytes occupying this area included

24

Glossy Buckthom, Sedge, Fem, Purple Loosestrife, Sphagnum spp. and Willow.
Even during drought-like conditions, water was evident below the substrate. Also
near this location was the outlet, which generally contained standing water.
Documented sightings of female HKU, occurred throughout most of the season in
this area. Female HKU was not captured until late spring, making her initial
spring emergence location unknown. At the end of the 2007 season, she was
found hibernating in fen’s open area. Hydrophytes were predominantly Sedge,
Typha and Shrubby Cinquefoil. Caused by low elevation, this area held water
longer than other areas. Future studies need to be completed to determine if this
turtle had hibemaculum site fidelity.
Channel 5 - BKW (Female)

Female BKW was first captured and telemetry attached 21 April 2007.
She was observed a total of 22 times throughout the 2007 season. On 4 June
2007, the transmitter malfunctioned and was removed. Minimum Convex
Polygon (MCP) was not conducted due to incomplete data.
Channel 6 - DKVWX (Female)

Female DKVWX was first captured and telemetry attached 17 May 2007.
She was observed a total of 54 times throughout the 2007 season. Using
Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 0.29 hectares
(Figure 22). Main activity occurred in the outlet and open area in middle of fen.
Main hydrophytes included Typha, Red-osier Dogwood, Sedge, Willow, and
Shrubby Cinquefoil. Due to lower elevation, the substrate was more saturated

than other areas. This turtle was originally captured late spring, making her initial

25

spring emergence location unknown. At the end of 2007, documented
hibernation was in fen’s open area. Future studies need to be completed for
determination of hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 7 - KLU (Female)

Female KLU was first captured and telemetry attached 18 May 2007. She
was observed a total of 55 times throughout the 2007 season. Using Minimum
Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 0.40 hectares (Figure 23).
Main activity occurred in the ditch. Main hydrophytes included Typha, Red-osier
Dogwood, Sedge, Willow, Bulrush, and Shrubby Cinquefoil.

This turtle was originally captured late spring, making her initial spring
emergence location unknown. At the end of 2007, documented hibernation was
in the ditch. Future studies need to be completed for determination of
hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 8 — HKV (Female)

Female HKV first captured and telemetry attached 18 May 2007. She was
observed a total of 34 times throughout the 2007 season. Using Minimum
Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 1.12 hectares (Figure 24).
On 25 June 2007, she was found in the Chara pond, caught in Chara spp. The
turtle was untangled, and it was noted the epoxy was loose and may have
caused the transmitter to “catch” on the Chara spp. With repairs made, the turtle
was released at a safer location, a distance from the Chara pond, in the outlet.
Within 10 days of original move, female turtle HKV had returned to the Chara

pond, suggesting homing ability. On 19 July 2007, the turtle was found dead with

26

its antenna tangled in Chara spp. Main activity occurred in the Chara pond.
Main hydrophytes included Typha and Chara spp.
Channel 9 — KLW (Female)

Female KLW was first captured and telemetry attached 17 May 2007.
This turtle was originally captured near the Chara pond, and observed nine
times. After these nine sightings, female KLW was never observed again. The
turtles’ telemetry location did not change positions after 30 May 2007. With the
inter-connected networks of underground muskrat burrows, the turtle was
believed to be in the burrows and inaccessible for observation. On 17 June
2007, lacking turtle movement for several weeks, the telemetry location
was thoroughly investigated for whereabouts of the missing turtle. Remains were
found in deep water of the Chara pond, with head missing and transmitter still
attached to carapace. Two, possibly three eggs were observed within turtle.
Considering water depth where turtle was found, it is believed that it was
predated by a muskrat. Because data was incomplete, Minimum Convex
Polygon was not conducted.

Channel 10 - IKW (Male)

Male IKW was first captured and telemetry attached 21 May 2007. He
was observed a total of 42 times throughout the 2007 season. Using Minimum
Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 0.45 hectares (Figure 25).
Main activity occurred in the outlet and ditch. Main hydrophytes included Typha,
Red-osier Dogwood, Sedge, Willow, and Shrubby Cinquefoil. Both locations

had documentation of water throughout the dry season. This turtle was originally

27

captured in late spring, making his initial spring emergence location unknown.
The turtle was documented hibernating in the ditch at the end of 2007. Future
studies need to be completed to determine hibemaculum site fidelity.
Channel 11 — KV (Female)

Female KV was first captured and telemetry attached 30 May 2007. She
was observed a total of 46 times throughout the 2007 season. Using Minimum
Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 0.07 hectares (Figure 26).
Main activity occurred in open area in middle of fen. Main hydrophytes included
Typha, Red-osier Dogwood, Sedge, Willow, and Shrubby Cinquefoil. This area
was lower in elevation and held water longer than other areas.

This turtle was originally captured in late spring, making her initial spring
emergence location unknown. At the end of 2007, documented hibernation was
in open area of fen. Female KV returned to the same hibemaculum at the end of
the 2008 season, suggesting hibemaculum site fidelity.

2008 Radio Telemetry and Climatic Conditions

In 2008, 17 turtles had telemetry attached. This included 14 females and
three males. Unlike 2007, the 2008 season was much wetter with higher levels
of rainfall documented throughout summer months. Total rainfall for entire year
equaled 54.1 inches (approximately 137 cm). This was substantially higher than
33.82 inches (approximately 86 cm) documented for 2007. Most areas
throughout the site contained standing water during 2008. The lower elevation
areas had increased water levels, and higher concentrations of turtles than the

higher elevation areas of the fen. These lower elevation areas included: 1) open

28

area in middle of fen, 2) wide trail to lake including lake’s edge, 3) ditch, 4) an
area of short hydrophytes, and 5) far southwestern edge of lake.
Channel 0- KMW (Female)

Female KMW was first captured and telemetry attached 9 June 2008 near
lake’s edge. She was observed a total of 15 times throughout the 2008 season.
During the 15 times this turtle was observed, it was found moving towards the
Chara pond. On 4 September 2008, she was rescued from the middle of the
Chara pond where she was caught in Chara spp. Telemetry equipment was
removed, in order to avoid a repeat situation, similar to the one which occurred in
2007, with Channel 8. Due to minimal number of sightings, Minimum Convex
Polygon (MCP) was not generated for this turtle.

Channel 1 - HJKV (Female)

Female HJKV was first captured and telemetry attached 13 May 2008.
She was observed a total of 39 times throughout the 2008 season. Using
Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 1.20 hectares
(Figure 27). Main activity occurred in area of big trail to lake, a wide trail that led
from open area to lake. Both sides of this trail had tall hydrophytes including
Red-osier Dogwood, Poison Sumac, Typha and Glossy Buckthom. Main
hydrophytes included Sedge, Bulrush and Shrubby Cinquefoil.

This turtle was originally captured in late spring, making her initial spring
emergence location unknown. Documented hibernation was near lake’s edge.

Future studies need to be completed to determine hibemaculum site fidelity.

29

Channel 2 - KUV (Male)

Male KUV was first captured and telemetry attached 10 June 2008. He
was observed a total of 13 times. The turtle was originally located in the ditch
and migrated towards the Chara pond. On 23 July 2008, he was found dead in
the Chara pond. Main hydrophytes in the ditch area included Typha, Sedge,
Bulrush, Shrubby Cinquefoil and Gray Twig Dogwood. Hydrophytes in the Chara
pond included Typha and Chara spp. Even though Channel 2 was only observed
13 times, total area of utilization (using Minimum Convex Polygon) was
generated. Home range for this turtle was 0.65 hectares (Figure 28).

Channel 3 - HJK (Female)

Female HJK was first captured and telemetry attached 23 May
2008. She was observed a total of 35 times throughout the 2008 season. Using
Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 0.71 hectares
(Figure 29). Main activity occurred in an area which contained a tall canopy of
Typha near main road. Hydrophytes included Typha, Swamp Rose, Willow,
Fern, Sedge, and Shrubby Cinquefoil.

This turtle was originally captured late in spring making her initial spring
emergence location unknown. Documented hibernation included a tall canopy
of Typha, Swamp Rose, Willow, Sphagnum spp. and Sedge. Future studies
need to be completed to determine hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 4 - ABKW (Female)
Female ABKW was first captured and telemetry attached 31 May 2008.

She was observed a total of 34 times throughout the 2008 season. Using

30

Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 0.23 hectares
(Figure 30). Main activity occurred in middle open area of fen. Main hydrophytes
included Sedge, Shrubby Cinquefoil and Sphagnum spp. moss mounds.

This turtle was originally captured in late spring, making her initial spring
emergence location unknown. Documented hibernation was in the open area of
the fen. Female ABKW was buried in a hibemaculum below a Sphagnum spp.
moss mound covered with Shrubby Cinquefoil and Sedge. Investigations from
last year showed this turtle hibernating in an area in close proximity to its 2008
hibemaculum, indicating hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 5 - CHJKLVW (Female)

Female CHJKLVW was first captured and telemetry attached 10 June
2008. She was observed a total of 26 times throughout the 2008 season. Using
Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 0.22 hectares
(Figure 31). Main activity occurred in an area consisting of a tall canopy of
Typha, Swamp Rose, Willow, Sedge, Shrubby Cinquefoil and Sphagnum spp.
moss mounds.

Channel 5 was originally captured in late spring, making her initial spring
emergence location unknown. Documented hibernation was in the same area
with the tall canopy of Typha. Future studies need to be completed to determine
hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 6 - BDKW (Female)
Female BDKW was first captured and telemetry attached 31 May 2008.

She was observed a total of 34 times throughout the 2008 season. Using

31

Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 0.60 hectares
(Figure 32). Main activity occurred in open area in middle of fen, with several
sightings occurring in thick areas of Glossy Buckthom near lake. Main
hydrophytes included Typha, Willow, Sedge, Shrubby Cinquefoil and Sphagnum
spp. moss mounds.

Channel 6 was originally captured in late spring, making her initial spring
emergence location unknown. Documented hibernation was in middle open area
of fen. Future studies need to be completed to determine hibemaculum site
fidelity.

Channel 7 - AKX (Female)

Female AKX was captured and telemetry attached on 12 June 2008. She
was observed a total of 24 times throughout the 2008 season. Using Minimum
Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 1.09 hectares (Figure 33).
This turtle was initially found in 2008 near the edge of lake and migrated, as the
season progressed, toward middle open area of ten. Main hydrophytes in this
area included Typha, Bulrush, Sedge, Shrubby Cinquefoil and Sphagnum spp.
moss mounds.

In March 2007, Female AKX was observed leaving a hibemaculum in
open area of fen. She was documented entering a hibemaculum in this same
area at the end of 2008, suggesting hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 8 - FKS (Female)
Female FKS was first captured and telemetry attached 10 June 2008.

She was observed a total of 26 times throughout the 2008 season. Using

32

Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 1.33 hectares
(Figure 34). Main activity occurred in lower elevation area which included
Sphagnum spp., Sedge, and Shrubby Cinquefoil. Later in the season, female
FKS migrated to the ditch, where hibernation was documented. Main
hydrophytes included Typha, Red-osier Dogwood, Sedge, Willow, Bulrush and
Shrubby Cinquefoil. Channel 8 was captured in late spring; her initial spring
emergence location was unknown. Future studies need to be completed to
determine hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 9 - BKW (Female)

Female BKW was first captured and telemetry attached 12 June 2008.
She was observed a total of 26 times throughout the 2008 season. Using
Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 0.16 hectares
(Figure 35). Main activity occurred on big trail that led from open area to lake.
Both sides of this trail had tall hydrophytes which included Red-osier Dogwood,
Poison Sumac, Typha and Glossy Buckthom.

This turtle was originally captured in late spring, making her initial spring
emergence location unknown. Female BKW was documented hibernating near
entrance of big trail to lake. Future studies need to be completed to determine
hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 11 - CKU (Female)

Female CKU was first captured and telemetry attached 10 June 2008.

She was observed a total of 26 times throughout the 2008 season. Using

Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 1.08 hectares

33

(Figure 36). Main activity occurred in a tall canopy of Typha, Swamp Rose,
Willow, Sedge, Shrubby Cinquefoil and Sphagnum spp. moss mounds.

This turtle was originally captured in late spring, making her initial spring
emergence location unknown. Documented hibernation was in same area of a
tall canopy which included Typha, Swamp Rose, Willow, Sedge, Shrubby
Cinquefoil, and Sphagnum spp. moss mounds. Future studies need to be
completed to determine hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 12 — ABCKW (Female)

ABCKW was captured and telemetry attached 11 May 2008. She was
observed a total of 37 times throughout the 2008 season. Using Minimum
Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 0.49 hectares (Figure 37).
Main activity occurred in open area in middle of fen. Several sightings occurred
near lake, in thick areas of Glossy Buckthom. Main hydrophytes included Typha,
Bulrush, Sedge, Shrubby Cinquefoil and Sphagnum spp. moss mounds.

Female ABCKW was first observed 29 March 2007 coming out of a
hibemaculum in middle open area of fen. On 5 October 2007, ABCK was
observed entering a hibemaculum, identified as same spring emergence
location. In 2008, ABCKW was documented hibernating in middle open area of
ten, suggesting hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 13 - DKP (Female)
Female DKP was captured and telemetry attached 11 May 2008. She

was observed a total of 39 times throughout the 2008 season. Using

34

Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 1.08 hectares
(Figure 38). Main activity occurred in an area which included a tall canopy of
Typha, Willow, Swamp Rose, and Glossy Buckthom. On 3 October 2008, the
turtle was found dead in deep water surrounded by a tall canopy of Typha and
Willow. No visible signs or cause of death were noted.

Channel 14 — BHK (Female)

Female BHK was first observed 24 March 2007 emerging from a
hibemaculum in middle open area of fen. She was captured and telemetry
attached 11 May 2008. She was observed a total of 35 times throughout the
2008 season. Using Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization
was 0.79 hectares (Figure 39). Main activity occurred in open area in middle of
fen, with several sightings occurring near lake in thick areas of Glossy Buckthom.
Main hydrophytes included Typha, Bulrush, Sedge, Shrubby Cinquefoil and
Sphagnum spp. moss mounds.

In September of 2008, the transmitter was removed; preferred
hibemaculum was undetermined. Future studies are needed to determine
hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 15 — ADKO (Female)

Female ADKO was captured and telemetry attached 15 May 2008. She
was observed a total of 36 times throughout the 2008 season. Using
Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of utilization was 0.22 hectares
(Figure 40). Main activity occurred in an area of Shmbby Cinquefoil, Sedge,

Glossy Buckthom and Sphagnum spp. moss mounds. This turtle was

35

documented in a possible hibemaculum buried deep in mud and water, beneath
thick brush and Sedge pile. Future studies need to be generated to determine
hibemaculum site fidelity.

Channel 16- ABCK (Male)

Male ABCK was Channel 2 in 2007. He was captured again and
telemetry reattached on 16 May 2008. He was observed a total of 30 times
throughout the 2008 season. Using Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area
of utilization was 1.81 hectares (Figure 41). Main activity occurred in big trail to
lake and its edge, and open area in middle of fen. Both sides of this trail had tall
hydrophytes which included Red-osier Dogwood, Poison Sumac, Typha and
Glossy Buckthom. Main hydrophytes included Typha, Red-osier Dogwood,
Sedge, Willow, and Shrubby Cinquefoil. This area of the fen was lower in
elevation, which held water longer than other areas.

In 2007, ABCK was documented emerging and hibernating in the middle
open area with lower elevation. In 2008, he was documented emerging from the
same locale as 2007, but hibernated in big trail near lake. Site fidelity was
suggested from 2007 data but was not found in 2008.

Channel 17 - IKW (Male)

Male IKW was Channel 10 in 2007. He was recaptured and telemetry
reattached 1 June 2008. He was observed a total of 31 times throughout the
2008 season. Using Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), total area of habitat

utilization was 1.33 hectares (Figure 42). Main activity occurred along the lake’s

36

edge and ditch. Main hydrophytes included Typha, Red-osier Dogwood, Sedge,
Willow, Sphagnum spp. moss mounds and Shrubby Cinquefoil.

In 2007, IKW was documented emerging from a hibemaculum in the ditch.
He was recorded later in the season returning to ditch to possibly hibernate. In
2008, he was recorded returning again to ditch for possible hibernation. This
information suggested hibemaculum site fidelity.

The area of utilization of all turtles with and without transmitters in 2007
and 2008 was 13.30 hectares. Area of preferred habitat was described in
Chapter 1. Each individual turtle’s home range included nesting locations, areas
of aestivation (when applicable), and hibernation.

Radio telemetry was used to track turtles in the 2007 and 2008 season.
Radio telemetry turtles were observed more than 1500 times. More females than
males had transmitters attached to them with hopes of acquiring a better
understanding of nesting activity. This proved to be difficult, with no females
being observed nesting.

The home ranges of males were larger than females. The mean home
range in 2007 using Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP), for males, was 1.9
hectares and for females 0.5 hectares. The mean home range in
2008 using Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP) for males, was 1.3 hectares and for
females 0.7 hectares. Barlow (1999) and Litzgus (1996) found no significant
difference in home range sizes between males and females. Haxton and Berrill

(1999) found females to have a significantly larger mean home range.

37

In 2007, the home range of ABCK Channel 2 male was 3.30 hectares.
Male ABCK, again, was equipped with telemetry in 2008, this time as Channel
16. His home range was observed to be 1.81 hectares (Figure 43). The 2007
home range was distinctly larger than 2008. It should be noted that in 2007,
ABCK’s transmitter was a larger model. In 2008, a smaller transmitter was
attached to the turtle.

In 2007, Male IKW was equipped with a larger model transmitter (Channel
10). In 2008, the smaller transmitter (Channel 17) was attached. The home
range in 2007, with the larger transmitter, was 0.45 hectares. In 2008, the
distance covered with the smaller transmitter was 1.33 hectares (Figure 44). The

2008 home range was distinctly larger than the 2007 home range.

 

Homingand Overlapping Results

Homing behavior is the ability of an animal to return to its home range
when removed (Cagle 1944). This was documented on two occasions in this
study. In April 2007, female KVX was captured in close proximity to a main road.
After attachment of transmitter, the turtle was released in another area of the
habitat, out of her home range, to ensure the turtle’s safety. In less than 24
hours, the turtle had returned to its home range where originally captured.

The second instance of homing behavior occurred with Channel 8.
Female HKV was found tangled in Chara pond, 25 June 2007. She was
untangled; repairs were made to transmitter (new epoxy) and released out of her
home range from Chara pond. On 15 July 2007, Channel 8 was tracked and

located back at Chara pond. This suggested homing behavior.

38

In 2007, overlapping of female and male home ranges was documented
(Figure 45 and Figure 46). The largest male home range (Channel 2) was 3.30
hectares. Overlapping occurred with four transmittered females. The home
range of Channel 0 (male) was 1.6 hectares which overlapped with four
transmittered females. Channel 10 (male) had the smallest home range with
0.45 hectares. Although home range was small, it overlapped with five
transmittered females. Home range of KVW Male (Channel 1) was 2.37
hectares. Although home range for Channel 1 was not as large as Channel 2
(3.30 hectares), what is noteworthy is home range overlapped with all eight
transmittered females (Figure 47). This suggested that searching and
encountering of females would have been more productive. Although Channel 5
(BKW) and 9 (KLW) were not tracked for the entire 2007 season, their home
ranges for the beginning of the season were documented to overlap with
Channel 1 and Channel 0. Channel 10 (IKW) overlapped with Channel 5.

The home range of Male ABCK (Channel 16) was 1.81 hectares, and
overlapped with seven transmittered females in 2008. Male IKW (Channel 17)
home range was 1.3 hectares, and overlapped with seven transmittered female
turtles in 2008. Home range for Male KUV (Channel 2) was documented as 0.65
hectares, and overlapped with two transmittered female turtles in 2008 (Figure 48
and Figure 49).

Habitat Discussion
In this study, the area of distribution of all Spotted Turtles with and without

transmitters was observed for two years (2007 and 2008). Areas of preferred

39

habitat were generally those with lower elevation, and standing water or mucky,
wet substrate. Shorter, more accessible vegetation was generally preferred.
Areas of tall, thick vegetation were avoided. Fen areas that included massive,
thick stands of Glossy Buckthom were generally uninhabited by C. guttata. Only
Channel 2, appeared to use the deer trails for providing quick and easy
movement through the thick Glossy Buckthom canopy.

Drier areas were generally avoided throughout the fen. It is possible that
turtles avoided these areas lacking water for feeding, mating, and risk of
desiccation. The prescribed burn area was also avoided, with no turtles found.
The conservancy owns only a small portion of the study site, with the remaining
portion owned by private land owners. Thus, these controlled burns have proven
to only slow the growth of the Glossy Buckthom, due to dominance and ability of
Glossy Buckthom to encroach from the private land owner's property. This area
contained thick stumps of Glossy Buckthom that were impenetrable for turtles.
The burn area was extremely dry, also explaining the absence of turtle sightings.

Throughout the area of preferred habitat, where standing water or muck
was available, shorter vegetation was present. This vegetation included
Sphagnum spp., Sedge tussocks (Scirpus pungens), Typha, and Shrubby
Cinquefoil (Potentilla fruticosa).

Small mounds of Sphagnum spp. were observed with Sedge and Shrubby
Cinquefoil growing on top of these mounds, with a total height up to 61 cm
(Figure 50). There appeared to be a positive relationship between this type of

vegetation and the survival of the Spotted Turtle. Spotted Turtles hide within this

40

vegetation, burrowing beneath the Spaghnum spp. mounds. With the growth of
Sedge and Shrubby Cinquefoil, root systems in the Sphagnum spp. mounds and
in the mucky substrate were prevalent. These root systems, along with
groundwater flow, provided small, below surface tunnels and air pockets. These
areas provided a means of movement and protection from predators in addition
to locations for aestivation and hibernation, which are further discussed in
Chapter 3.

Turtles were found basking on mounds (Figure 51). In 2008, after heavy
rainfall, most vegetation in the low areas was undenivater, providing fewer
basking locations. Shrubby Cinquefoil was observed in some areas above the
water line. Channel 4 was located basking near the top branches of this
hydrophyte, sharing prime basking space with a Northern Water Snake.

In late summer, with elevated air temperatures, Spotted Turtles needed
protection from heat. Crawling under the “umbrella-like” growth of Shrubby
Cinquefoil provided protection from the sun for C. guttata. Not only was Channel
4 observed using Shrubby Cinquefoil for sun protection, but also for both
aestivation and hibernation, by burrowing deep into the mud beneath these
Sphagnum spp. mounds (Figure 51). Nesting in this type of vegetation was also
documented in these mounds covered with the growth of Sedge and Shrubby
Cinquefoil.

Sphagnum spp. mounds, Sedge and Shrubby Cinquefoil are important
vegetative components needed to provide a successful habitat for C. guttata. A

positive correlation between this vegetation and turtle movement, predation

41

avoidance, camouflage, basking, nesting, temperature control, aestivation and
hibernation have been found during this study.

Duckweed (family Lemnaceae), is a floating, leaved plant found in most C.
guttata habitats (Ross and Lovich, 1992). Ross and Lovich (1992) proposed that
the carapacial cryptic patterns of C. guttata mimicked the color and form of this
plant species. Natural selection, with the use of cryptic coloration, helped to
protect this species from predation. Although Lemnaceae occurs throughout
most of Michigan (Voss, 1972), it was absent from this study site.

Since duckweed was not present in this C. guttata site, camouflage may
have been accomplished with Shrubby Cinquefoil (Potentilla fruticosa), a
predominant fen hydrophyte. Shrubby Cinquefoil is a much-branched shrub that
is 0.5 -1.0 m tall which when it blooms produces yellow summer flowers
(Chadde, 2002). As the flower petals drop, the mud and substrate was covered
with yellow polka dots. Distinguishing carapacial patterns of C. guttata from that
of fallen petals might be difficult for would be predators (Figure 53 and Figure
54). Shrubby Cinquefoil may have provided camouflage for Spotted Turtles and
help protect from predation. No previous studies support this finding.

Bloom length of Shrubby Cinquefoil may not be as long as the duckweed
season, but may have a positive effect on C. guttata. Ross and Lovich (1992)
stated that since juveniles and sub-adults of both species are patterned like
adults, it is possible that the duckweed-like pattern effectively concealed younger
turtles from would-be predators. Shrubby Cinquefoil appeared to provide this

same concealment for C. guttata.

42

Whitetail deer trails were prevalent throughout the research site (Figure
55). These trails appeared to facilitate C. guttata movement. Constant use by
deer created depressions in the hydric soil. Saturation and standing water in
these depressions provided “mini highway” systems for Spotted Turtles. These
systems allowed for movement with ease through the fen. Movement may have
increased food availability by exposing more foraging area and opportunities for
mating and better population dispersal. For Spotted Turtles, predation is a major
cause of mortality. The opportunity of escape using deer trails may have
“hedged the bet” for survival. Also, the submergence of C. guttata in water may
have provided a scent cover-up, keeping it safe from predator detection.

In times of low precipitation or drought, deer trails are one of the last
resorts for the provision of water. Spotted Turtles feed almost entirely
underwater (Ernst etal, 1994; Harding, 1997). This allows for extended
availability of open water allowing continuation of feeding. Also, mating generally
occurs underwater (Ernst, 1967). When no water was present in the deer trails,
the substrate remained the consistency of mud or muck. This appeared to allow
for easier burrowing or movement for C. guttata.

Disturbed areas of a habitat are more vulnerable to invasive plant species.
In this study site, one invasive plant species of most concern is the Glossy
Buckthom, found in human-impacted areas. Movement through Glossy
Buckthom is difficult for Spotted Turtles. Monitoring and controlling invasive
species must be a priority. If habitats are entirely encroached by invasive

species, turtle populations will suffer.

43

One of the most effective techniques for Glossy Buckthom removal was
suggested by Nate Simons, Executive Director and plant ecologist of Blue Heron
Ministries in Indiana. Simons (pers. comm.) suggested using a hatchet to create
a wound at the base of the plant. Wounds then should be treated using a squirt
bottle filled with a strong herbicide. A onetime treatment of the herbicide
performed during the winter season was found effective at eradicating Glossy
Buckthom.

Movement Discussion

In 2007, initially, time was spent traversing the entire habitat in search of
C. guttata. It became apparent there were areas where no turtles were
observed. Efforts were reduced in these areas, and focused more on habitat
where turtles were observed. Telemetry data supported this decision of not
equally covering the habitat. Figure 56 represents a reasonable assessment of
turtle utilization of the area.

In this study, Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP) and Kernel Home Range
Analysis were used in determining home range and its specific preferred habitat,
homing, and overlapping. Cagle (1944) referred to the “homing behavior” of
Spotted Turtles after being “forced” from their home areas during spring and late
fall, later returning to their home range. He states the reason for these peripheral
movements may have been the attempt of mate locating and/or hibernation.

With the use of MCP or Kernel Home Range Analysis, these peripheral
movements or “outliers” have been included in this study’s home range, and not

considered homing behavior. Using spatial analysis, the animal’s entire

44

utilization distribution of an area can be documented, all providing more
knowledge needed for C. guttata preservation.

Comparing 2007 to 2008 data from the Spotted Turtle Distribution and
Analysis of All Transmittered Turtles, the utilization of habitat in 2008 increased
by approximately 1.3 hectares, which was not significant (Figure 11 and Figure
13). It is important to note that an additional six turtles were outfitted with
telemetry equipment in 2008. This may be one explanation for small, but slightly
increased area covered by Spotted Turtles in 2008. Standing water is necessary
for Spotted Turtles to forage and mate, both occurring underwater. High
amounts of rainfall and standing water were documented in 2008. With the
addition of six telemetered turtles in 2008 and additional rainfall, one would
surmise that the area of distribution would be substantially larger than 2007. This
was not the case. Even with additional water in 2008, turtles did not venture far
from 2007 data coordinates. This would suggest that basic needs were met
without traveling any additional distance.

Comparing 2007 to 2008 data from the Spotted Turtle Distribution and
Analysis of All Nontransmittered Turtles in 2007, showed a slight increase in
habitat utilization in 2008 by approximately 0.9 hectares, which was also not
significant (Figure 12 and Figure 14).

In 2007, male ABCK equipped with large transmitter (Channel 2),
displayed a home range of 3.30 hectares. In 2008, male ABCK was again
equipped with a transmitter (Channel 16), this time the small model. Home range

recorded was 1.81 hectares.

45

In 2007, male IKW equipped with large transmitter (Channel 10),
displayed a home range of 0.45 hectares. In 2008, Male IKW was again
equipped with a transmitter, this time the small model (Channel 17). Home range
recorded was 1.33 hectares.

ABCK’s home range varied significantly in 2007 compared to 2008. This
was also true for male IKW. Both individuals may be demonstrating home range
site fidelity. Although ABCK’s 2007 home range was larger than 2008, the 2008
home range was embedded within the 2007 home range. Although lKW’s 2008
home range was larger than 2007, areas of these two home ranges overlapped.
Having results from only two turtles using both small and large transmitters made
it difficult to conclude whether or not there was a negative impact for turtles using
large versus small transmitters. It is not necessarily true that a large transmitter
impeded the turtle.

With the large water volume differences throughout the habitat in 2007
versus 2008, it could be suggested that movement was less confined in 2008.
This suggests that with more water present, areas for foraging and mating were
more accessible. It is also conceivable with available standing water throughout
the site; traveling great distances for activities (such as foraging or mate-seeking)
were not needed.

In 2007, home range sizes varied significantly, not only between males
and females, but also among same sex individuals. Home ranges of male
transmittered turtles varied from 0.45 hectares to 3.30 hectares. During the

same season, female home ranges varied from 0.07 hectares to 1.12 hectares.

46

Each Spotted Turtle appeared to be individualistic, with no set movement pattern,
covering the amount of land needed to fulfill requirements for survival. These
requirements may have included foraging, mating, nesting, aestivation and
hibernation. Ernst’s (1970) findings were that home ranges of Spotted Turtles
usually did not include a suitable nesting area; therefore, females had to migrate
out of their home range. Not true in this study. Home ranges included not only
the females’ nesting area, but also areas for both male and female foraging,
mating, aestivation (if applicable) and hibernation.

When comparing male 2008 home ranges, ABCK (Channel 16) and IKW
(Channel 17) were similar in size. Male KUV’s (Channel 2) recorded home range,
in comparison, was smaller as he was found dead in July 2008. This small
sample size makes it difficult to speculate commonalities of 2008 male home
ranges.

However, home ranges for females in both 2007 (0.05-1.12 hectares) and
2008 (0.12-1.33 hectares) varied significantly. Because of large female sample
size versus small male sample size, it is difficult to make any conclusions about
home range without further study and data collection.

One noteworthy observation takes into consideration that habitat utilization
by both transmittered males and females was within preferred habitat area

previously discussed in detail.

Homing_a_nd Overlapping Discussion

 

During this study, two turtles (female KVX and female HKV) returned to

their original home ranges, suggesting homing ability. This supports the findings

47

of Breder (1927), Nichols (1939), Medsger (1919), Schneck (1886), Grant (1936)
and Ernst (1968). Continued research in this area would be useful in determining
if more turtles utilize homing ability.

Overlapping of home ranges by both males and females were
documented in 2007 and 2008. This suggests there was no territoriality in this
study site, which agrees with Ernst’s (1970) findings. This may prove to be
advantageous to both males and females, keeping the sexes in close proximity to
one another for mating purposes. Also, encountering of food may prove to be
easier when foraging within close proximity to other individuals. Locating of
communal hibemaculae may prove to be a positive result with overlapping of
home ranges. A disadvantage of overlapping Spotted Turtle home ranges

makes them vulnerable to predators and collectors.

48

Chapter 2: Population Dynamics and Demography
Introduction

Population breakdown of males, females and juveniles vary in C. guttata
studies. Breisch (2006) found in her West Virginia study, a population of 21
Spotted Turtles. This population included 38% males, 19% females, and 43%
juveniles. In Ontario, Litzgus (1996) found males and females to be consistent at
47% each, and juveniles were 6% of the population of 171 turtles. In 2004,
Litzgus and Brooks (1997) reported 118 Spotted Turtles in their Georgian Bay,
Ontario site. This population included 42% males, 49% females, and 9%
juveniles. In South Carolina, Litzgus and Mousseau (2004) studied a population
of 44 Spotted Turtles. This study included a population breakdown of 39%
males, 48% females, and 14% juveniles.

In previous studies, the sex ratio for male and female C. guttata was found
to be of approximately equal distribution, with a 1:1 ratio. These studies
included: Litzgus (1996), Litzgus and Brooks (1997), Graham (1995) and Litzgus
and Mousseau (2004). Breisch (2006) found a sex ratio of males to females of
2:1.

The occurrence of sexual dimorphism varies with populations.
Documented average carapace length for males and females varies depending
on the population. Average carapace lengths for males have been recorded as
10.26 cm (Breisch, 2006), 11.69 cm (Litzgus, 1996) and 11.33 cm (Graham,
1995). Average carapace lengths documented for females were 9.92 cm

(Breisch, 2006), 11.517 cm (Litzgus, 1996) and 11.02 cm (Graham, 1995).

49

Gibbons and Lovich (1990) found that on average, female C. guttata were larger
than males, but Breisch (2006), Litzgus (1996) and Graham (1995) found male
dominated sexual size dimorphism.

Ernst (1970) stated that sexual maturity in both sexes of the Spotted Turtle
is obtained when the carapace length of the turtle reaches 8.0 cm. Ditmars
(1933) stated that C. guttata were fully mature when the carapace length reached
four inches long (10.16 cm). Sexual maturity was obtained in both sexes
between 7 and 14 years of age (Harding, 1997; Ernst, 1975; Graham, 1970).

Population density has been studied in areas of the Spotted Turtles’
range. In West Virginia, Breisch (2006) reported a density of 6.8 turtles per
hectare. Litzgus and Mousseau (2004) estimated the population density in South
Carolina as 0.36 turtles per hectare. Litzgus (1996) reported a population density
of 0.62 turtles per hectare in Ontario.

Because Spotted Turtle research is ongoing, mortality rates of populations
have been poorly documented. Litzgus (1996) found a relatively “high adult
mortality rate” in her Ontario population.

Dialecti—vee:

The specific objectives contained in this chapter were to determine
Spotted Turtle population dynamics and demography. Population size,
population breakdown of males, females and juveniles and their morphometric
data were specifically researched. Obtaining sex ratios, understanding sexual

dimorphism and stability were also investigated.

50

Methods
Methods were previously described in Chapter 1.
Bfiulfi

From March 2007 until March 2009, 187 Spotted Turtles were
documented in this study site (Table 9). This number represented 72 juveniles
(38%), 61 males (33%) and 54 females (29%) (Figure 57). The sex ratio for
males and females appeared to be 1:1, further supporting the approximately
equal sex distribution ratio stated by Litzgus (1996), Litzgus and Brooks (1998),
Graham (1995) and Litzgus and Mousseau (2004).

At the onset of this study 79 juveniles were documented with seven being
identified as males. For purposes of sexual identification, Ernst’s (1970) defined
sexual maturity as carapace length of 8.0 cm and above. However, female
characteristics (for example, flat plastron and shorter tail) are juvenile
characteristics and male characteristics (concave plastron and longer tall) are
obtained during the maturation process. Current data showed sexual maturity of
these seven males were obtained before reaching this 8.0 cm carapacial length.
Thus, these seven juvenile males were documented as adult males, lowering the
number of juveniles to 72.

Annuli were counted to determine the minimum age of the Spotted Turtle
(Litzgus and Brooks, 1998). Older adult turtles would show worn or smooth
annuli and cessation of annuli growth; making it difficult to calculate their exact
age. Therefore, the age of older adults may be the minimum age, not the

maximum. The minimum possible age of the oldest turtle documented at the site

51

was a 22 year old female. The lowest mean minimum age of an adult Spotted
Turtle was 9.2 years in this site.

Mean morphometric measurements were documented for most Spotted
Turtles observed in the study site. If strictly conforming to Ernst’s (1970)
definition of sexual maturity (adult having the 8 cm or above carapacial length),
the seven turtles documented as males would have been juveniles. In this study,
turtles with male characteristics (concave plastron and longer tails) were
recorded as males, making the average female larger than the average male.
This supports the findings of Gibbons and Lovich (1990) which show female
Spotted Turtles to be larger than male Spotted Turtles. The mean carapace
length for male Spotted Turtles was 8.9 cm, with the largest male having a
carapace length of 10.9 cm (range 65-109 cm). The mean carapace length for
females was 9.0 cm, with the largest female having a carapace length of 10.3 cm
(range 8.0 — 10.3 cm). Breisch (2006), Litzgus (1996) and Graham (1995) found
males to have a larger average carapace length than females.

The mean carapace width for males was 6.4 cm (range 5.1 — 7.7 cm), with
females having a mean of 6.6 cm (range 5.9 - 7.8 cm). Males recorded a mean
plastron width of 7.5 cm (range 5.7 — 8.6 cm) while a mean of 8.0 cm was
recorded for females (range 7.2 — 8.5 cm). Mean height in males and females
was 3.3 cm (range 2.6 — 3.7 cm) and 3.7 cm (range 3.0 — 4.1 cm), respectively.
Males recorded an average weight of 0.10 kg (range 0.05 - 0.16 kg). Females

recorded an average weight of 0.11 kg (range 0.08 — 0.14 kg).

52

This study took place in a fen with an approximate size of 30 hectares.
Representative sampling of the entire fen was accomplished at the onset of the
study. It was noted earlier in Chapter 1, that the outlying areas of the fen were
void of turtles, and as stated earlier, continuing to traverse through these areas
was not time well spent. Population density was based on 30 hectares, even
though the area of actual turtle concentration was less. The turtle population
density was calculated at approximately 6.2 turtles per hectare.

During the 2007 and 2008 research, a total of 10 turtles (with and without
transmitters) were found dead due to various reasons. Two Spotted Turtles died
by becoming entangled in the Chara Pond. One turtle found dead in the Chara
Pond had been predated upon by a probable Muskrat. Two turtles were found
dead due to unknown causes. Two empty, fully intact shells were found during
the two year study, along with shell fragments (which may have been very old) of
three other turtles. The mortality rate of this study site was calculated to be
0.05%.

Discussion
Females were larger than males in this study site. The results of this
study support findings of Gibbons and Lovich (1990). It should be noted that
turtles in this Michigan study site appear to be smaller overall than findings of
other Spotted Turtle researchers. One explanation may be turtles are maturing
at an earlier age than in other sites, therefore, not reaching their maximum size

capability.

53

It was recorded that males and females have a similar average weight.
Although, the mean average was approximately equal, one must take into
consideration gravid female’s weight fluctuation due to egg storage. If females
were recorded prior to ovipositioning, their weights would be higher than after
they have nested.

The population density calculated from this study was similar to findings
found by Breisch (2006) but was larger than those recorded by Litzgus and
Mousseau (2004).

With a high hatchling and juvenile rate of 38%, and overall adult mortality
rate of 0.05%, the mortality rate of C. guttata appeared to be low. This study was
conducted for two years. More long term data is needed to determine if this
mortality rate remains consistent. Considering only ten dead animals were found
and the large percentage of juveniles and hatchlings sighted, C. guttata

appeared to be a stable or growing population in this study site.

54

Chapter 3: Seasonal Activities
Introduction
Aestivation

Ernst et al (1994) noted activity levels reached a peak when mean
monthly air temperatures were between 13.1 °C and 180°C (mean 155°C); at
least two months before the highest mean air temperature month. Activity then
declined when mean monthly air temperature was between 178°C and 223°C
(mean 203°C), and then approached or reached a minimum level during the
month with highest mean air temperature. This decline in activity was referred to
as aestivation.

Perillo (1997) defined aestivation as a period of dormancy punctuated by
periods of brief activity. Spotted turtles were documented to be able to survive
months in this dormant state, which is considered a summer equivalent of
hibernation (Carroll, 1991). It had been suggested that “summer dormancy” may
be a more appropriate term than aestivation to describe the behavior of northern
populations of Spotted Turtles when they become inactive in the late summer
(COSEWIC, 2004).

Litzgus (1996) stated that aestivation is like a summer version of
hibernation, in theory, to avoid increased temperatures rather than decreased
temperatures. This behavior typically involved burying under leaf litter and pine
needles in the shade of junipers or rock outcroppings or in forests. Populations
of Spotted Turtles that live at more southern latitudes aestivated to avoid

prolonged high summer temperatures. However, in northern populations, the

55

advantage of this behavior was less obvious. Litzgus (1996) found that turtles
were not decreasing their body temperature by aestivating; therefore, they were
not using aestivation to avoid increased temperatures. This behavior by Spotted
Turtles in Georgian Bay, Ontario, suggested it may be carried over from a time
when it served a completely different function.

In Pennsylvania, Ernst (1976) found that Spotted Turtles become inactive
when water temperatures reached 32°C, seeking out cool refuges such as
muskrat burrows or mud at the bottom of pools of running water. Most turtles
remained inactive until the following March but some emerged during the cooler
days of July, August and the fall, and the warmer days of winter.

Ernst (1982) stated C. guttata thermoregulate in their northern range by
basking during cooler weather and by burrowing into the soft bottom of a
watenivay or by entering muskrat burrows and lodges to avoid extreme hot
(aestivation) and cold conditions (hibernation). Water and substrate covering C.
guttata formed an effective thermal shell which provided adequate insulation for
avoidance of extreme temperatures both hot and cold. Muskrat burrows and
lodges contained underwater entrances. In the summer, the evaporation of the
water in these burrows and lodges provided a cooler microhabitat and high
humidity that helped prevent moisture loss.

In Maryland, Ward et al (1976) stated aestivation sites varied depending
on the location of the range of the Spotted Turtle. Aestivation sites included
. moist areas under dead and loosely matted reeds, grasses and ferns. He also

documented turtles in early successional paludal woods. This form of

56

microhabitat was characterized by heavy organic soils, shallow water, and an
overstory of dense leaves, grasses and ferns. lndentations in the substrate,
referred to as “forms” used by C. guttata are filled with water so that only the top
of the carapace are visible. Haxton and Berrill (2001) noted in central Ontario,
turtles were found in forms similar to those discussed by Ward et al (1976). They
found that the temperature of the turtles was no different than the water
temperature, indicating avoidance of warm air temperatures may not be the
primary objective of aestivation as suggested by Ernst (1976, 1982).

Other aestivation sites documented are muskrat burrows in banks of
streams and lodges (Ernst, 1982), predominantly bogs (Haxton and Berrill,
1999), upland habitats and the dried edge of a vernal pool (Perillo, 1997), and
terrestrial sites (Litzgus and Brooks, 2000; Ultsch, 2006; Barlow, 1999). Perillo
(1997), whose Spotted Turtle research was conducted in Connecticut, noted dry
summers with little rainfall, may stimulate turtles to aestivate upland for longer
amounts of time than during a summer with more normal precipitation.

Time spent in aestivation varied depending on site location. In
Massachusetts, Graham (1995) found aestivation to last from one to three
weeks. In Indiana, Barlow (1999) found turtles aestivating from two days to two
weeks, with some turtles not aestivating at all.

Hibernation

Ultsch (2006) found that most species of turtles faced harsh winters

causing them to hibernate for extended lengths of time that may exceed over half

of their lives (more than six months per year). The ability or lack of it, to

57

ovenNinter in hypoxic/anoxic conditions places limitations on where aquatic
turtles can overwinter, and perhaps on where they can occur at all. Litzgus et al
(1999) and Lewis and Ritzenthaler (1997) documented turtles entering a
hibemaculum as early as mid-September and as late as April if ice had not
sealed the entrance to the hibemaculum. Lewis and Ritzenthaler (1997) found
that turtle departure positively correlated to the warming of water in hibemaculum
and melting of ice in the hole.

Spotted Turtle hibemaculae were typically aquatic beneath a layer of ice
and mud (Ward et al, 1976; Ultsch, 2006). These sites never froze completely,
but were shallow enough to thaw quickly in spring (Ernst, 1982). The majority of
hibernation took place in wetlands and small pools in various microhabitats; one
common place being beneath hummocks in swamps (Ward et al, 1976; Graham,
1995; Perillo, 1997; Joyal etal, 2001; Litzgus etal, 1999; Milan and Melvin,
2001). Hibemaculae have been known to contain a saturated, organic muck
layer (Lewis and Ritzenthaler, 1997).

Communal aggregations have been documented in central Ontario
(Haxton and Berrill, 1999), Ohio (Lewis and Ritzenthaler, 1997), Pennsylvania
(Ernst, 1967), Connecticut (Perillo, 1997) and northern Ontario (Litzgus et al,
1999). Small aggregations of Spotted Turtles were common, but groups have
been documented to contain as many as 34 turtles (Lewis and Ritzenthaler,
1997). Hibemaculae near its northern limits in Ontario contained single turtles up
to nine turtles. Litzgus et al (1999) noted that hibemaculae were of two types

both in swamps: elevated Sphagnum spp. moss hummocks reinforced by roots

58

and stems of vegetation, including trees and shrubs; rock caverns near shore
with a measured water depth of 30-40 cm.

Lewis and Ritzenthaler (1997) determined hibemaculae that contained
three or less turtles were simple vertical holes that were approximately seven cm
in diameter and no deeper than 70 cm. Larger hibemaculae were 15 by 20 cm at
the surface entrance and contained some horizontal passages in addition to the
primary vertical hole. Further, Lewis and Ritzenthaler (1997) found no sex
biased hibemaculum use.

Although large aggregations present obvious vulnerabilities to predators
and collectors, benefits were also found. Communal hibernation provided
reproductive advantages by putting otherwise solitary turtles in close proximity
during early spring for mating (Ernst, 1970; Lewis and Ritzenthaler, 1997; Perillo,
1997). Barlow (1999) found aggregations may have made it easier for males to
find females and that these oven~intering locations may have had some historical
value of C. guttata when located near favorite spring breeding locations.
Communal hibernation may have improved fitness of individuals by
synchronizing emergence (Gregory, 1982; Ultsch, 1989).

Hibemaculum site fidelity was observed in Spotted Turtles. Research
conducted in Central Ontario (Haxton and Berrill, 1999), Ohio (Lewis and
Ritzenthaler, 1997), Northern Ontario (Litzgus et al, 1999), and Connecticut
(Perillo, 1997), showed that this turtle species displayed high fidelity to

hibemaculae.

59

Objectives

The objectives of this study were to determine seasonal activities of the
Spotted Turtle which included aestivation (determining if it does occur, and if so,
when, how long, habitat temperature, and type of habitat preferred). Hibernation
of Spotted Turtles was also studied to determine the preferred hibemaculae.
Also researched was whether or not the hibemaculae were communal, substrate
properties, location, hibemaculae temperature, and possible site fidelity.

Methods
Methods were previously described in Chapter 1.
Aestivation Results and Discussion

Aestivation is a period of brief inactivity. In this fen, aestivation coincided
with high air temperatures. In 2007, turtles were tracked throughout late
summer, with rising air temperatures causing the land to warm and turtles to
become inactive. The majority of telemetered turtles did aestivate. Length and
period during which aestivation occurred varied between 4 and 26 days, with
some turtles coming out of aestivation for a short period of time and then
returning again to inactivity. Aestivation in this southwestern fen occurred within
the months of June, July and August. Nine turtles aestivated, with six aestivating
twice. Aestivation coincided with the drier parts of summer. Field data entries in
mid June and July showed at these aestivation times, the substrate consisted of
“dried mud” with only traces of precipitation recorded.

In 2007, turtles aestivated in areas which corresponded with areas shown

in Figure 58. Areas included the open middle fen area, ditch, outlet, area of short

60

height hydrophytes, and a more open area just north of ditch. These areas were
lower in elevation, with water levels just beneath the substrate, even during drier
penods.

With water absent, mud temperatures were recorded. In June and July Of
2007, seven turtles aestivated (some more than once) with mud temperatures
ranging from 155°C to 290°C. Air temperatures ranged from 179°C to 324°C.
Two turtles aestivated in August when the mud temperatures were recorded
between 19°C and 26°C and the air temperatures recorded were between 21 .4°C
and 32°C.

There was more precipitation in 2008 than 2007. Seven turtles aestivated,
most occurring late July thru early September. All turtles aestivated once during
this season, except for one turtle (aestivation occurred twice). The majority of
turtles aestivated for nine days when the mud temperature was 205°C to 29.1 °C
and the air temperature was 245°C to 37°C. Two turtles aestivated for a period
of 20 days during which the mud temperature was 21 .6°C to 27°C, air
temperature was 235°C to 345°C, and water temperature (in one location) was
31°C.

Turtle aestivation locations in 2008 were found in areas of habitat where
large turtle aggregations were located, as shown in Figure 59. These areas
included the open middle fen area, ditch, and big trail to lake including the lake’s
edge and the area of short height hydrophytes. These areas were lower in

elevation and contained water even throughout the drier months.

61

In both 2007 and 2008, turtles aestivated by burying themselves in mud
covered with a variety of hydrophytes. These hydrophytes included Sedge,
Shrubby Cinquefoil, Typha, Bulrush, Red-osier Dogwood, Willow and Fern.

Hibeflation Results and Discussion

Radio telemetry was used to track fall season movement and location of
Spotted Turtles. Locations were identified and documented as possible
hibemaculae. Turtles were tracked late in summer and early autumn (September
and October). Two areas were found to have a heavier aggregation which
appeared to be hibemaculae locations. In spring (March), larger numbers of C.
guttata were observed and captured in these same areas, suggesting emergence
from close-by hibemaculae.

With less recorded precipitation during 2007, there was no standing water
throughout the site; water table present just below substrate surface. At this
time, turtles were no longer visible at surface and radio telemetry was used to
locate turtles.

On 25 September 2007, using radio telemetry to locate transmittered
female Channel 11, a possible hibemaculum was identified in a lower elevation
fen area. The hydrophytes in this area included Typha, Sedge (Scirpus
pungens) and Bulrush (Scirpus acutus). While attempting to locate Channel 11
(female KV) by its frequency, a hole, approximately 15 cm deep, was located in
the substrate containing no water, only damp mud. Reaching into the hole, four
turtles were stacked, one below the other, all in horizontal positions. Channel 11

was found with two females (BDKW and HKP) and a male (AJKX) (Figure 60).

62

Another hole, similar to the one which contained the four turtles, was
observed nearby. Reaching approximately 13 cm into this damp, muddy hole,
three turtles were collected, each on top of the other. All three Spotted Turtles
were male (CDKV, FJKS, CDKVW). With the use of telemetry, Channel 2 (male
ABCK) was found only one foot from the hole where the three males were found.
With further investigation, female CKX was located nearby buried in mud,
Spaghnum spp., and Sedge (Figure 60).

A week later, 2 October 2007, while attempting to locate Channel 11
(female KV), another possible hibemaculum was sighted. By locating Channel
11 using its radio telemetry frequency, a hole in the substrate was observed.
Reaching into the hole, four turtles were collected; three females (HKP, CKX, KV
Channel 11) and 1 male (AJKX). Turtles were found stacked on top of each
other ranging from 13-33 cm downward. The hole contained both mud and water
(Figure 61). AJKX, KV, and HKP had previously been located (25 September
2007) in a different hibemaculum locale.

On 12 October 2007, a possible hibemaculum was reinvestigated known
to contain turtles a week prior. Standing over the entrance to the possible
hibemaculum, no turtles were visible from the surface, but the small 7.62 cm hole
was observed. Reaching down into the vertical hole, filled with water, mud and
muck, a non-transmittered Spotted Turtle was located. Continuing to reach down
into this hole another conspecific turtle, a little deeper horizontally to the first
turtle was retrieved. Small tunnels, approximately three to six cm in size, were

filled with water and were intertwined with roots of Sedge spp., Typha and other

63

hydrophytes. It is believed that these tunnels allowed easy movement for
Spotted Turtles from surface predators. Within this hole three non-transmittered
turtles were identified. The first turtle removed, a male (BCKV), was located
approximately nine cm from the ground level and had a recorded carapace shell
temperature of 118°C. Reaching back into the hole, a second male turtle (IKP)
was located just below the first turtle. The shell temperature was IKP was
recorded at 123°C. Reaching again into the hole, a third turtle, a female (KUW)
was located slightly lower in the hole and horizontally to the right approximately
15 cm from the original vertical hole. The third turtle had a shell temperature of
13.3 ’0 (Figure 62).

On 16 October 2007, another possible hibemaculum was found in an area
where Sandbar Willow was the main hydrophyte. While traversing through the
site, a male Spotted Turtle (CDKV) was observed with only its carapace showing.
Upon further observation, it was determined that the male turtle was located over
a hole of possible hibemaculum. With further investigation, it was determined
that three additional turtles were located stacked below the substrate in water
and mud in a hole approximately 25 cm deep.

The carapace shell temperature for the turtle located on top of the
substrate was 14.5°C. Downward in the hole, a juvenile (KOQ) was collected
with shell temperature of 145°C. Beneath the juvenile, a juvenile (IKNP) was
documented with a shell temperature of 155°C. Lastly, another juvenile (AKP)

was documented with a shell temperature of 167°C (Figure 63).

64

As turtles were collected deeper in the possible hibemaculum, carapace
shell temperatures increased. Although, Lewis and Ritzenthaler (1997) found no
evidence that communal hibemaculae serve any thermal function, this study
suggests the opposite. Evidence from this study implies that the deeper into the
hibemaculum a turtle is found, the warmer the body temperature.

These possible hibemaculae, which were in lower elevation areas of the
fen, were found with both single turtles and aggregations. Most hibemaculae
ranged from eight to 35 cm in depth with some containing small tunnels that
formed interconnected networks under the substrate. These tunnels were too
small in size to be considered muskrat burrows. A possible explanation for the
cause of these undenivater passages may be the steady flow of groundwater
throughout the root systems.

Another area of heavy Spotted Turtle concentration known as the “ditch”
was to the south of the fen, running east and west. It handled overflow from the
wetland and a nearby road. The ditch was generally filled with approximately 40-
60 cm of water and hydrophytes which included Typha, Red-osier Dogwood,
Sedge and Bulrush.

In spring of 2008, a heavy concentration of turtle emergence was
observed from the ditch. On 3 April 2008, four turtles (CKW-juvenile, KLN-male,
AKM-female, DKO- male) emerged and captured from the ditch and GPS
coordinates were recorded. Three days later, 6 April 2008, four different
individual turtles (KMW-female, KUV-male, KLM-male, and AK-male) were

observed and documented close to this same location. Turtles were found

65

emerging periodically during the next several weeks in this same locale. These
observations suggest the ditch was a heavily populated hibemaculum.

Spotted Turtles selected areas of the wetland for hibernation that are
generally underwater or with the water table at ground level. Turtles preferred
areas that had the deepest concentrations of water in the fen. Both possible
hibemaculae were located within these areas.

In spring, when C. guttata emerged from hibernation in these two known
hibemaculae, both sites were inundated with water from 40 to 60 cm deep.
Shortly after emergence, turtles were observed moving from deep to shallow
water. The deep water temperature ranged from 60°C to 85°C while the
temperature in the shallow water ranged from 140°C to 185°C. The observation
of Spotted Turtles migrating to shallower water confirms that C. guttata, being
ectotherrnic, may be moving to a warmer habitat to raise metabolic rates.

In late summer and early fall of 2008 (September and October), with
heavy amounts of rainfall, 2-40 cm of standing water covered the fen. Water
levels in the first known hibemaculae (the area in the middle of the fen) were
approximately 40 cm. Although tracking the transmittered turtles to these areas
was no problem, locating holes and reaching into the substrate was a difficult
undertaking. With deep water, locating turtle aggregations proved difficult.

When radio telemetry was conducted, and turtles located, these potential
hibemaculae contained some of the same and new conspecifics than previously

documented, including different combinations of males, females and juveniles.

66

This infers that turtles may be “staging” or trying to locate the most viable
locations for future courtship which may yield genetic diversity.

On 12 January 2007, four Spotted Turtles were observed during a
“January thaw” in the ditch. Two individual male turtles were observed, as well
as a copulating pair (Lutz, 2008). This observation coincides with Ernst’s (1970)
suggestion that communal hibemaculae serve a purpose for turtles in their
relationship to mating preference.

Males, females and juveniles were all found within the same
hibemaculum, suggesting that hibemaculae are not sex biased. This evidence
aligns with a previous study by Lewis and Ritzenthaler (1997).

Previous suggestions that the two main areas discussed (ditch and open
middle area of fen) were hibemaculae areas for the Spotted Turtle were further
supported by evidence shown using Arc View© and Arc Map©. Figure 56
(Kernel Home Range Analysis) also substantiates these findings. Not only were
transmittered turtles found to hibernate in these two main regions, but also non-
transmittered turtles were recorded to hibernate there, as well. This evidence
further supports the findings that Spotted Turtles do communally hibernate.

Site fidelity of a hibemaculum was documented in 2007 and 2008 in the
ditch and open middle area of fen. Eight of 23 (35%) transmittered turtles were
documented having site fidelity. It should be noted that 29 turtles were originally
equipped with transmitters, with two transmitters malfunctioning, and four turtles
found dead. Further research is needed to determine whether the other 15

turtles show site fidelity.

67

With the telemetry equipment used in this study, hibemaculae
temperatures were obtained (refer to Methods). A low winter hibemaculum
temperature of 13°C was reported in the beginning of March 2008. In Ohio,
Lewis and Ritzenthaler (1997) recorded low winter hibemaculae temperatures of
2.21 and 273°C. The findings of this study are in close proximity to the Ohio

findings.

68

APPENDIX

69

Table 1. Specific habitat preferences documented throughout Spotted Turtle

 

 

range.

Habitat Type Location Source

Forested Swamps Maine Joyal et al 2001

Boreal Fen Ohio Lovich 1989

Terrestrial Sites Ontario Haxton and Berrill 2001
Florida Berry 1978

Rock Outcrops Ontario Haxton and Berrill 2001
Ontario Litzgus et al 1999

Low Acidic Swamps Ontario Litzgus et al 1999

Small Bodies of Water
Salt Marshes/Brackish

Meandering Brooks
Little Bog Holes
Ditches

Vernal Pools

Early Successional Fields
Upland Fields

Older, more established woodlands
Cypress swamps
Freshwater marshes

Mixed Hardwood Wetland
Cypress Tupelo Ponds

Ephemeral Marshes
Upland Pine-Hardwood Forest

throughout range
Illinois

Maryland
throughout range
throughout range
throughout range
Indiana
Connecticut
Massachusetts
Maine
Connecticut
Connecticut
Massachusetts
Connecticut
Florida

Florida
Pennsylvania
Florida

South Carolina
South Carolina
South Carolina
South Carolina
South Carolina

Carr 1952

Cahn 1937

Nemuras 1966

Carr 1952

Carr 1952

Conant and Collins 1998
Minton 1972

Perillo 1997

Fowle 2001

Joyal et al 2001

Perillo 1997

Perillo 1997

Fowle 2001

Perillo 1997

Barnwell et al 1997
Barnwell et al 1997
Ernst 1976

Barnwell et al 1997
Lovich 1990

Litzgus and Mousseau 2004
Lovich 1990

Lovich 1990

Litzgus and Mousseau 2004

Flooded Mowed Fields Maryland Ward et al 1976
Maine Joyal et al 2001
Indiana Minton 1972
Woodland/Marsh Ecotones Maryland Ward et al 1976
Emergent Marshes Massachusetts Fowle 2001
Unpolluted Bodies of Water Massachusetts Graham 1995
throughout range Harding1997

 

7O

Common Name

Table 2. Non-woody plants located in study site.

Scientific Name

 

Small-flowered Gerardia
Bugle

Common Burdock
Mugwort

Swamp Milkweed
Northern Bog Aster
Bushy Aster

New England Aster
Frost Aster

Willow Aster

Tickseed Sunflower
False Nettle

Downy Chess

Marsh Bellflower
Chicory

Canada Thistle

Swamp Thistle

Twig Rush

Queen Anne's Lace
Water Willow

Common Wood Fern
Daisy F leabane
Spotted Joe Pye Weed
Boneset

Lesser Fringed Gentian
White Avens

Ground Ivy

Spotted Touch-me-not
Blue Flag Iris
Canadian Rush
Torrey's Rush

Rice Cutgrass

Marsh Blazing Star
Kalm's Lobelia
Northern water Horehound
Tufted Loosestrife
Purple Loosestrife
Sweet-scented Waterlily
Common Evening Primrose
Cowbane

Panic Grass

Switch Grass

Agalinis tenuifolia
Ajuga reptans
Arctium minus
Artemisia vulgan's
Asclepias incarnate
Aster borealis

Aster dumosus

Aster novae-angliae
Aster pilosus

Aster praealtus
Bidens coronatus
Boehmeria cylindrical
Bromus tectorum
Campanula aparinoides
Cichon‘um intybus
Cirsium arvense
Cirsium muticum
Cladium man'scoides
Daucus carota
Decodon verticillatus
Dryopten‘s spinulosa
En'geron annuus
Eupaton'um maculatum
Eupaton'um pen‘oliatum
Gentiana procera
Geum canadense
Glechoma hederaceae
Impatiens capensis
Iris versicolor

Juncus Canadensis
Juncus torreyi
Leersia oryzoides
Liatris spicata

Lobelia kalmii

L ycopus uniflorus

L ysimachia thiysiflora
L ythrum salicaria
Nymphaea odorata
Oenothera biennis
Oxypolis rigidior
Panicum flexile
Panicum virgatum

Swamp-Betony Pediculan’s lanceolata
Timothy Phleum pretense
Water Smartweed Polygonum amphibium

 

71

Table 2 (cont’d).

 

Common Name

Scientific Name

 

Water Pepper
Meadow Spikemoss
Canada Goldenrod
Ohio Goldenrod
Swamp Goldenrod
Indian Grass

Peat Moss

Marsh Fern

Marsh St. Johnswort
Cattail

Cattail

Small Purple Bladderwort
Blue Vervain
Rattlesnake Root
Black-eyed Susan
Bouncing Bet
Hardstem Bulrush
Common Threesquare

Polygonum h ydropiper
Selaginella apoda
Solidago Canadensis
Solidago ohiensis
Solidago patula
Sorghastrum nutans
Sphagnum spp.
Thelypten's palustn's
Triadenum virginicum
Typha angustifolia
Typha Iatifolia
Utn'cularia resupinata
Verbena hastate
Prenanthes racemosa
Rudbeckia hirta
Saponaria ofi'rcinalis
Scirpus acutus
Scirpus pugqens

 

Table 3. Woody plants located in study site.

 

Common Name

Box Elder

Red Maple

Sugar Maple

Shad spp.

Bog Birch

Oriental Bittersweet
Northern Swamp Dogwood
Red-Osier Dogwood
White Ash
Winterberry
Honeysuckle spp.
Virginia Creeper
Cottonwood
Bigtooth Aspen
Trembling Aspen
Shrubby Cinquefoil
Wild Black Cherry
Red Oak

Black Oak
Alder-leaf Buckthom
Glossy Buckthom
Black Locust
Carolina Rose
Multiflora Rose

Scientific Name

Acer negundo

Acer rubrum

Acer saccharum
Amelanchier spp.
Betula pumila
Celastrus orbiculata
Camus racemosa
Cornus stolonifera
Fraxinus Americana
llex verticillata
Lonicera spp.
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
Populus deltoids
Populus grandidentata
Populus tremuloides
Potentilla fruticosa
Prunus serotina
Ouercus rubra
Quercus velutina
Rhamnus alnifolia
Rhamnus frangula
Robinia pseudoacacia
Rosa Carolina

Rosa multiflora

Swamp Rose Rosa palustris
Common Blackberry Rubus allegheniensis
Black Raspberry Rubus occidentalis
Dewberry Rubus spp.
Blue-leaved Willow Salix myricoides
Willow spp. Salix spp.

Bittersweet Nightshade Solanum dulcamara
Poison Ivy Toxicodendron radicans
Poison Sumac Toxicodendron vernex
Elm spp. U/mus spp.

G rape Vitis riparia

 

73

Table 4. Wildlife documented in

Common Name
Meadow Vole

White-Tailed Deer

Muskrat

Eastern Cottontail Rabbit

Coyote
Red Fox
Raccoon

study site.

Scientific Name
Microtus pennsylvanicus
Odocoileus virginianus
Ondatra zibethica
Sylvilagus floridanus
Canis Iatrans

Vulpes fulva

Procyon lotor

Table 5. Amphibians and reptiles documented in study site.

Common Name
Western Chorus Frog
Spring Peeper
Wood Frog
Brown Snake
Eastern Garter Snake
Northern Water Snake
Northern Ribbon Snake
Midland Painted Turtle
Queen Snake
American Toad
Green Frog
Bullfrog
Common Snapping Turtle
Spiny Softshell
Eastern Hog-nosed Snake
Eastern Box Turtle
Eastern Grey Treefrog
Common Musk Turtle
Blanding's Turtle
Spotted Turtle
Eastern Massasatm Rattlesnake

Scientific Name
Pseudacris triseriata triseriata
Pseudacris crucifer
Rana sylvatica
Storeria dekayi
Thamnophis sirtalis sin‘alis
Nerodia sipedon sipedon
Thamnophis saun'tus
Chrysemys picta
Regina septemvittata
Bufo americanus
Rana clamitans
Rana catesbeiana
Chelydra serpentine
Apalone spinifera
Heterodon platiminos
Terrapene carolina carolina
Hyla versicolor
Sternotherus odoratus
Emydoidea blandingii
Clemmys guttata
Sistrurus ca tenatus ca tenatus

74

 

Table 6. Bird species present in study site.

 

Common Name

Scientific Name

 

Red-winged Blackbird
Swamp Sparrow

Song Sparrow
American Goldfinch
America Robin

Blue Jay

Sandhill Crane

Mute Swan

Canada Goose
Common Snipe
Common Grackle
American Crow

Turkey Vulture

Eastern Phoebe

Wood Duck

Mallard Duck

Mourning Dove

Hairy Woodpecker
Downy Woodpecker
Belted Kingfisher

Tree Swallow
American Woodcock
Double-Crested Cormorant
Carolina Wren

Tufted Titmouse
Black-capped Chickadee
Northern Cardinal
Ring-billed Gull

Yellow Warbler
Common Yellowthroat Warbler
Yellow-rumped Warbler
Palm Warbler

Willow Flycatcher
Red-tailed Hawk
Virginia Rail

Eastern Bluebird
Rose-breasted Grosbeak
Warbling Vireo

Eastern Wood Pewee
Baltimore Oriole
Eastern Kingbird

Cedar Waxwing
Rough-winged Swallow
Spotted Sandpiper
Gray Catbird
Black-billed Cuckoo
Green Heron

75

Agelaius phoenlceus
Melospiza Georgiana
Melospiza melodia
Carduelis tristis
Turdus migratorius
Cyanocitta cristata
Grus Canadensis
Cygnus olor

Branta Canadensis
Capella gallinago
Quiscalus quiscula
Corvis brachyrhynchos
Cathartes aura
Sayornis phoebe

Aix sponsa

Anas plalyrhynchos
Zenaida macroura
Picoides villosus
Picoides pubescens
Megaceryle alcyon
Tachycineta bicolor
Philohela minor
Phalacrocorax auritus
Thryothorus ludovicianus
Parus bicolor

Parus atricapillus
Cardinalis cardinalis
Larus dela warensis
Dendroica petechia
Geothlypis trichas
Dendroica coronata
Dendroica palmarum
Empidonax trail/ii
Buteo jamaicensis
Rallus Iimicola

Sialia sialis

Pheucticus ludovicianus
Vireo gilvus

Contopus virens
lcterus galbula
Tyrannus tyrannus
Bombyci/la cedrorum
Stelgidopteryx ruficollis
Actitis macularia
Dumete/la carolinensis
Coccyzus erythropthalmus
Butorides striatus

Table 6 (cont’d).

 

Common Name

Scientific Name

 

Yellow-throated Vireo
Great Crested Flycatcher
White Throated Sparrow
Scarlet Tanager
Brown-headed Cowbird
Ruby-throated Hummingbird
Wood Thrush

Cooper's Hawk

Great Blue Heron
Broad-winged Hawk
Blue Gray Gnatcatcher
Eastern Meadowlark
Osprey

Northern Waterthrush
Veery

Vireo fla vifrons
Mylarchus crinitus
Zonotrichia albicollis
Piranga olivacea
Molothrus ater
Archilochus colubris
Hylocichla mustelina
Accipiter cooperii
Ardea herodias
Buteo playpterus
Polioptila caerulea
Sturnella magna
Pandion haliaetus
Seiurus noveboracensis
Catharus fuscescens

 

76

 

 

 

Table 7. Example of Microsoft Excel individual turtle data worksheet.

835E 33!. $2 8.8 mm 9 9.0 in. NN— g
Eo§3£mhmm2§=g3ousl - . - - ; r
39.9, >8: .EQSEE SSEESS. , . 9rd , In. new g
52.3 4 ounce E0223 0.9 3 mg in. 8N g
EEoE 82 82.3.6.3 Eu m N I . ,,-..-l:l,i
388 E; E53852 E_ 28E 88E...
SEES-22,2233 .. EN. E. EEG . 2.2me g
.222 Eu mm a 93.. .225 .5 m—
s .823 a E ESE 2 EEEEEE _
- 828932.... a... .
0. E.» o. NEEHU. 3E3 3%.. ,
EmEmEo-u, ., 4 5,2,3, .3 _ :33 22.3 .3330.— . tip-F . 2a:

982888.38 E. {SE .EEEENEEEEEEE. ,2, E9
>. ueEaE 2386.9 WEEEEEO

 

ENE-NEE o-EE E «REEL-.2 9E E. #33. 9E E 23. 2.21.2
:in NNN E :1an N E 5.2.: NNN. E , 2...». £95 .38....
221333 E3, #3an E. E 5.2.: .8 E E 523 82.26
ESE-$38252 - RENEE-321W— EEEEEE. EB, lE 2E». EEEZ .EEEEE-o-
, - , , , , , , 22$ £533.82
EN. .222 .3

E3 .5... 5w.

>2 .2 3....»

77

Table 8. Example of the Microsoft Excel radio telemetry data sheet.

38. Ewan 833

323 2.... c. xooEEEE EacmEnaE .22....
.292. 5 =2. 8% E 2...... EN. 8.8 8.9.” in. $5 836
32:3 a 52:22... 8.8 SEN 2a mvum 86.8

383 =3 63. 62.3 652.22.
.EucaoE EEoE :2»; E 3.52 6.... .9. E...

Q 32m 223.2...) E. =2. 82. 5 8m 8mm 8.8 mm; in 9N 85m
E22 8.66

2 :9. m5 3 .33 22.5 E .29.. c. 9.59...
.8. 2E2 SE .m Eon .3268 8.8 92mm 8.3 Zn. Rum 8.9.0

93. um. a. 6:323 .EmuEE .EEoE
E... E .555 E25 E2... E2. .8 E25...
22. .EE2E3E E. E9; E2... .E 83m
22532 d 8.8 BNN 2< m.“ I 88
52:20.5 .3an 02.3 .5...) .EE .EEoE
.22... 3.52 done 93 EE .2... 3.. Eu

.8282 In. 8N 8:3
.2. £92.. 26.. 2.2.8.... 35.232.
.8. 2E2 uaE .Eofixosn SEN 8.8 9:. En. SN 82%

$83 a. 5.532 62...... £5. EucaoE
ES .32.. E. 3...... mm? E22 .3:

nausea §H_EauHu-Hdaflu.ldafl 82E Hum 8.233 «ad
5...; E< 5...... __.EE 29.2.

E:: 3.3. $2.25....

”2.22.5222.

2.... 2.. .255. .5... 3.23..
2a: P2222231,

78

Table 9. Compilation of 2007 and 2008 data for the 187 turtles of southwestern
Michigan fen.

 

Age Male/ Adult! Carapace Width Plastron Height Weight
Length Length
Turtle (yrs) Female Juvenile (cm) (cm) (cm) (cm) (Ig)__
A (2006) 1 J 3.020 2.707 2.599
ABCK 13 M A 9.264 6.556 7.595 3.331 0.118
ABCKVW 12 M A 10.930 6.918 8.223 3.434 0.130
ABCKW 12 F A 9.580 6.765 8.383 3.954 0.134
ABDK 1 1 F A 9.368 6.350 8.432 3.852 0.1 14
ABKW 14 F A 8.848 6.245 7.699 3.748 0.1 10
ABKWX 15 M A 10.305 7.180 8.640 3.538 0.158
ACDK F A 9.388 6.391 8.352
AClK 1 1 F A 8.536 6.380 7.596 3.434 0.102
ACK 7 J 7.807 5.830 6.765 3.020
ACKVWX 7 M A 7.983 5.954 6.970
ACKW 8 F A 9.054 6.867 8.014 3.744 0.1 14
ADKO 12 F A 9.262 6.454 8.010 3.851 0.140
ADKV 1 1 F A 8.341 6.245 7.702 3.332 0.088
AHK 6 J 4.944 4.061 4.164 2.078 0.024
AJK 1 1 M A 9.073 6.525 7.742
AJKX 1 1 M A 9.678 6.868 8.119 3.437 0.120
AK 15 M A 9.056 6.462 7.598 3.320 0.1 10
AKLMP 8 J 7.710 6.620 6.665 2.813 0.072
AKM 12 F A 8.811 6.347 7.705 3.747 0.112
AKN 7 M A 8.488 6.047 7.285 3.333 0.092
AKO 12 F A 8.540 6.140 7.495 3.750 0.106
AKOQ 7 J 7.810 6.040 6.868 2.81 1 0.080
AKP 7 F J 7.708 5.620 6.766 3.018 0.066
AKU J 6.640 5.420 5.839
AKW 13 M A 9.570 6.574 8.223 3.740 0.1 16
AKWX 13 M A 8.354 5.944 7.282 3.021 0.084
AKX 15 F A 8.848 6.350 7.810 3.645 0.135
B (2006) 2 J 3.123 2.706 2.602 0.004
BCEKL 2 J 6.240 5.100 5.520 2.500 0.042
BCK F A 9.471 6.661 8.329 0.132
BCKV 12 M A 9.368 7.705 7.91 1 3.436 0.120
BCKW M A
lBDK 10 F A 8.745 6.455 7.914 3.746 0.110
BDKV 10 M A 9.580 6.870 8.010 3.430 0.120
BDKW 10 F A 8.950 6.660 8.1 18 3.850 0.135
BDKX 14 M A 9.570 6.660 7.910 3.644 0.112
BHK 12 F A 8.535 6.557 7.705 3.850 0.126
BlK J 7.708 5.517 6.454
BIKX 8 M A 8.015 6.039 7.787 3.226 0.084
BJK 8 F A 8.120 6.038 7.390 3.123 0.084
BJKW 13 M A 9.246 6.507 7.809 3.435 0.114
BK (Juv.) J 5.622 4.889 4.993

79

 

Table 9 (cont’d).

Age Male! Adult] Carapace Width Plastron Height Weight

 

Length Length
Turtle (yrs) Female Juvenile (cm) (cm) (cm) (cm) 33L
BK F A 8.435 6.455 7.704 3.852 0.112
BKM 9 J 6.663 5.210 5.832 2.500 0.050
BKN 6 J 6.670 5.204 5.932 2.602 0.050
BKOV J 5.414 4.475 4.788
BKP J 6.208 5.103 5.512
BKU 13 F A 8.920 6.294 7.772 3.748 0.1 12
BKV F A 9.055 6.589 8.123
BKW 12 F A 9.471 6.768 8.329 3.642 0.144
BKX 7 M A 8.534 6.063 7.078 3.029 0.090
C 2 J 3.021 2.707 2.599 0.004
CDK F A 8.325 6.141 7.492
CDKV 12 M A 9.387 6.453 7.724 3.434 0.102
CDKVW 1 1 M A 9.992 7.280 8.235 3.540 0.130
CHJKLVW 1 1 F A 9.473 6.558 8.225 3.851 0.152
CHK 13 M A 8.848 6.039 7.596
CHKW J 5.623 4.788 5.099
CHKZ 10 J 6.038 4.889 5.312 2.495 0.036
CIJKP 6 M A 6.560 5.120 5.730 2.600 0.052
CJK 1 1 F A 8.328 6.139 7.699
CK 7 J 7.181 5.417 6.247 2.915 0.062
CKM J 6.973 5.413 6.038
CKN 7 F J 6.454 5.100 5.728 2.610
CKO J 7.153 5.893 6.223
CKP 5 J 4.995 4.372 4.265 1 .978 0.022
CKU F A 9.161 6.765 8.326 3.748 0.138
CKW 6 J 7.491 5.829 6.558 2.913
CKX 17 F A 9.163 6.520 8.118 3.643 0.116
CRV M A 10.635
DHK 1 1 M A 8.950 6.455 7.720 3.640 0.1 12
DIK F A 9.301 6.541 8.131
DJK M A 8.816 6.264 7.549
DKL F A 8.758 6.586 7.691
DKLM 8 M A 6.450 5.410 5.720 2.603 0.048
DKM 16 F A 9.368 6.555 7.912 3.539 0.106
DKN 9 M A 8.432 6.556 7.285 3.021 0.098
DKO 8 M A 7.705 6.036 6.869 3.123 0.070
DKP 13 F A 8.750 6.554 7.720 3.540 0.122
lDKU M A 8.593 6.245 7.288 3.333 0.102
DKVWX 12 F A 8.750 6.770 7.846 3.440 0.112
DKX 1 1 F A 9.050 6.770 8.174 3.640 0.1 14
FGK 14 F A 8.265 6.185 7.325 3.440
F lKS 6 J 5.839 4.892 5.000 2.495 0.038
FJKS 10 M A 9.060 6.350 7.500 3.230 0.1 12

8O

 

Table 9 (cont’d).

 

Age Male! Adult/ Carapace Width Plastron Height Weight
Length Length
Turtle (yrsl Female Juvenile (cm) 4cm) (cmL (cm) (kg)__
FKS 13 M A 9.160 6.680 7.601 3.539 0.122
GK 7 J 5.932 4.287 5.102 2.498 0.036
GKX 10 M A 8.535 6.036 7.077 3.125 0.096
H 2 J 4.265 3.750 3.643 1.665 0.012
HIK 12 M A 9.264 6.661 7.808 3.124 0.112
HJK 12 F A 9.158 6.560 8.222 3.954 0.136
HJKV 12 F A 8.640 6.870 7.705 3.539 0.136
HK 2 J
HKL J 6.245 5.205 5.517 2.705 0.046
HKLQ 12 A 9.158 6.868 8.223 3.332 0.114
HKM 22 A 10.306 7.600 9.056 4.579 0.198
HKN J 6.558 5.412 5.727
HKNQV 1 1 M A 8.744 6.452 7.363 3.124 0.098
HKO 6 M A 7.388 5.620 6.452 2.709 0.056
HKP 13 F A 9.368 7.283 8.535 3.850 0.136
HKQ M A 8.580 5.987 7.328
HKQW 6 J 6.868 5.312 6.141 2.708 0.054
HKQX J 6.807 5.438 6.162
HKU 1 1 F A 9.265 7.077 8.324 3.850 0.134
HKV 18 F A 9.471 6.973 8.535 4.059 0.160
HKW
(F) 5 J 5.933 4.890 5.207 2.394
HKW
(M) M A 9.368 6.453 7.704 3.537 0.132
HR 1 J 3.850 3.230 3.540 3.230 0.010
I 5 J 6.247 4.892 5.623 2.707 0.044
lF J 5.525 4.717 4.770
U K M A 8.575 6.030 7.135
IK
(2006) 2 J 3.995 3.230 3.228 1 .460 0.008
lK 5
yr. )( 5 J 4.893 4.164 4.268 1 .870
lKL 11 M A 9.413 6.599 7.705 3.332 0.118
IKM 10 M A 9.262 6.452 7.596 3.332 0.1 10
lKNP 8 J 7.821 5.932 7.389 3.226 0.084
lKNX 14 M A 9.252 6.140 7.390 3.225 0.096
lKO 5 J 5.519 4.682 4.994 2.287 0.030
IKOPQ 11 M A 8.326 6.140 7.290 3.124 0.092
IKP 10 M A 9.159 6.558 8.016 3.125 0.108
IKW 11 M A 9.327 6.765 7.869 3.644 0.124
lMX M A 8.966 6.203 7.356
J 1 J 3.227 2.813 2.707 1.249 0.006
J KL 12 M A 8.745 6.245 6.973 3.435 0.098
JKOP 7 M A 7.079 5.519 5.935 2.708 0.060
JKP 4 J 6.245 4.787 5.518 2.500 0.038
JKW 10 M A 9.991 6.454 8.225 3.540 0.138

81

Table 9 (cont’d).

 

Age Male] Adult! Carapace Width Plastron Height Weight
Length Length
Turtle (yrs) Female Juvenile (cm) (cm) (cm) (cm) (kg)__
JKX 7 J 5.725 4.786 4.788
K 6 J 6.765 5.204 6.038 2.710 0.048
KL 4 J 4.371 3.645 3.539
KLM 12 M A 9.369 6.348 7.705 3.333 0.132
KLN 8 M A 9.053 6.244 7.390 3.227 0.102
KLO M A 9.522 6.789 7.887
KLP 6 J 6.035 5.205 5.205 2.598 0.034
KLQ 17 F A 9.367 6.455 8.265 3.745 0.126
KLU 9 F A 8.744 6.557 7.808 3.539 0.1 18
KLW 19 F A 8.898 6.650 7.717 3.740
KLX F A 9.091 6.746 8.120 3.540 0.122
KMN 12 F A 9.056 6.558 7.808 3.953 0.128
KMOQ 19 F A 9.159 6.558 8.118 3.850 0.126
KMP J 6.868 5.208 6.037 2.599 0.048
KMU 8 J 5.830 4.890 5.206 2.602 0.032
KMW
(J UV) 1 1 J 7.600 5.934 6.675 2.915 0.070
KMW 13 F A 9.886 7.825 8.536 4.059 0.168
KMX 9 F A 8.750 5.921 7.500 3.021 0.096
KN 4 J 4.370 3.540 3.542 1.665 0.014
KNO 9 M A 9.262 6.143 7.597 3.226 0.100
KNP 6 J 6.660 5.210 5.930 2.810 0.052
KNU 14 M A 8.534 5.934 7.285 2.910 0.084
KNV 5 J 5.392 4.890 5.100 2.290 0.036
KNW 15 M A 9.161 6.452 8.385 3.331 0.104
KNX 12 M A 9.885 6.952 8.285 3.022 0.120
KO 3 J 4.268 3.747 3.332 1.660 0.014
KOP 5 J 6.558 5.206 6.038 2.604 0.048
KOPR 6 J 7.285 5.820 6.246 2.813 0.062
KOQ 6 M A 6.767 5.204 5.934 2.602 0.052
KOU 13 M A 9.158 6.555 7.910 3.339 0.110
KOV 7 J 7.390 5.516 6.351 2.917 0.064
KOW J 7.503 5.875 6.485
KOX J 7.226 5.517 6.383
KP 7 J 5.375 4.465 4.737 2.189 0.026
KPQ 8 F A 9.160 6.453 8.120 3.850 0.128
KPU 5 J 5.830 4.990 5.100 2.390 0.036
KPV 7 M A 7.492 5.729 6.659 2.708 0.068
KPW 6 J 6.145 5.205 5.518 2.705 0.044
KPX 9 F A 8.140 6.765 7.206 3.245 0.110
KG
(2006) 2 J 3.123 2.707 2.602 1.146 0.006
KQU J 7.071 5.453 6.200
KU M A

82

 

Table 9 (cont’d).

 

Age Male! Adult! Carapace Width Plastron Height Weight
Length Length
Turtle (yrs) Female Juvenile (cmL (cm) (cm) JemL (I59)
KU 14 F A 9.158 6.763 8.224
KUV 12 M A 8.950 6.570 7.590 3.330 0.134
KUVX 9 J 6.878 5.271 6.140 2.708
KUW 8 F A 8.014 5.934 7.078 3.230 0.084
KV 21 F A 9.158 6.869 8.293 3.641 0.136
KVW 9 M A 9.055 6.455 7.390 3.125 0.1 10
KVWX J 6.713 5.177 6.033
KVX 14 F A 8.952 6.765 8.013 3.750 0.128
KW F A 9.083 6.871 8.202
KWX 4 J 5.208 4.578 4.580 2.291
KX
(2006) 2 J 3.227 2.812 2.605 1 .145 0.006
LMN M A 10.066
0 2 J 4.058 3.437 3.332 1.560 0.010
P 1 J 3.228 2.915 2.603 1.147 0.006
R 1 J 3.330 3.020 2.610 1 .350 0.008
V 3 J 4.060 3.538 3.228 1 .562 0.012
W 1 J 3.123 2.810 2.501 1.145 0.004

83

 

Figure 1. Presettlement land cover of southwestern Michigan fen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
 

 

.2922 Lancet 5’52““ I
8.2 wEgsetaw use «0.3 ream “5.5a. §i$§§sl
50325 Le 89¢. 3.592.1— 23.5308...— _ S35? I

m7 i20<
on: 39.88:

 

 

Hectares:~30; Acresz~75

84

Figure 2. Outlying regions of study site.

 

85

Figure 3. Open wetland in middle of fen.

 

86

Figure 4. Thick growth of Chara spp. in study site Chara pond.

 

87

Figure 5. Large transmitter attached to turtle carapace.

 

88

Figure 6. Alphabetical turtle marking system diagram.

Head

/v

 

 

 

89

Figure 7. Diagram of sample markings for turtle ABX.

Head

 

 

 

Tail

90

Figure 8. Spotted Turtle with notched markings.

 

91

Figure 9. Small transmitter attached to turtle carapace.

 

Figure 10. Labeled diagram of study site.

 

 

I. l n.3’lt. ‘II3'5v

83...

         
 
    

       
       

1|
83.306»:
East—03m tosm
tame—O
econ
r820
zon—
mo 23:2
«2.4 :30
8:3 0
59.3.25 :8... Em Eofixozm
>320 Ammo—
owem read
83 .55
contomoi
8.3

*Hand-drawn diagram by Diana Lutz.

93

Figure 11. Compilation of habitat utilization for transmittered turtles 2007.

 

« 'Hectare.s€‘1
Acres:26.i
- ' r. ‘3 ’

Spotted Turtle Distribution and Analysis
For All Transmittered Turtles 2007

 

   

 

 

 

*Hectares:10.69; Acres: 26.42

94

Figure 12. Compilation of habitat utilizations for turtles without transmitters in
2007.

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution and Analysis I
for All Nontransmittered Turtles 2007

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Hectares: 9.81; Acres: 24.245

95

Figure 13. Compilation of habitat utilizations for transmittered turtles in
2008.

 

 

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution and Analysis
For All Transmittered Turtles 2008

 

   

 

 

 

*Hectares: 12.02; Acres: 29.71

96

Figure 14. Compilation of habitat utilizations for turtles without transmitters in
2008.

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution and Analysis
for All Nontrsnrnittered Turtles 2008

 

   

 

 

 

*Hectares: 10.71; Acres: 26.47

97

Figure 15. Predated Nesting Site.

\

‘\

“W‘TMQ
. \\
4" _ \ N

9 \V // I '

 

98

~,-' “‘1“ w_ n ‘\\I‘
' ‘l“ 4
9.5“ \ '

Figure 17. Channel 0 male IKL habitat utilization in 2007.

 

 

 

 

d: .3. a$§< ...:

823:5: 2:2. 8:25

 

 

 

 

 

'3? ...

so; 0 s.

.....w

.1........._.
..~

.... . MUM...
and.» s x h

.Qccwfihk...

 

 

 

*Hectares: 1.60; Acres: 3.95

99

Figure 18. Channel 1 male KVW habitat utilization in 2007.

 

Hectares'1237o 1x _

Acres: 5.86

 

 

 

Spotted Turde Distribution

and Analysis For KVW

 

Legend

 

 

MCP

Spotted Turtle
Observations

O

 

 

*Hectares: 2.37; Acres: 5.86

100

 

 

 

Figure 19. Channel 2 male ABCK habitat utilization in 2007.

 

 

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution
and Analysis For ABCK 2007

 

nd

 

 

(MCP

Spotted Turns
Observations

0

 

 

*Hectares: 3.30; Acres: 8.16

101

 

 

 

Figure 20. Channel 3 female KVX habitat utilization in 2007.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.23 388 o
E s... ".223. ...: as.
8:353: 3:5 Beam F83

 

 

 

Viiv 3F...

\

.5 .....ufi.

. m
...
a

o...

4

......w... x

w...

a: 8.9.3“
3.6 M228:

2 's I ‘3
"0.1 ' ‘

. .5

0"

«a.

w,

.’/

 

 

 

*Hectares: 0.48; Acres: 1.19

102

Figure 21. Channel 4 female HKU habitat utilization in 2007.

 

"::

Hectares: Q35
Acres 06:

 

 

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution
and Analvsis For HKU

 

WP

 

Spotted Turtle
Observations

0

 

 

*Hectares: 0.35; Acres: 0.86

103

 

 

 

Figure 22. Channel 6 female DKVWX habitat utilization in 2007.

 

as
'3!
O‘-
..I~_
30
Eli
‘52
00
I<

E...” 33 5"...»
hat-ht.

to.“

.1 ....

 

913,

AV
. ,.
ts

. " A. .4..- .33-9.

-(

 

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution
and Analysis For DKVWX

 

MCP

 

Spotted Turtle
Observations

O

 

 

*Hectares: 0.29; Acres: 0.71

104

 

 

 

Figure 23. Channel 7 female KLU habitat utilization in 2007.

 

1. ‘t '1 -‘

i 3.11.! '

6
iii
0
b
a:
..
U
a:
3:

Acres: 0.98

 

 

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution

and Analysis For KLU

 

 

WP

o SpottsdTutle

 

 

*Hectares: 0.40; Acres: 0.98

105

 

 

 

Figure 24. Channel 8 female HKV habitat utilization in 2007.

 

2

0"?
‘1:
'd)

b
ts
..
0
d:
I

Acres: 2.77 .

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution
and Analysis For HKV

 

Lem

MCP

 

Spotted Turtle
Observations

O

 

 

*Hectares: 1.12; Acres: 2.77

106

 

 

Figure 25. Channel 10 male lKW habitat utilization in 2007.

 

[N
8
«3
u.
in?
=8
..
h
.22
DO
NO}
I]:

‘—
P.
‘—
El;
0
s.
U
<

 

 

 

i
=5
gs
ii
Eh
5%
3'»
e?

'D

5

 

Legend
MCP

o SpottedTutle

 

 

 

 

*Hectares: 0.45; Acres: 1.11

107

 

 

 

Figure 26. Channel 11 female KV habitat utilization in 2007.

 

[N
O.
can
..‘1
3°
._..
2m
03
ea
I<

O.
0
es
I

 

=
'3;
=
.9
'5:
In
a:
on
>
Ea
h:
<
‘3:
g.
a.
U)

 

Legend
MCP

 

 

Spotted Turtle
Observations

O

 

 

*Hectares: 0.07; Acres: 0.18

108

 

 

Figure 27. Channel 1 female HJKV habitat utilization in 2008.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9.? v n

Sea->380

......» 3.88

3:: 3m 2.2.5. a... .6:
525.53: 2:3. 8:25 E:

a cites... e

Pm...
....“

$63123 ... ...” ... ._
Wmuwwfifivz e ,e
..

... J .

 

 

 

*Hectares: 1.20; Acres: 2.96

109

Figure 28. Channel 2 male KUV habitat utilization in 2008.

 

In
us
oo
..CD.
3;-
b“
sin
02
00
I<

 

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution

and Analysis For KUV

 

 

 

WP

Spotted Tube
Observations

O

 

 

*Hectares: 0.66; Acres: 1.60

110

 

 

 

Figure 29. Channel 3 female HJK habitat utilization in 2008.

 

._
".
CID
..l\.
3.-
...
EU)
as
00
I<

 

 

 

E
.6
’35
5
be.
as
.a
E>
:1
Pl:
4
Be
8:
8.
m

 

nd
MCP

 

 

Spotted Turtle
Observations

O

 

 

*Hectares: 0.71; Acres: 1.75

111

 

 

 

Figure 30. Channel 4 female ABKW habitat utilization in 2008.

 

n
N.
can
5"!
m°
._..
2m
02
mo
I<
e

 

 

 

55
'5
5
33%
0
2'3
["3
34!
'5
8.5
CD

 

nd
MCP

 

Spotted Turtle
Observations

O

 

 

 

*Hectares: 0.23; Acres: 0.58

112

 

 

 

Figure 31. Channel 5 female CHJKLVW habitat utilization in 2008.

 

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution
and Analysis For CHJKLVW

Hectares: 0.22
Acres: 0.55

 

ts

Leg—end

352..

a

S;
y,

wavy"?
u“. '1 ‘ 6.-

.l
, .. v “' I. :\‘-
. ’9‘ J _; P ‘ .

i" “
I

”5'!

MCP

 

 

Spotted Turth
Observations

O

 

 

 

*Hectares: 0.22; Acres: 0.55

113

 

 

 

Figure 32. Channel 6 female BDKW habitat utilization in 2008.

 

.
O
'1‘
O
.553
2..
53
UL
QIU
:<

 

 

 

 

ea
2:
“.9
3:.
£5

 

LOW

MCP

 

 

Spotted Turth
Observations

O

 

 

*Hectares: 0.60; Acres: 1.48

114

 

 

Figure 33. Channel 7 female AKX habitat utilization in 2008.

 

case-Q

. . ... . ...
$1“f3’0
. é ‘ '

.. a .,

 

 

 

Spotted Turde Distribution

and Analysis For AKX

 

MCP

 

 

Spotted Tutle
Observations

O

 

 

*Hectares: 1.09; Acres: 2.70

115

 

 

 

Figure 34. Channel 8 female FKS habitat utilization in 2008.

 

(’3
‘7
1-
iii
0
L-
1V
...
U
Q!
I

Acres: 3.28

 

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution

and Analysis For FKS

 

Legend

 

MCP
o SpottedTutie

 

 

 

*Hectares: 1.33; Acres: 3.28

116

 

 

 

Figure 35. Channel 9 female BKW habitat utilization in 2008.

 

412' '

O
D
o

Hectaresziqés
Acr‘es:‘0

.8
O

 

 

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution

and Analysis For BKW 2008

 

Le97nd
MCP

 

Spotted Turtle
Observations

O

 

 

*Hectares: 0.16; Acres: 0.41

117

 

 

 

Figure 36. Channel 11 female CKU habitat utilization in 2008

 

co
°.
i-rs
a“?
”N
...
3‘”
82
:E
O

 

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution

and Analysis For CKU

 

 

 

MCP

Spotted Tutie
Observations

O

 

 

*Hectares: 1.08; Acres: 2.67

118

 

 

 

Figure 37. Channel 12 female ABCKW habitat utilization in 2008.

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution
and Analysis For ABCKW

 

' C
a.
‘2
ON
“(‘5
3‘-
Eli
‘62
0.1L)
I<

)

bx‘?
. .4
a.
Legend

'. x
MCP
Spotted Turtle
Observations

O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Hectares: 0.49; Acres: 1.22

119

Figure 38. Channel 13 female DKP habitat utilization in 2008.

 

Hectares: 1.08
Acres: 2.67

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution
and Analysis For DKP

 

nd
MCP

 

Spotted Turtle
Observations

O

 

 

*Hectares: 1.08; Acres: 2.67

 

 

Figure 39. Channel 14 female BHK habitat utilization in 2008.

 

-
a
N.
O
111
2
(l
..
o
a;
I

Acres: 1.95

 

 

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribu ' n
and Analysis For BHK

 

Legs—rid

WP

 

Spotted Tutle
Observations

O

 

 

*Hectares: 0.79; Acres: 1.95

 

 

 

Figure 40. Channel 15 female ADKO habitat utilization in 2008.

 

Hectares: 0.22
Acres: 0.53

‘ ' .‘5 ‘5.

.ofl“

 

1‘ -./

w}.

l

a:

'cg I. ‘ I $34.1“

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution

and Analysis For ADKO

 

Legend
MCP

 

Spotted Turtle
Obeervations

O

 

 

*Hectares: 0.22; Acres: 0.53

122

 

 

Figure 41. Channel 16 male ABCK habitat utilization in 2008.

 

 
 
 

Habitat Use 2008
Hectares: 1.81
Acres: 4.48

Spotted Turtle Distribution
and Analysis For ABCK 2008

 

Legend

MCP
Spotted Turtle
Observations

O

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘Hectares: 1.81; Acres: 4.48

123

Figure 42. Channel 17 male lKW habitat utilization in 2008.

 

 

 

 

 

and Analysis For IKW

Spotted Turtle Distribution

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Hectares: 1.33; Acres: 3.29

124

 

Figure 43. Habitat utilization for male ABCK in 2007 and 2008.

 

I .i o“. . ‘
" ‘3}.4‘3.
.‘I .

.5

if
1 I.‘
\

Habitat U
° Hectares

 
 
 

 

Habitat Use 2008
Hectares: 1.81
Acres: 4.48

Spotted Turtle Distribution
and Analysis For ABCK 2007 and 2008

 

Lem
sopzoos
M02007

SposedTunIe
W

O

 

 

 

 

 

 

*2007 Hectares: 3.30; Acres: 8.16
*2008 Hectares: 1.81; Acres: 4.48

125

Figure 44. Habitat utilization for male IKW in 2007 and 2008.

 

130,6" .

I
Hectates
Acres: 3.29' .

‘ er
Habitarfu‘sf

f.

.s
t

 

q,
031.
03. e

Spotted Turtle Distribution
and Analysis For IKW 2007 and 2008

Habitat Use 2007
Hectares: 0.45
Acres: 1.11

 

Legend
MCP
Spotted Tutle
Observations

O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*2007 Hectares: 0.45; Acres: 1.11
*2008 Hectares: 1.33; Acres: 3.29

126

Figure 45. Overlapping areas of all females tracked in 2007.

 

co
'5')
c
c
(TS
.:
O

 

 

Spotted Turtle Minimum Convex Polygon
Showing All Females Tracked 2007

 

 

 

Roads

 

 

 

Ch. 3: Hectares: 0.48; Acres: 1.19
Ch. 4: Hectares: 0.35; Acres: 0.86
Ch. 5: Hectares: 0.37; Acres: 0.92
Ch. 6: Hectares: 1.08; Acres: 2.67

Ch. 7: Hectares: 0.40; Acres: 0.98
Ch. 8: Hectares: 1.12; Acres: 2.77
Ch. 9: Hectares: 0.05; Acres: 0.11
Ch. 11: Hectares: 0.07; Acres: 0.18

127

 

 

Figure 46. Overlapping areas of all males tracked in 2007.

 

Spotted Turtle Minimum Convex Polygon
Showmg All Males Tracked During 200'

T
1

 

chmo

 

 

 

DCH2

 

 

 

8l
3 .— o
I :r:
0 0
F
Ch. 0: Hectares: 1.60; Acres: 3.95 Ch. 1: Hectares: 2.37; Acres: 5.86
Ch. 2: Hectares: 3.30; Acres: 8.16 Ch. 10: Hectares: 0.45; Acres: 1.11

128

 

 

Figure 47. Channel 1 overlapping with all transmittered females during 2007.

 

«emanate 55.5 s36 _ 1555
Euro.— aosaeo 5.55: at; Baa—m

 

 

 

 

 

 

m 85.5

 

 

 

Figure 48. Male overlapping home ranges in 2008.

 

 

 

 

 
 
 

Showing All Males Tracked During zoos

Spotted Turtle Minimum Convex Polygon

N
I
0
0
v-
I
O

 

 

 

 

Ch. 2: Hectares: 0.65; Acres: 1.60
Ch. 16: Hectares: 1.81; Acres: 4.48
Ch. 17: Hectares: 1.33; Acres: 3.29

130

Figure 49. Female overlapping home ranges in 2008.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a .
2%
in
93
H
(32
[-
E
‘8
E
.55
Eu.
25
to:
35
H';
'8:
=85
w
9!!
58%
[gm]
m 3:3
: -1 I
(D --.:
E 6666
g l—
o

   

 

 

 

Ch. 1: Hectares: 1.20; Acres: 2.97 Ch. 8: Hectares: 1.33; Acres: 3.28
Ch. 3: Hectares: 0.71; Acres: 1.75 Ch. 9: Hectares: 0.17; Acres: 0.41
Ch. 4: Hectares: 0.23; Acres: 0.58 Ch. 11: Hectares: 0.17; Acres: 0.42
Ch. 5: Hectares: 0.22; Acres: 0.55 Ch. 12: Hectares: 0.50 Acres: 1.22
Ch. 6: Hectares: 0.60; Acres: 1.48 Ch. 13: Hectares: 0.12; Acres: 0.29
Ch. 7: Hectares: 1.09; Acres: 2.70 Ch. 14: Hectares: 0.79; Acres: 1.95
Ch. 15: Hectares: 0.22; Acres: 0.53

131

Figure 50. Sphagnum spp. moss mounds.

13599.n- -...

.-.

" "1 >11, . '
egg-v
p -‘ "7;“ 7 “Q a X 1'
. \ » , c
- g- \\ I - 1‘ ")4;
' 40-: . . . . '-

 

132

Figure 52. Channel 4 aestivation and hibernation locale.

C k A“ 3' (:11 l t1

. ... a r": 2” 1 r
‘ ' ‘: a . .1. 7.7/"3 “(z/1".“ ” ’ ,
Ale/Empty" 1L1; -‘ . .z‘ .- 1.4: 3w
1‘ a Mr" F015 hi". 1 l A
(A l) L.- ’ 0'
\\_ ,, . _ 117436
V/— ____ \~ , .. ' ‘

mo“ Noam; a-“ .
“x he i Q

-’

   

.\ , g g. .1 _. .
z..;..---«.u,/ ~ - a»- -

4.
15.24 Cm Mafia mdemch/K

CAI“ A? \ q

Wafel—w’r’nf) [0°C
411’ 16m? l5-7 0L

*Hand-drawn diagram by Diana Lutz.

133

   

 

 

..y. . . . .
a . . 1 . . .
lisp. t nil i... 9‘ .v . .ll't. ' states has... bl. Waist.

Figure 55. Deer trail in study site.

 

135

Figure 56. Total utilization area for all turtles in 2007 and 2008.

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution and
Analysis For All Turtles 2007 - 2008

 

   

 

 

 

*Hectares: 13.30; Acres: 32.85

136

Figure 57. 2007 and 2008 Spotted Turtle sex distribution.

 

 

he. ”nous—HE.» 35852 .80...

 

 

2.52:. I
...: I
0.2:.“— I

 

 

 

5:39.85 xom 2:2. 8:26 83 can 33

137

Figure 58. Main aggregations of Spotted Turtles during 2007.

 

 

Spotted Turtle Distribution and Analysis
For All Transmittered Turtles 2007

 

   

 

 

 

*Hectares: 10.69; Acres: 26.42

138

Figure 59. Main aggregations of Spotted Turtles during 2008.

 

'

Spotted Turtle Distribution and Analysis
For All Transmittered Turtles 2008

 

   

 

 

*Hectares: 12.02; Acres: 29.71

139

 

Figure 60. 25 September 2007 possible hibemaculum.

77/656101] , 255€p+€mb€f 2007

) 0%
9.16m 0 W1 ZQBCK—Wk) ‘bUl’iEA in mud
/\

bunpd m mud "' C KY
(female

\ 3.48m

   
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

Bulrush, 661136, .1
“r! 4",“ ’7‘ ' is ficATur‘HfS ’ciacbzat" horizonletli
‘ - f cDKV(mle). ij5(mle))coi<vw(mlc)
11".... -..---
It“: ; 1 Na alder in km";
S dam!) mud
n?
1.
7A3¢am
ii.
I ” , ,
601(03‘Wlsedqei .1 1 3 .“D Channel H found WXEA
"54+ rho 7“ \ g i'n'stacls" With other 099,114+“;
Y 1 (g- = l: .' including BDKWPkaHKPOQ’M‘?)
M 1’ 3 “M AYWL'WF)
see-1:44.308 m an "
(‘7‘.-.17'7‘14 _
8‘ . - (..v/ No water in hole}
all turtles in damp Int/cl
an ,.
n at "6<V)“"~al<

hon Lon“ a? yaw i too

*Hand-drawn diagram by Diana Lutz.

140

Figure 61. 2 October 2007 possible hibemaculum.

Tuesday . 2— Ocl-obcr 2007

 

 

 

 

 

water in ._
hole . ‘ .3
ALL Mk5 _ f w z.“ swag“... '- ~-
' ‘ r:.---'--« ----- ~:;m¢.~;.~..:--; .
In mgzqnh < Ctr—IL?“ ‘ -
F’s'hm 3.114%

 

. ......
_. . “fr. ......f, ..- ~~..‘ @ 3:033?“ .330
A7KX(M12), dame! u (KVW) , 4+1: Fatima) , czxémle)

’ . ' a HKP
' W200? madamn,a_ .
Nam. “W151 teat deed!) rcn+ )hole) zaggmfrom Fifi-r
1044 this 3 ivrfles. BDKV was unable +0 was
:25“ CKXG‘cmaie)-l'fu:fu)as obsermt may 31.32m
13 aged on 2.5 2007 approx: 11
0 Se" septum-139’ maid
79mm AW) channel it, 31' HKP.

*Hand-drawn diagram by Diana Lutz.

141

 

Figure 62. 12 October 2007 possible hibemaculum.

fin’day I2. Oc'i'obcr 1007

 

 

,/
Sandbar willow —-> ’ ' i
i‘ 91"”
J (06" awv’
' “a" ’ é-WoZan-D “a? --. .2 ‘
. .- M M“ s ‘9 ‘2...
’25 C "1.....-m ‘- M~~ .- .——-
4m: w. . fl .. (£9
' “'7' . a‘um““%~--“‘:§~:‘: , t
Noie: CM 5 in
swimsngs Bax/6m) 11.0‘6 shell Rmp,
(firms .2: TKPka) 12.37. sAeIi imp,
r L ,
seismic. Kuwgimk) i337. shell w

In W! War andn‘wd) among
Soundbar mum mo+ 35mm- L49!- WK (5 amber wan)
9C KVGMJC) was «Ln-Hu's hole weih 2. drfjferem-
5PM“ TM‘€S((LDKVm41e , KLX fanatic).

*Hand-drawn diagram by Diana Lutz.

I42

 

Figure 63. 16 October 2007 possible hibemaculum.

”Galaxy up adobe!“ 2007

 

 

 

 

WW “AU-0w —-;
“ " «titrfi.
walcr and mud (€727Mi- ..

in M2. 4:_ 1::M --. ...?

.....qu ”’1':-
Nolc' change in com (rule) l~l$°c shell lame
6mm? 5+4: ’ KO? (330 Il‘f.$‘C shell Rm?-
daggm. IKNPQM/m) ls.s°c shell lth-

AKP gunk/3W) "...-1°C shell “MP-

*Hand-drawn diagram by Diana Lutz.

143

 

LITERATURE CITED

144

I- sank-m

 

LITERATURE CITED

Barlow, C. 1999. Habitat Use and Spatial Ecology of Blanding’s Turtles
(Emydoidea blandingil) and Spotted Turtles (Clemmys guttata) in
Northeast Indiana. Master of Science Thesis. Purdue University, Indiana.

Barnwell, M.E., Meylan, PA, and T. Walsh. 1997. The Spotted Turtle (Clemmys
guttata) in Central Florida. Chelonian Conservation and Biology.
2(3):405-408.

Blake, SF. 1922. Sexual differences in coloration in the spotted turtle, Clemmys
guttata. Proc. US. Natl. Mus. 59:463-469.

Berry, J.F. 1978. Spotted Turtle. IN: McDiarmid, R.W. (eds). Rare and
Endangered Biota of Florida. 3:47-49.

Breder, RB. 1927. Turtle Trailing: a New Technique for Studying the Life Habits
of Certain Testudinata. Zoologica. 9(4):231-243.

Breisch, AM. 2006. The Natural History and Thermal Ecology of a Population of
Spotted Turtles (Clemmys guttata) and Wood Turtles (Glyptemys
insculpta) in West Virginia. MS. Thesis. Marshall University.

Brinlee, C.J. Herbicide Demonstration for Aquatic Vegetation Control [intemet]
Available from: lnttpzfanninswcd.com/Newsletters/nletter-13-3-3-Pond.
Accessed 2009.

Burke, V.J., J.E. Lovich, and J.W. Gibbons. 2000. Conservation of freshwater
turtles. IN: M.K. Klemmens (ed.). Turtle Conservation. Smithsonian
Institution Press, Washington, DC. pp. 156-179.

Cagle, PR. 1944. Home Range, Homing Behavior, and Migration in Turtles.
Misc. Publ. Mus. Zool., Univ. Mich. 6121-33.

. 1939. A System of Marking Turtles for Future Identification. Copeia.
1939(3):170-173.

Cahn, AR. 1937. The turtles of Illinois. Contribution from the Zoological -
Laboratory of the University of Illinois. 492:68-75.

Carr, A. 1952. Handbook of Turtles: The Turtles of the United States, Canada

and Baja California. Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London.
pp.111-117.

Chadde, SW. 2002. A Great Lakes Wetland Flora. Second Edition Pocketflora
Press. Calumet, MI.

145

 

Chippindale, Paul. 1989. Courtship and Nesting Records for Spotted Turtles,
Clemmys guttata, in the Mer Bleue Bog, southeastern Ontario. The
Canadian Field Naturalist. 103:289-291.

Conant, R. and J.T. Collins. 1991. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of
Eastern and Central North America. Houghton Miffin Co., Boston. pp.50-
51.

Conant, R. and J.T. Collins. 1998. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of
Eastern and Central North America, Third Edition Expanded. Houghton
Miffin 00., Boston. pp.158-159.

Cook et al. 1980. Spotted Turtles (Clemmys guttata) in Eastern Ontario and
Adjacent Quebec. The Canadian Field Naturalist. 94:411-415.

COSEWIC. 2004. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the
Spotted Turtle, Clemmys guttata, in Canada. Committee on the Status of
Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. Vi + 27 pp. Available from:
www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status e.cfm. Accessed 2009.

Ditmars, R.L. 1933. Reptiles of the World. MacMillan Company, Norwood,
Mass, USA. pp.285-286.

Ernst, OH. 1967. A Mating Aggregation of the Turtle Clemmys guttata. Copeia.
1 967(2) :473-474.

. 1968. Homing Ability in the Spotted Turtle, Clemmys guttata
(Schneider). Herpetologica. 24(1):77-78.

. 1968. Evaporative Water-Loss Relationships of Turtles. Journal of
Herpetology. 2(3/4):159-161 .

. 1970. Reproduction in Clemmys guttata. Herpetologica. 26:228-
232.

. 1970. Home Range of the Spotted Turtle, Clemmys guttata
(Schneider). Copeia. 970(2):391-393.

. 1972. Clemmys guttata. Cat. Amer. Ambhib. Rept. 124.1-124.2.

. 1975. Growth of the Spotted Turtle, Clemmys guttata. Journal of
Herpetology. 9(3):313-318.

. 1976. Ecology of the Spotted Turtle, Clemmys guttata (Reptilia,
Testudines, Testudinidae), in Southeastern Pennsylvania. Journal of
Herpetology. 10(1):25-33.

146

. 1982. Environmental Temperatures and Activities in Wild Spotted
Turtles, Clemmys guttata. Journal of Herpetology. 16(2):112-120.

. 2001. An Overview of the North American Turtle Genus Clemmys
Ritgen, 1828. Chelonian Conservation and Biology. 4(1):211-216

, J.E. Lovich, and R.W. Barbour. 1994. Turtles of the United States
and Canada. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London. pp.
205-212.

and G. Zug. 1944. Observations on the Reproductive Biology of the
Spotted Turtle, Clemmys guttata, in Southeastern Pennsylvania. Journal
of Herpetology. 28(1):99-102.

Fitch, HS. 1958. Home range, territories, and seasonal movements of
vertebrates of the University of Kansas Natural History Reservation. Univ.
Kans. Pub, Mus. Nat. Hist. 11(3):63-326.

Folkerts, G.W. and AC. Skorepa. 1967. A Spotted Turtle, Clemmys guttata
(Schneider) from southeastern Georgia. Herpetologica. 23(1):63.

Fowle, S. 2001. Guidelines for Protecting Spotted Turtles and Their Habitats in
Massachusetts. Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program,
Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. pp. 1-11.

Gibbons, J.W. and J.E. Lovich. 1990. Sexual dimorphism in turtles with
emphasis on the Slider Turtle (Trachemys Scripta). Herpetological
Monographs. 4:1-29.

Graham, Terry E. 1970. Growth Rate of Spotted Turtle, Clemmys guttata, in
Southern Rhode Island. Journal of Herpetology. 4(1/2):87-88.

Graham, Terry E. 1995. Habitat use and population parameters of the Spotted
Turtle, Clemmys guttata, a Species of Special Concern in Massachusetts.
Chelonian Conservation and Biology. 1(3):207-214.

Grant, C. 1936. The Southwestern Desert Tortoise, Gopherus agassizii.
Zoologica. 21(4):225-229.

Harding, J. 1997. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Great Lakes Region.
University of Michigan Press.

Haxton, T. and M. Berrill. 2001. Seasonal Activity of Spotted Turtles (Clemmys

guttata) at the Northern Limit of Their Range. Journal of Herpetology.
35(4) :606-61 4.

147

Joint Nature Conversation Committee. 2005. 3140 Hard oligo-mesotrophic
waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp. Available from:
www.jncc.gov.uk/protectedsites/sacselection/habitat.asp?FeaturelntCode=
H3140-31K-. Accessed 2009.

Joyal et al. 2001. Landscape Ecology Approaches to Wetland Species
Conservation: A Case Study of Two Turtle Species in Southern Maine.
Conservation Biology. 15(6):1755-1762.

Kiester, A.R., C.W. Schwartz, and ER. Schwartz. 1982. Promotion of gene flow
by transient individuals in an otherwise sedentary population of box turtles
(Terrapene carolina). Evolution. 36:617-619.

Lewis, TL. and J. Ritzenthaler. 1997. Characteristics of Hibemacula Use by
Spotted Turtles, Clemmys guttata, in Ohio. Chelonian Conservation and
Biology. 2(4):611-615.

Litzgus, JD. 1996. Life-History and Demography of a Northern Population of
Spotted Turtles, Clemmys guttata. Master’s Thesis, University of Guelph,
Ontaria.

. 1996. Cryptic Survivor: The Elusive Spotted Turtle. Bruce Trail
News. pp.16-19.

. 2006. Sex Differences in Longevity in the Spotted Turtle (Clemmys
guttata). Copeia. 2006(2):281-288.

and R.J. Brooks. 1998. Growth in a cold environment: body size and
sexual maturity in a northern population of spotted turtles, Clemmys
guttata. Can. J. Zool. 76:773-782.

and R.J. Brooks. 1998. Reproduction in a Northern Population of
Clemmys guttata. Journal of Herpetology. 32(2):252-259.

and R.J. Brooks. 2000. Habitat and Temperature Selection of
Clemmys guttata in a Northern Population. Journal of Herpetology.
34(2): 1 78-1 85.

et al. 1999. Phenology and ecology of hibernation in spotted turtles
(Clemmys guttata) near the northern limit of their range. Can. J. Zool.
77: 1 348-1 357.

and T. Mousseau. Demography of a Southern Population of the

Spotted Turtle (Clemmys guttata). Southeastern Naturalist. 2004.
3(3):391-400.

148

 

and T. Mousseau. Home Range and Seasonal Activity of
Southeastern Spotted Turtles (Clemmys guttata): Implications for
Management. Copeia. 2004. 2004(4):804-817.

Lovich, J.E. 1987. The Savannah River Ecology Laboratory Museum. Herpetol.
Rev. 20:37-38.

. 1988. Geographic Variation in the Seasonal Activity Cycle of Spotted
Turtles, Clemmys guttata. Journal of Herpetology. 22(4): 482-485.

.1989. The spotted turtles of Cedar Bog: historical analysis of a
declining population. Proceedings of Cedar Bog Symposium II,
Glotzhober, R.C., A. Kochman, and WT Schultz (eds.). pp.23-28.

. 1990. Spring Movement Patterns of Two Radio-tagged Male Spotted
Turtles. Brimleyana. 16:67-71.

and TR. Jaworski. 1988. Annotated check list of amphibians and
reptiles from Cedar Bog, Ohio. Ohio J. Sci. 88:139-143.

Lutz, D.J. 2008. Clemmys guttata Winter Copulation in Michigan, USA. Bull.
Chicago Herp. Soc. 43(11):173-174.

Medsger, OF. 1919. Notes on the First Turtle I Ever Saw. Copeia. 69:29.

Milam, J. and S. Melvin. 2001. Density, Habitat Use, Movements, and
Conservation of Spotted Turtles (Clemmys guttata) in Massachusetts.
Journal of Herpetology. 35(3):418-427.

Minton, S.A. Jr. 1972. Amphibians and reptiles of Indiana. Indiana Academy of
Science. Indianapolis, Indiana. pp.155.

Nature Serve. Available from: www.natureserve.org. Accessed 2008.

Nemuras, K. 1966. Genus Clemmys. lntemational Turtle and Tortoise Society
Journal. 1:26-27, 29, 44.

. 1966. Spotted Turtles in Maryland. Bull. New York Herpetological
Society. pp. 6-9.

Netting, MG. 1936. Hibernation and Migration of the Spotted Turtle, Clemmys
guttata (Schneider). Copeia. 2:112.

Nichols, J.T. 1939. Range and Homing of Individual Box Turtles. Copeia.
3:125-127.

149

Oldham, M.J. 1991. Status of the Spotted Turtle, Clemmys guttata, in Canada.
COSEWIC, Ottawa. Unpublished draft report. 90pp.

Perillo. KM. 1997. Seasonal movements and habitat preferences of Spotted
Turtles (Clemmys guttata) in North Central Connecticut. Chelonian
Conservation and Biology. 2(3):445-447.

Peterson, DE. and CD. Lee. 2005. Aquatic Plants and Their Control. Kansas
State University Agricultural Experimental Station and Cooperative
Extension Service. pp. 1-2.

Roach, A. 2006. The Spotted Turtle: North America’s Best. Living Art
Publishing, Canada. pp. 2-3.

Ross and Lovich. 1992. Does the Color Pattern of Two Species of Turtles
lmitate Duckweed? Journal of the Pennsylvania Academy of Science.
66(1):39-42.

Ruthven et al. 1928. Herpetology of Michigan. University of Michigan, Michigan
Handbook Series, No. 3. pp.143-145.

Schneck, J. 1886. Longevity of Turtles. Amer. Nat. 20(9):897.

Scribner, K.T., M.H. Smith, and J.W. Gibbons. 1984. Genetic differentiation
among local populations of the yellow-bellied slider turtle (Pseudemys
scripta). Herpetologica. 40:382-387.

State of Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Water Bureau. 2005.
Aquatic Plants of Michigan. Accessed 2009.

Ultsch. GR. 2006. The Ecology of Overwintering Among Turtles: Where Turtles
Overwinter and Its Consequences. Biological Reviews. 81:339-367.

Voss, E.G. 1972. Michigan Flora, Part I. Gymnosperms and monocots.
Cranbrook Institute of Science Bulletin 55 and University of Michigan
Herbarium.

Ward, F.P., C.J. Hohmann, J.F. Ulrich and SE. Hill. 1976. Seasonal
Microhabitat selections of spotted turtles (Clemmys guttata) in Maryland
Elucidated by Radioisotope Tracking. Herpetologica. 32:60-64.

Wilson, RR. 1989. Clemmys guttata (Spotted Turtle) Reproduction. Herp.
Review. 20(3):69-70.

Wilson, T.P., J.C. Mitchell, and TS. Akre. 1999. Status and conservation of the
genus Clemmys in Virginia: Prospects for the future. Abstract Symposium

150

on Conservation and Ecology of the Mid-Atlantic Region. Patuxent
Research Refuge and National Wildlife Visitor Center, Laurel, Maryland.

Worton, B.J. 1989. Kernel methods of estimating the utilization distribution in
home range studies. Ecology. 70(1):164-168.

151

Illlllllll

l

1293 03062 9916

l

lllllilllllll