Scholarlink

Background <p>The Reeves’ turtle (<i>Mauremys reevesii</i>), a globally endangered species listed on CITES Appendix Ⅲ, faces significant threats in South Korea, including habitat fragmentation and competition with invasive species. Effective conservation requires a deep understanding of its spatial ecology, particularly how it differs between distinct habitat types. We compared the spatial ecology of <i>M. reevesii</i> in lentic (reservoir) and lotic (river) ecosystems to elucidate how their spatial behavior and habitat use are shaped by these distinct environments.</p> Methods <p>We used GPS telemetry to track 12 adult turtles (6 in a reservoir, 6 in rivers) in South Korea from April to November 2022. We analyzed differences in home range (Minimum Convex Polygon [MCP], Kernel Density Estimation [KDE 95%], Local Convex Hull [LoCoH 99%]), daily movement distance (Generalized Linear Mixed Models [GLMMs] testing habitat, sex, and season separately), diel terrestrial detection (circular statistics), and seasonal displacement (Generalized Additive Mixed Models [GAMMs]).</p> Results <p>Home range estimates (LoCoH 99%) showed no significant habitat differences, yet males occupied larger ranges than females (MCP, <i>p</i> = 0.015). GLMMs, accounting for individual random effects, revealed that habitat type was the only significant predictor of daily movement distance (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), with estimated movement in rivers being approximately 45% lower than in the reservoir. Sex and season did not exhibit statistically significant differences. Diel terrestrial detection also varied by habitat (Watson’s U<sup>2</sup> test, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001); both groups peaked at 14:00&#xa0;h, but river turtles exhibited a much sharper temporal concentration. GAMMs displacement analysis revealed distinct seasonal strategies: while turtles actively used adjacent paddy fields (June–September), reservoir turtles maintained a stable expansion peaking around 450&#xa0;m. In contrast, river turtles displayed a dynamic, biphasic migration with an overarching summer foraging peak (~ 1400&#xa0;m) followed by a secondary re-equilibration bounce before hibernation. Notably, recurrent returns to near-zero displacement baselines offer strong preliminary evidence of site fidelity back to their core aquatic environments.</p> Conclusions <p><i>M. reevesii</i> displays significant habitat associated differences in spatial ecology, adopting divergent movement patterns in response to lentic versus lotic environments. Paddy fields function as vital supplemental habitats. We recommend habitat-specific conservation buffers (450&#xa0;m radius for reservoirs, 1,400&#xa0;m linear distance for rivers) to encompass these movements and underscore the necessity of connectivity within these defined core habitats for effective population management.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Spatial ecology and habitat use of the reeves’ turtle (Mauremys reevesii) in lentic and lotic systems

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月24日

查看全文
  • Chang-Deuk Park,
  • Kwanik Kwon,
  • Jeongwoo Yoo,
  • Nakyung Yoo,
  • Chang-Yong Choi,
  • Ju-Duk Yoon

摘要

Background

The Reeves’ turtle (Mauremys reevesii), a globally endangered species listed on CITES Appendix Ⅲ, faces significant threats in South Korea, including habitat fragmentation and competition with invasive species. Effective conservation requires a deep understanding of its spatial ecology, particularly how it differs between distinct habitat types. We compared the spatial ecology of M. reevesii in lentic (reservoir) and lotic (river) ecosystems to elucidate how their spatial behavior and habitat use are shaped by these distinct environments.

Methods

We used GPS telemetry to track 12 adult turtles (6 in a reservoir, 6 in rivers) in South Korea from April to November 2022. We analyzed differences in home range (Minimum Convex Polygon [MCP], Kernel Density Estimation [KDE 95%], Local Convex Hull [LoCoH 99%]), daily movement distance (Generalized Linear Mixed Models [GLMMs] testing habitat, sex, and season separately), diel terrestrial detection (circular statistics), and seasonal displacement (Generalized Additive Mixed Models [GAMMs]).

Results

Home range estimates (LoCoH 99%) showed no significant habitat differences, yet males occupied larger ranges than females (MCP, p = 0.015). GLMMs, accounting for individual random effects, revealed that habitat type was the only significant predictor of daily movement distance (p < 0.001), with estimated movement in rivers being approximately 45% lower than in the reservoir. Sex and season did not exhibit statistically significant differences. Diel terrestrial detection also varied by habitat (Watson’s U2 test, p < 0.001); both groups peaked at 14:00 h, but river turtles exhibited a much sharper temporal concentration. GAMMs displacement analysis revealed distinct seasonal strategies: while turtles actively used adjacent paddy fields (June–September), reservoir turtles maintained a stable expansion peaking around 450 m. In contrast, river turtles displayed a dynamic, biphasic migration with an overarching summer foraging peak (~ 1400 m) followed by a secondary re-equilibration bounce before hibernation. Notably, recurrent returns to near-zero displacement baselines offer strong preliminary evidence of site fidelity back to their core aquatic environments.

Conclusions

M. reevesii displays significant habitat associated differences in spatial ecology, adopting divergent movement patterns in response to lentic versus lotic environments. Paddy fields function as vital supplemental habitats. We recommend habitat-specific conservation buffers (450 m radius for reservoirs, 1,400 m linear distance for rivers) to encompass these movements and underscore the necessity of connectivity within these defined core habitats for effective population management.