Does Human Scent Bias Seed Removal Studies?

Field estimates of seed removal rates are often determined by monitoring the survival of seeds placed at stations. Such experiments may unintentionally provide seed predators with unnatural olfactory cues. We compared the removal of seeds that had direct contact with human skin (scented) vs. seeds t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Ecology (Durham) 2002-09, Vol.83 (9), p.2630-2636
Main Authors: Duncan, R. Scot, Wenny, Daniel G., Spritzer, Mark D., Whelan, Christopher J.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Animal nesting
Animal, plant and microbial ecology
Bias
Biological and medical sciences
Bird nesting
Design of experiments
Ecology
experimental bias
Experimentation
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
General aspects. Techniques
granivore
Human ecology
Humans
Methods and techniques (sampling, tagging, trapping, modelling...)
olfactory cues
Plants
Predation
Predators
Rodents
seed predation, seed removal
Seeds
Smell
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Field estimates of seed removal rates are often determined by monitoring the survival of seeds placed at stations. Such experiments may unintentionally provide seed predators with unnatural olfactory cues. We compared the removal of seeds that had direct contact with human skin (scented) vs. seeds that had no contact with human skin (unscented). At three Florida sites in 1997-1998, four to five species were tested by placing five conspecific seeds at each station; 40-50 stations per species, per treatment, per site were monitored for 30 d. Seed removal was greater for scented than unscented seeds, but most differences were significant only with all species and sites pooled. At two Illinois sites and one Florida site in 1999-2000, one seed of one of two species was placed at each of 400 stations and monitored for 30 d. Scented seeds were removed significantly faster than unscented seeds at Illinois sites (14% scented vs. 5% unscented removed after one day), but not at the Florida site. The effect of scent on removal was pronounced during the first week, then disappeared. Fortunately, these results suggest scent biases are weak and shortlived, and most studies are unaffected. Studies that may be affected are those of short duration.
ISSN:0012-9658
1939-9170
DOI:10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[2630:DHSBSR]2.0.CO;2