Behneyetal. • PRAIRIE-CHICKEN BREEDING BEHAVIOR 
97 
many males mate, and what characteristics influ¬ 
ence male mating success. The objectives ot our 
study were to (1.) assess the roles of behavioral, 
territorial, and morphological characteristics tor 
Lesser Prairie-Chicken mate choice, (2) report dates 
if peak female attendance and copulations, and (3) 
issess the extent of mating skew on prairie-chicken 
Ids. 
METHODS 
S ntd\ Area,—Our study occurred on private 
itos in Cochran and Yoakum counties in the 
lews Southern High Plains Ecoregion (Llano 
Esiacado). The area consists of a matrix of 
grassland and cropland (Wu et al. 2001) among 
j level to gently undulating landscape with small 
■egetated dunes providing infrequent topograph¬ 
'll relief. The dominant vegetation was shinnery 
to iQuercus havardii ) intermixed with sand 
■agebnish (Artemisia filifolia), grasses, and forbs 
'Pettit 1979, Woodward et al. 2001). 
ihe mean annual precipitation was 48.3 cm for 
to period 2000-2009 (50.3 and 45.2 cm in 2008 
■to 2009. respectively) with average summer 
Tun-Aug) and winter (Dec-Feb) temperatures 
’I 35.4 and 5.4 C, respectively. Extreme high 
to low temperatures were 39.5 and -13.4 C, 
espectively (U.S. Department of Commerce 
- 1 h ) The average elevation of the study area is 
'"U00 m. 
Held Methods,—"We conducted this study on 
|,l||r different leks during spring 2008 and 2009. 
I"° leks were sampled in 2008 and three in 2009 
"" h °ne sampled in both years. Grass cover on 
r v leks was too high and dense to see the birds 
T s continuously. Thus, we selected leks lor this 
'toy based on vegetation characteristics that 
1 ditated identification of color bands on legs ot 
I^aine-chickens. 
' Ve captured male Lesser Prairie-Chickens 
walk-in-funnel traps (l laukos ct al. 1990. 
Boeder and Braun 1991) early in the lekking 
eas,| n date Feb-early Mar). We also captured 
males 1 
opportunistically with a bownct throughout 
* lc Lking season. We did not attempt to capture 
ial es with the bownet while females were present 
Wi. Each captured male was fitted with a 
,u 4ue color band combination (Association ot 
lC 'd Ornithologists, Manomet, MA. USA) and a 
tobered aluminum Texas Parks and Wildlife 
bailment band (size 6). We measured mass (g). 
Sh pinnae length (mm), right tarsus length 
nni ), and right unflattened wing cord length from 
bend of wing to tip of longest primary (mm) for 
each captured male. We classified prairie-chicken 
age as either adult or yearling based on plumage 
characteristics. Yearlings exhibited frayed tips of 
the ninth and tenth primaries and spotting within 
2.5 cm of the tip of the tenth primary whereas 
adults lacked frayed primaries and had no spotting 
within 2.5 cm of the tip of the tenth primary 
(Copelin 1963). Four males (2 yearlings, 2 
adults) were marked with necklace style radio 
transmitters. 
We placed a grid of points centered on the 
activity center of each study lek to facilitate 
mapping of male territories. Grid points consisted 
of numbered, orange-colored, blocks ot wood (7.6 
X 5 1 X 5,1 cm), placed every 5 m encompassing 
the entire lek area. Some leks were sufficiently 
small to be covered with a 5 X 8 grid (20 X 35 m) 
while others required a 10 X 10 grid (45 X 45 m). 
Grids were placed on leks in February before 
birds started attending leks. 
We conducted observations from a blind 
(Primos Ground Max. Flora, MS, USA.) placed 
within 10 m of the edge of the lek during morning 
and evening lekking periods. We used binoculars 
and spotting scopes to identify males, and assess 
locations and behavior. We used the grid points 
as a reference to plot locations ot males onto a 
corresponding paper copy of the grid during 10- 
min interval scan samples. Lek observations were 
not conducted if a lek had walk-m-iunnel traps 
present or after the bownet had been triggered 
Observations were made 2-3 days/week Irom 2 
February to 21 May 2008 and 5 March to 10 May 
o()09 The order of leks to be monitored was 
randomly selected, weekly. Leks were not ob¬ 
served when lightning was present or winds 
exceeded ~45 km/hr. . 
We recorded a description of male Lesser Prairie- 
Chicken behavior every time a location was plotted. 
Behavioral categories included display, moving 
face off. fighting, and idle. Display involved 
erecting pinnae, enlarging eye-combs, elevating 
tail drooping wings, extending head and neck 
forward, stamping feet, inflating esophageal air 
sacs, and emitting booming vocalization (Hagen 
and Giesen 2005). Moving was when the male was 
walking or running but not displaying. Face off 
consisted of two males in close proximity (<1 m), 
facing each other at a territory boundary. lypically 
in a semiprone position, but not displaying, moving, 
or fighting (Hagen and Giesen 2005). Fighting 
consisted of two males actively fighting each other 
