732 
THE WILSON JOURNAL OF ORNITHOLOGY • Vol 124. No. 4. December 2012 
for . S 7 inso "-^'ari>,e re a, Woodbuty Wildlife Ma W 
modification proposed by Manolis et al. (2000). ' Sl " VIVa ,dlLS E lncludc nests of unknown fate using the 
Incubation 
Year 
No. nests 
•IIVUIM 
Nestling 
Exposure days (losses i 
Daily survival 
Exposure days (losses) 
Daily survival 
1999 
2000 
2(M)I 
2005 
2006 
Totals 
18 
22 
23 
5 
10 
78 
165 (7) 
220 (5) 
235.5 (5) 
11.5 (1) 
49.5 (6) 
681.5 (14) 
0.957 ±0.016 
0.977 ± 0.010 
0.979 ± 0.009 
0.913 ± 0.083 
0.879 ± 0.046 
0.965 ± 0.007 
75.5 (1) 
119(4) 
126.5 (2) 
28 (0) 
31 (1) 
380 (8) 
0.986 ± 0.013 
0.966 ±0.016 
0.984 ± 0.011 
1.000 
0.968 ± 0.032 
0.979 ± 0.007 
Pooled 
Daily survival 
0.967 ± 0.011 
0.973 ± 0.009 
0.981 ± 0.007 
0.975 ± 0.025 
0.913 ± 0.031 
0.970 ± 0.005 
Nesting Success. The leading cause of nesi 
failure was depredation (25/27). followed by 
desert,on (2/27). Two predatory interne,ions were 
observed during the study, both involving black rat 
snakes (Elaphe obsolete,). One snake unsuccessfully 
ined to cany away an 8-day-old nestling, while 
another swallowed three eggs from a 5.5-nt high 
nest. The nesthng was force-fledged, hut was 
observed J days later being fed by one of the 
parents. Twelve nest outcomes were unknown due 
the flew*"“T™ 8 fmm fluwli "S °r 'he end of 
fOT (»lT° n ' T' Cighl nesls were observed 
(Tabl’e a , T h P °H rC , “f Wi,h 32 ' e *** observed 
Tl l? da " > ' M ay fle W dutch survival 
est mate tor all years was 0.965 ± 0 007 and tin- 
daily Mayfield nestling survival was 0.979 ± () (M )7 
The overall daily nest survival rate with combined 
The M 0 r U M neSthng phases WiJS 0.970 ± 0.005 
The Mayfield survival estimate for the 23-dav 
nesting cycle was 50% {95%. Cl = 45 - 5 ?%)' * 
Goodness of fit tests indicated the global model 
ade,„ a , dy j, the ohserved va|ues qT “ 
raf-bm og, ca | mode | (] p = 3/79 . dr = g 
7.48 . df = s" e p = 0 486 a ) n p CaPe m ° de ' «* = 
’ U 486 )- Pearson’s Chi-square 
statistic was <| f or both the temporal-biological 
(0.739) and habitat-landscape models (0.659) 
indicating limited overdispersion of data. Twen- 
ly-lwo candidate models were used to examine 
temporal and biological effects on nest survival, 
an t,ie ,,CSI Oiling models incorporated the 
interactive effects of nest age and parasitism 
a'ong with nesi stage (Table 3 ). Models examin¬ 
ing yeat, day of the year, whether linear or 
quadratic, and the cubic and quadratic effects of 
nest age were not strong predictors of nest 
suivival. Daily survival rale was highest among 
unparasitized nests oI the youngest age during 
incubation. The variables from the best fit 
temporal-biological models were incorporated 
into ih e habitat-landscape models (n = 17 ) 
•iol 3). We identified two candidate models 
win ow AAIC values; the combined effects of 
nest age. nest parasitism, and distance to the 
nearest swamp w'ere most important for nesi 
survival. Variables relating to cane density, 
distance to the nearest road and slough, and nest 
ivi^it received little support. Unparasitized nests 
that were younger in age and further from a 
swamp had the highest daily survival rates. The 
w.S y ^ *, habitat vaHaite 
-fury Wildlife Management Area, South Carolina. 1994-2001 and 200 
_Model 
Temporal-biological models 
p arastat*nest_agexstage 
Parastat*nest_age 
Nest_age parastat 3 185.89 j p-, 0.5401 
Habitat-landscape models 18896 4.192 0 0664 
Parastat*nest_age dist.swp 
Nest - age parastat dist_swp 
0.7309 
0.2511 
