能量吸收和通过巢的流动是包括海龟在内的许多爬行动物物种胚胎发育的重要方面。迄今为止,很少有研究明确地试图量化通过海龟巢的能量流,选择温度指数模型提供的简化方法。然而,能量的量化可以提供明确的非生物联系,可以将生物模型与生物气象和生态水文过程和模型联系起来。我们调查了在加拿大盾构岩石贫瘠景观中占据不同基岩形态的海龟巢的能量流,在安大略省,加拿大。研究的分类单元是斑点龟(Clemmysguttata),米德兰彩绘龟(Chrysemyspictamarginata),和布兰丁的海龟(Emydoideablandingii)。在2018年和2019年,使用放置在12个海龟巢穴附近的土壤中的传感器测量了巢穴的温度和土壤湿度。确定了每个巢穴位置的三种主要岩石形态,缝隙,楔子,和扁平类型,按基岩与巢址接触百分比递减的顺序。使用量热法确定每个巢的地面热通量和储热变化,同时还确定了大气和底层岩石之间的能量通量方向。与Flat(440MJ)和Ledge(331MJ)巢相比,Crevice巢的形态平均经历了最低的地面热通量(1.56×10-1Wm-2)和最低的累积储热(230MJ)。然而,在昼夜周期中,平巢的大量热量增加大部分被夜间热量损失所抵消。虽然缝隙巢的日储热收益最低,与其他巢穴类型相比,它们在晚上的热量损失要低得多。此外,我们发现59%的能量是从下面的基岩进入裂缝巢穴的,强调基岩在控制海龟筑巢栖息地热动力学方面的重要性。缝隙巢穴类型的能量参数变化较低,可以归因于巢穴与基岩的接触量较高,与平巢类型相比。我们的结果表明,裂缝形态可能是海龟在北部极限筑巢的理想选择,因为晚上最小的热量损失可以导致更稳定的热孵化环境。未来的保护和栖息地恢复工作应考虑基岩形态的重要性,并优先考虑保护Crevicenest遗址。此外,这项工作突出了生态学家之间潜在的跨学科工作的重要机会,气候学家,生物学家,水文学家,特别是生态水文和生物模型的整合。这项工作还强调了气候变化对海龟卵孵化成功和巢性别比的潜在不确定性。
Energy absorption and flow through a nest is an important aspect of embryonic development in many reptile species including turtles. To date, few studies have explicitly attempted to quantify the energy flow through turtle nests, opting instead for the simplified approach offered by temperature index models. However, the quantification of the energy can provide an explicit abiotic link that can link biological models to biometeorological and ecohydrological processes and models. We investigated the energy flow through turtle nests occupying different bedrock morphologies within a Canadian Shield Rock Barren landscape, in Ontario, Canada. The taxons studied were Spotted Turtle (Clemmys guttata), Midland Painted Turtle (Chrysemys picta marginata), and Blanding\'s Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii). Nest temperature and soil moisture were measured in 2018 and 2019 using sensors placed in the soil adjacent to 12 turtle nest cavities. Three main rock morphologies were identified for each nest location, Crevice, Ledge, and Flat types, that are in order of decreasing bedrock percentage contact with the nest site. Ground heat flux and change in heat storage were determined using the calorimetric method for each nest, while the direction of energy flux between the atmosphere and the underlying rock was also determined. The Crevice nest morphology experienced the lowest ground heat flux on average (1.56 × 10-1 W m-2) and lowest cumulative heat storage (230 MJ) compared to the Flat (440 MJ) and Ledge (331 MJ) nests. However, over the diurnal cycle, large heat gains by Flat nests were mostly balanced out by nighttime heat losses. While Crevice nests saw the lowest daily heat storage gains, they experienced much lower heat losses over the evening period compared to the other nest types. Furthermore, we found that 59% of the energy is directed from the underlying bedrock into the Crevice nest, highlighting the importance of the bedrock in controlling thermal dynamics in the turtle nesting habitat. The lower variability in energy parameters for Crevice nest types can be attributed to higher amounts of nest-to-bedrock contact, compared to the flat nest types. Our results indicate that Crevice morphology may be ideal for turtles nesting at their northern limits because minimal heat loss during the evening can result in a more stable thermal incubation environment. Future conservation and habitat restoration efforts should consider the importance of bedrock morphology and prioritize the protection of Crevice nest sites. Furthermore, this work highlights important opportunities for potential interdisciplinary work between ecologists, climatologists, biologists, and hydrologists, specifically the integration of ecohydrological and biological models. This work also underscores the potential uncertainty of climate change impacts on turtle egg hatching success and nest sex ratios.