Ruffed grouse feeding behavior and its relationship to secondary metabolites of quaking aspen flower buds

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) staminate flower buds and the extended catkins are primary food resources for ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus). Winter feeding observations indicate that ruffed grouse select specific trees or clones of quaking aspen to feed in. Flower buds and catkins of quaking aspen were analyzed for secondary compounds (tannins, alkaloids, and phenolics) that might cause ruffed grouse to avoid trees with high levels of these compounds. Coniferyl benzoate, a compound that has not been previously found in quaking aspen, exists in significantly higher concentrations in buds from trees with no feeding history as compared to ruffed grouse feeding trees. Aspen catkins were also significantly lower in coniferyl benzoate than buds from the same tree. Ruffed grouse feeding preference was not related to the tannin or total phenolic levels found in buds or catkins. Buds from feeding trees had higher protein levels than trees with no feeding history; however, catkins did not differ from buds in protein concentration. The high use of extended catkins in the spring by ruffed grouse is probably due to a lower percentage of bud scale material in the catkin as opposed to the dormant bud. Bud scales contain almost all of the nontannin phenolics in catkins and dormant buds. A feeding strategy where bud scales are avoided may exist for other bird species that feed on quaking aspen. Dormant flower buds are significantly lower in protein-precipitable tannins than catkins and differ in secondary metabolite composition from other aspen foliage.