Environmental variation reflected by the North Atlantic Oscillation affects breeding and survival in terrestrial vertebrates, and climate change is predicted to have an impact on population dynamics by influencing food quality or availability. The North Atlantic Oscillation also affects the abundance of marine fish and zooplankton, but it is unclear whether this filters up trophic levels to long-lived marine top predators. Here we show by analysis of data from a 50-year study of the fulmar that two different indices of ocean climate variation may have lagged effects on population dynamics in this procellariiform seabird. Annual variability in breeding performance is influenced by the North Atlantic Oscillation, whereas cohort differences in recruitment are related to temperature changes in the summer growing season in the year of birth. Because fulmars exhibit delayed reproduction, there is a 5-year lag in the population's response to these effects of environmental change. These data show how interactions between different climatic factors result in complex dynamics, and that the effects of climate change may take many years to become apparent in long-lived marine top predators.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Wiley and Nordic Society Oikos are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Oikos. (no significance is to be attached to the order of the authors' names) Summary. We present a series of criticisms of the application of optimization theory to the behaviour and morphology of animals, using the example of optimal foraging theory. The criticisms are independent and presented in decreasing order of importance. We argue that optimization theory is inappropriate for investigating the products of evolution, that animals should not be expected to be optimal, that it is not possible to test whether they are optimal. We further suggest that it is not possible to test whether behaviour has been selected to fulfil specific functions, that such tests have not been carried out, and that no optimization model of foraging behaviour has been supported. Appeals to the heuristic value of the theory are inappropriate because they encourage unjustified interpretations of the behaviour of animals.

No abstract

No abstract