2020
DOI: 10.1007/s00227-019-3636-8
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparing the horizontal and vertical approaches used to identify foraging areas of two diving marine predators

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
13
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 72 publications
0
13
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Horizontal and vertical movements are generally recorded at different spatiotemporal resolutions. Consequently, studies which seek to quantify marine predator foraging behaviour have traditionally considered only one aspect of movement; examining either horizontal or vertical movement separately and using optimal foraging theory (OFT) to make foraging inferences [ 12 , 13 ]. Originating within terrestrial ecology, OFT originally tested mainly two-dimensional horizontal movement models, but this conceptual framework is widely used to examine the mechanisms and strategies an animal uses to acquire food across aquatic, terrestrial and aerial species.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Horizontal and vertical movements are generally recorded at different spatiotemporal resolutions. Consequently, studies which seek to quantify marine predator foraging behaviour have traditionally considered only one aspect of movement; examining either horizontal or vertical movement separately and using optimal foraging theory (OFT) to make foraging inferences [ 12 , 13 ]. Originating within terrestrial ecology, OFT originally tested mainly two-dimensional horizontal movement models, but this conceptual framework is widely used to examine the mechanisms and strategies an animal uses to acquire food across aquatic, terrestrial and aerial species.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The rest of the year they spend most of their time at sea, exhibiting higher foraging activity. Despite a partial trophic segregation in time, they can have similar diets (Thompson et al, 1996;Wilson & Hammond, 2019), diving behavior (Baechler et al, 2002;Lesage et al, 1999;Thompson et al, 1991), and potentially similar foraging grounds in coastal areas (Planque et al, 2020;Thompson et al, 1996). Both species disperse in coastal waters on the continental shelf and can use the same haulout sites (Thompson et al, 1996;Vincent et al, 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Diets of harbour seals in this area are essentially composed of small flatfish from nurseries in the summer period (Spitz et al, 2015), and their foraging areas are very coastal and close to the BDS haulout site (Planque et al, 2020). Grey seal foraging areas include these coastal areas as well as areas further offshore (Planque et al, 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Assessment of the seals' foraging locations -We analysed the seals' dives to identify their foraging behaviour following (Planque et al, 2020). Dives with a maximum depth < 3 meters and a dive duration < 30 seconds were removed, considering that very shallow and short dives are unlikely representing foraging behaviour.…”
Section: Foraging Habitat Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These square dives are assumed to represent foraging (Bjørge et al, 1995;Hindell et al, 1991;LeBoeuf et al, 1988;Thompson et al, 1991). We set a minimum TAD threshold to the 3rd quartile (i.e.75% of dives) of each individual dive distribution according to their shape in order to select 25% most U-shaped individual dives (Planque et al, 2020). Long duration dives with a very low vertical descent speed (assumed to be sleeping dives) were excluded from the analysis for each individual: we excluded 10% of the most U-shaped dives characterized by the lowest vertical descent speeds.…”
Section: Foraging Habitat Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%