2020
DOI: 10.1002/aqc.3470
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genetic analysis of the diet of red‐footed boobies (Sula sula) provisioning chicks at Ulupa'u Crater, O'ahu

Abstract: 1. The diet of red-footed boobies (Sula sula) provisioning chicks was quantified using 106 regurgitations collected from 81 adults over two study years with contrasting oceanographic conditions: 2014 and 2015. 2. A total of 1,049 prey items were sorted into three broad categories (fish, squid, and other, consisting of highly-digested 'mush' and parasitic isopods) and assigned a categorical freshness value of 1 (perfect condition), 2 (superficial digestion), or 3 (highly digested and incomplete). 3. A total of … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
13
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
(59 reference statements)
1
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While CHSH may ingest some exoparasitic crustaceans attached to flyingfish, they are not known to forage on any other pelagic crustaceans or other taxa that would contribute to mush (Ashmole & Ashmole, 1967; Harrison et al, 1983; Spear et al, 2007). Thus, while digestion leads to the underestimation of the importance of fish in the CHSH diet, the quantification of the mass of mush in the samples can help quantify the magnitude of this bias (Donahue et al, 2021).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…While CHSH may ingest some exoparasitic crustaceans attached to flyingfish, they are not known to forage on any other pelagic crustaceans or other taxa that would contribute to mush (Ashmole & Ashmole, 1967; Harrison et al, 1983; Spear et al, 2007). Thus, while digestion leads to the underestimation of the importance of fish in the CHSH diet, the quantification of the mass of mush in the samples can help quantify the magnitude of this bias (Donahue et al, 2021).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The remainder of the sample was passed through a 500 µm sieve. The material retained in the sieve was sorted into categories: “fish,” “squid,” and “mush” (indistinguishable tissue sized >500 µm), following Donahue et al (2021). Everything that passed through the sieve, including the 200 ml of RO water in which the regurgitation was frozen, was transferred to a labeled sterilized container and used as the starting material for DNA metabarcoding analysis.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Prey species were collected in 2018 and 2019 in Cabo Verde waters, by local fishermen operating in the surroundings of Raso Islet or at local fish-markets, between June-October of each year, and therefore are contemporaneous with tracking of BRBO and RFBO. We selected the prey species that could be part of BRBO and RFBOs' diet, according to the data available in the literature for these and other similar taxa [13,[61][62][63]. All prey individuals were measured, weighted, and identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level.…”
Section: Stable Isotope Analysis Of Prey Samplesmentioning
confidence: 99%