2005
DOI: 10.1086/425202
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Isotopic Discrimination between Food and Blood and Feathers of Captive Penguins: Implications for Dietary Studies in the Wild

Abstract: Using measurements of naturally occurring stable isotopes to reconstruct diets or source of feeding requires quantifying isotopic discrimination factors or the relationships between isotope ratios in food and in consumer tissues. Diet-tissue discrimination factors of carbon ((13)C/(12)C, or delta (13)C) and nitrogen ((15)N/(14)N, or delta (15)N) isotopes in whole blood and feathers, representing noninvasive sampling techniques, were examined using three species of captive penguins (king Aptenodytes patagonicus… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

10
221
4

Year Published

2007
2007
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 238 publications
(235 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
10
221
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Muscle samples were ground to a fine powder and muscle lipids were removed using cyclohexane. The low lipid content of whole blood does not typically necessitate lipid extraction (Cherel et al 2005). While overall statistically different (Kruskal-Wallis, H = 192.64, p < 0.0001), all mean values of C:N mass ratio encompassed a narrow range (3.1 to 3.5, always < 4) (see Tables 1-3).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Muscle samples were ground to a fine powder and muscle lipids were removed using cyclohexane. The low lipid content of whole blood does not typically necessitate lipid extraction (Cherel et al 2005). While overall statistically different (Kruskal-Wallis, H = 192.64, p < 0.0001), all mean values of C:N mass ratio encompassed a narrow range (3.1 to 3.5, always < 4) (see Tables 1-3).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…15 N values and in feather Δ 15 N values (review in Cherel et al 2005), thus allowing comparisons of the nitrogen signatures between species to investigate their respective trophic positions. We assumed that Δ 15 N values were identical between chicks, immatures and adult birds because no experimental work tested the effect of growth per se on Δ 15 N in birds and modeling suggests that growing endotherms should show the same δ 15 N values as those of adults fed the same diet (Ponsard & Averbuch 1999).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To examine dietary niche position of predator groups in relation to capelin stable isotopic ratios, a best-fitting trophic discrimination factor was chosen for each group based on taxonomy and previous knowledge of diet. Values of 1.86‰ for δ 15 N and 0.46‰ δ 13 C for rockhopper penguins were applied to shearwater samples (Cherel et al, 2005), 3.1‰ for δ 15 N and −0.30‰ δ 13 C for ring-billed gull chicks (Hobson and Clark, 1992) were applied to gull chick samples, and 2.82‰ for δ 15 N and 1.28‰ δ 13 C for fin whales (Borrell et al, 2012) were applied to humpback whale samples.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For analysis, the cellular component of shearwater blood samples and whole blood of gull chicks were used. Whole blood and the cellular component have very similar stable isotopic ratios (Cherel et al, 2005), allowing direct comparison. Although, EDTA may affect the stable isotopic ratios of blood (Lemons et al, 2012), EDTA tends to stay in the plasma when blood is centrifuged, and thus the effect on the cellular component should be negligible (Käkelä et al, 2007).…”
Section: Study Site and Field Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Numerous other factors can affect diet-tissue fractionation and studies to date have addressed these issues for a range of animal species, mostly under controlled conditions in captivity (see Post, 2002;Vanderklift and Ponsard, 2003;Robbins et al, 2005). For example, fractionation factors may be affected by, i) prey type, ii) prey quality, iii) temperature, iv) form of nitrogen excretion, v) habitat type, vi) water stress, and vii) nutritional status (including differences in dietary C:N ratios) (Ambrose, 1991;Hobson and Clark, 1992a,b;Hobson et al, 1994.;Pinnegar and Polunin, 1999;Perkins and Speakman, 2001;Bearhop et al, 2002;Vanderklift and Ponsard, 2003;Pearson et al, 2003;Evans Ogden et al, 2004;Cherel et al, 2005;Robbins et al, 2005;Podlesak and McWilliams, 2006). In cases where we do not know more about discrimination factors related to these factors we may be unable to make clear interpretations concerning trophic positions for particular species or animal communities.…”
Section: Tissue Turnovermentioning
confidence: 99%