Pellets of Stercorarius spp. (skua) as plant dispersers in the Antarctic Peninsula

Maggio, Lilian Pedroso; Schmitz, Daniela; Putzke, Jair; Schaefer, Carlos Ernesto Gonçalves Reynaud; Pereira, Antônio Batista

doi:10.1590/0001-3765202220210436

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Predatory waterbirds are similar to predatory seabirds (Maggio et al, 2022) and raptors (Pérez‐Méndez & Rodríguez, 2018), in that they disperse propagules inside or attached to their own prey (i.e., secondary dispersal), which can include granivores, herbivores or frugivores. Many plants and invertebrates have now been recorded in excreta of fish‐eating cormorants (van Leeuwen et al, 2017) and pelicans (Green et al, 2008), storks and gulls feeding on crayfish (Lovas‐Kiss, Sánchez, et al, 2018; Martín‐Vélez, Lovas‐Kiss, et al, 2021; Martín‐Vélez et al,2022), and also herons that feed on small mammals around wetland edges (Navarro‐Ramos et al, 2021).…”

Section: How Do Waterbirds Differ From Other Dispersal Vectors?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dispersal of aquatic and terrestrial organisms by waterbirds: A review of current knowledge and future priorities

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We review progress in our understanding of the importance of waterbirds as dispersal vectors of other organisms, and identify priorities for further research. Waterbirds are excellent for long‐distance dispersal (LDD), whereas other vectors such as fish and mammals disperse similar propagules, but over shorter distances. Empirical studies of internal and external transport by waterbirds have shown that the former mechanism generally is more important. Internal transport is widely recognised for aquatic plants and aquatic invertebrates with resting eggs, but also is important for other organisms (e.g., terrestrial flowering plants not dispersed by frugivores, bryophytes, tardigrades, fish eggs). Waterbird vectors also are important in terrestrial habitats, and provide connectivity across terrestrial–aquatic boundaries. There are important differences in the roles of different waterbird species, especially those using different habitats along the aquatic–terrestrial gradient. Early attempts to predict zoochory based on propagule morphology have been found wanting, and more research is needed into how the traits of vectors and vectored organisms (including life history, dormancy and growth traits) explain dispersal interactions. Experimental studies have focused on the potential of propagules to survive internal or external transport, and research into factors determining the establishment success of propagules after dispersal is lacking. Recent spatially explicit models of seed dispersal by waterbirds should be expanded to include invertebrate dispersal, and to compare multiple bird species in the same landscape. Network approaches have been applied to plant–waterbird dispersal interactions, and these are needed for invertebrates. Genetic studies support effective LDD of plants and invertebrates along waterbird flyways, but there remains a lack of examples at a local scale. Next Generation Sequencing and genomics should be applied to waterbird‐mediated dispersal across the landscape. More studies of biogeography, community ecology, or population genetics should integrate waterbird movements at the design stage. Zoochory research has paid little attention to the dispersal of non‐pathogenic microbes (both eukaryotic and prokaryotic). Nevertheless, there is evidence that dispersal via avian guts can be central to the connectivity of aquatic microbial metacommunities. More work on microbial dispersal by waterbirds should explore its implications for biogeochemistry, and the interchange with gut flora of other aquatic organisms. In the Anthropocene, the role of migratory waterbirds in LDD of plants and other organisms is particularly important, for example in compensating for loss of large migratory mammals and fish, allowing native species to adjust their distributions under global warming, and spreading alien species along flyways after their initial introductions by human vectors. Recent technological advances have opened exciting opportunities that should be fully exploited to further our understanding of dispersal by waterbirds.

show abstract

Section: How Do Waterbirds Differ From Other Dispersal Vectors?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dispersal of aquatic and terrestrial organisms by waterbirds: A review of current knowledge and future priorities

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…upland goose ( Chloephaga picta ), white-bellied seedsnipe ( Attagis malouinus ), mallard ( Anas platyrhnchos ), skua ( Stercororius sp.)] and even a flying fox ( Pteropus conspicillatus ), has been shown to be feasible ( Parsons et al., 2007 ; Wilkinson et al., 2017 ; Lázaro et al., 2021 ; Maggio et al., 2022 ), and Ricciocarpos has been noted to be present in the faeces of mallards ( Hartman, 1985 ). Thus, long distance dispersal via bird vectors ( Viana et al., 2016 ) is a plausible mechanism to explain bryophyte species with disjunct, sometimes bipolar, geographic distributions ( Schuster, 1983 ; Piñeiro et al., 2012 ; Lewis et al., 2014b ).…”

Section: Distribution and Ecology Of Ricciocarposmentioning

confidence: 99%

The monoicous secondarily aquatic liverwort Ricciocarpos natans as a model within the radiation of derived Marchantiopsida

Singh,

Bowman

2023

Front. Plant Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Liverworts represent one of six embryophyte lineages that have a Devonian, or earlier, origin, and are, at present, represented by only Marchantia polymorpha as an established model. Ricciocarpos natans is a secondarily monoicous aquatic liverwort with a worldwide distribution, being found on all continents except Antarctica. Ricciocarpos, a monotypic genus, forms a sister relationship with Riccia, the largest genus of the Marchantiopsida (~250 species), diverging from their common ancestor in the mid-Cretaceous. R. natans is typically found on small stagnant ponds and billabongs (seasonal pools), where it assumes a typical ‘aquatic’ form with long scale keels for stabilization on the water surface. But, as water bodies dry, plants may become stranded and subsequently shift their development to assume a ‘terrestrial’ form with rhizoids anchoring the plants to the substrate. We developed R. natans as a model to address a specific biological question — what are the genomic consequences when monoicy evolves from ancestral dioicy where sex is chromosomally determined? However, R. natans possesses other attributes that makes it a model to investigate a variety of biological processes. For example, it provides a foundation to explore the evolution of sexual systems within Riccia, where it appears monoicy may have evolved many times independently. Furthermore, the worldwide distribution of R. natans postdates plate tectonic driven continent separation, and thus, provides an intriguing model for population genomics. Finally, the transition from an aquatic growth form to a terrestrial growth form is mediated by the phytohormone abscisic acid, and represents convergent evolution with a number of other aquatic embryophytes, a concept we explore further here.

show abstract

Pellets of Stercorarius spp. (skua) as plant dispersers in the Antarctic Peninsula

Cited by 2 publications

References 46 publications

Dispersal of aquatic and terrestrial organisms by waterbirds: A review of current knowledge and future priorities

Dispersal of aquatic and terrestrial organisms by waterbirds: A review of current knowledge and future priorities

The monoicous secondarily aquatic liverwort Ricciocarpos natans as a model within the radiation of derived Marchantiopsida

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About