2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.dsr2.2017.04.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Seasonal variation in coastal marine habitat use by the European shag: Insights from fine scale habitat selection modeling and diet

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Theory suggests that diet diversifies when predominant prey become scarce and/or lessen in profitability (Stephens & Krebs 1986), and empirical evidence in other seabird studies supports this (Croxall et al 1999, Cosolo et al 2011. Shags exploit a wide range of prey (Barrett 1991, Velando & Freire 1999, Lilliendahl & Solmundsson 2006, Cosolo et al 2011, Michelot et al 2017) and can adjust their foraging behaviour in response to a change in availability of different prey types within their foraging range (Wanless et al 1998, Daunt et al 2007, Bogdanova et al 2014, Michelot et al 2017. Changes in the availability of sandeels, non-sandeels or both may have contributed to the diet shift in our study population since many fish species have experienced changes in abundance and distribution in the N orth Sea linked to ocean warming (Perry et al 2005, Hiddink & ter Hofstede 2008, Heath et al 2012.…”
Section: Diet Trendsmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Theory suggests that diet diversifies when predominant prey become scarce and/or lessen in profitability (Stephens & Krebs 1986), and empirical evidence in other seabird studies supports this (Croxall et al 1999, Cosolo et al 2011. Shags exploit a wide range of prey (Barrett 1991, Velando & Freire 1999, Lilliendahl & Solmundsson 2006, Cosolo et al 2011, Michelot et al 2017) and can adjust their foraging behaviour in response to a change in availability of different prey types within their foraging range (Wanless et al 1998, Daunt et al 2007, Bogdanova et al 2014, Michelot et al 2017. Changes in the availability of sandeels, non-sandeels or both may have contributed to the diet shift in our study population since many fish species have experienced changes in abundance and distribution in the N orth Sea linked to ocean warming (Perry et al 2005, Hiddink & ter Hofstede 2008, Heath et al 2012.…”
Section: Diet Trendsmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Diet composition was estimated following Michelot et al (2017). First, we calculated the proportion of each prey group by biomass in each pellet (biomass of a prey group in a pellet / total biomass in the same pellet).…”
Section: Diet Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Crucially, effects on fitness are likely to depend on the relative profitability of different prey types throughout the annual cycle (Hislop et al 1991;Litzow et al 2004). Due to the difference in habitat associations between prey types, the dietary change observed may also have important implications for shag foraging distributions (Bogdanova et al 2014;Michelot et al 2017). The increase in proportion of non-sandeels in the diet could alter interactions with anthropogenic activities, such as offshore renewable developments or recreation.…”
Section: Demographic and Conservation Implicationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, sandeel availability varies among seasons since they are present in the water column during the spring and summer, but are buried in the sand during the winter, apart from a brief period when they emerge to spawn (Wright and Bailey 1993). Furthermore, environmental conditions, habitat use and energetic costs also vary between seasons (Daunt et al 2014;Michelot et al 2017). Thus, any changes in overall prey abundance or availability during the study might have different effects on diet composition at different times of the year.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%