The consequences of being colonial: Allee effects in metapopulations of seabirds

Schippers, Peter; Stienen, Eric; Schotman, A.G.M.; Snep, R.P.H.; Slim, P.A.

doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.05.022

Cited by 31 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When dispersal to another breeding site is constrained (e.g. because of being rare and hard to find, too far away or risky to reach), philopatric individuals may concentrate at a few perennially used sites even though fitness there is reduced (Kildaw, Irons, Nysewander, & Buck, 2005; Matthiopoulos et al, 2005; Russell & Rosales, 2010; Schippers et al, 2011; Schwager, 2005). Varying the costs of dispersal by changing the distances between potential colony sites may alter the colony distribution.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…parasite load that may change over time; Boulinier, McCoy, & Sorci, 2001; Danchin, 1992), past familiarity with the habitat around a site, and the number of conspecifics potentially or actually present (the colony size expectation with the associated costs and benefits of grouping; Brown & Brown, 1996) in deciding whether to be philopatric or disperse to a new colony site (Bonte et al, 2012). Knowing how colonial individuals make the decision to stay or go is critically important, both for understanding the metapopulation dynamics of colony occupancy (which may explain population-wide colony size variation; Johst & Brandl, 1997; Matthiopoulos, Harwood, & Thomas, 2005; Russell & Rosales, 2010) and for understanding how colonial species of conservation concern become ‘trapped’ in a subset of available colony sites (Cook & Toft, 2005; Kenyon, Smith, & Butler, 2007; Schippers, Stienen, Schotman, Snep, & Slim, 2011) due to their reluctance to disperse to new sites.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why come back home? Breeding-site fidelity varies with group size and parasite load in a colonial bird

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fidelity to a past breeding site is widespread among animals and may confer both costs and benefits. Colonial species occur at specific sites that can accommodate multiple breeders, and the choice of whether to return to last year's site or disperse elsewhere can affect colony site use, the colony size distribution and individual fitness. For the colonial cliff swallow, Petrochelidon pyrrhonota, which occupies colonies of widely different sizes, we used a 30-year field study in western Nebraska to investigate how the extent of infestation by ectoparasites and colony size affected breeders' colony site fidelity between years. We compared philopatry at colonies where parasitic swallow bugs, Oeciacus vicarius, had been removed by fumigation with that at nonfumigated sites exposed to natural levels of ectoparasites. About 25% of birds at nonfumigated colonies returned to their previous year's site, whereas about 69% of birds at fumigated colonies did so. Site fidelity was greatest at nonfumigated sites that changed the least in size between years. Birds were less likely to return to a nonfumigated site as the colony there became increasingly larger. Individuals philopatric to both nonfumigated and fumigated sites resided in colonies more similar in size between years than did dispersing birds. Most cliff swallows settled within 6 km of their previous year's site, indicating that many nonphilopatric birds still may have had some familiarity with the local landscape surrounding the site to which they moved. Removal of ectoparasites at a site allows large colonies to persist there perennially, probably contributing to higher philopatry because such large colonies are rare and would have been difficult to find had the residents dispersed. Cliff swallows are likely to be sensitive to both colony size and general familiarity with a given site or landscape region, and probably integrate these with other cues to select breeding colonies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Why come back home? Breeding-site fidelity varies with group size and parasite load in a colonial bird

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The majority of seabirds form seasonal breeding colonies (Furness and Monaghan 1987). Colonial breeding is an evolutionary strategy that confers benefits such as being protected from predators, learning foraging locations or finding a mate (Wittenberger and Hunt 1985, Buckley 1997, Brown and Brown 2004, Schippers et al 2011. Thus, established colonies represent important information centres that promote the success of the population (Bayer 1982) and the growth and formation of new colonies (Cairns 1989, Kildaw et al 2005.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Unmanned aircraft systems to unravel spatial and temporal factors affecting dynamics of colony formation and nesting success in birds

Sardà‐Palomera

Bota

Padilla

et al. 2017

Journal of Avian Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collecting information of ecological and behavioural processes often requires continuous field monitoring, however, reiterative human presence necessary to obtain monitoring data can disturb both the environment and the study species. An example of this phenomenon is the monitoring of the formation and dynamics of seabird colonies; one of the reasons for colony failure is disturbances caused by the presence of researchers or conservation managers during data collection. In this study, an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) was used throughout the breeding period to monitor the temporal and spatial dynamics of a black‐headed gull colony in the interior of a difficult‐to‐access island. This methodology permitted weekly visits to the colony without disturbance, which allowed for the continuous collection of spatial and temporal data on the process of colony formation. We obtained detailed information about nesting success and its relation with the distance to the nearest incubating neighbour, as well as the colony boundary along breeding season. Thus, we successfully monitored the dynamics of a bird colony and identified factors affecting individual decision making in colony formation using a UAS.

show abstract

“…; Schippers et al. ). Thus, the population sizes of con‐ or heterospecifics immediately following predator eradication will either encourage (social attraction) or impede (competition) recruitment (Table ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Drivers of Seabird Population Recovery on New Zealand Islands after Predator Eradication

Buxton

Jones

Møller³

et al. 2014

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eradication of introduced mammalian predators from islands has become increasingly common,with over 800 successful projects around the world. Historically, introduced predators extirpated or reduced the size of many seabird populations, changing the dynamics of entire island ecosystems. Although the primary outcome of many eradication projects is the restoration of affected seabird populations, natural population responses are rarely documented and mechanisms are poorly understood. We used a generic model of seabird colony growth to identify key predictor variables relevant to recovery or recolonization. We used generalized linear mixed models to test the importance of these variables in driving seabird population responses after predator eradication on islands around New Zealand. The most influential variable affecting recolonization of seabirds around New Zealand was the distance to a source population, with few cases of recolonization without a source population ࣘ25 km away. Colony growth was most affected by metapopulation status; there was little colony growth in species with a declining status. These characteristics may facilitate the prioritization of newly predator-free islands for active management. Although we found some evidence documenting natural recovery, generally this topic was understudied. Our results suggest that in order to guide management strategies, more effort should be allocated to monitoring wildlife response after eradication. Resumen: La erradicación de mamíferos depredadores introducidos en las islas se ha vuelto cada vez másPalabras Clave: aves marinas, dinámica de poblaciones, erradicación de depredadores, recolonización, recuperación, restauración

show abstract

The consequences of being colonial: Allee effects in metapopulations of seabirds

Cited by 31 publications

References 46 publications

Why come back home? Breeding-site fidelity varies with group size and parasite load in a colonial bird

Why come back home? Breeding-site fidelity varies with group size and parasite load in a colonial bird

Unmanned aircraft systems to unravel spatial and temporal factors affecting dynamics of colony formation and nesting success in birds

Drivers of Seabird Population Recovery on New Zealand Islands after Predator Eradication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About