Variation in foraging strategies over a large spatial scale reduces parent–offspring conflict in Manx shearwaters

Wischnewski, Saskia; Arneill, Gavin E.; Bennison, Ashley; Dillane, Eileen; Poupart, Timothée; Hinde, Camilla A.; Jessopp, Mark; Quinn, John L.

doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.03.014

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Deployments lasted several days and there was no detectable device effect on the welfare of both the tagged adults and their chicks (see Wischnewski et al . ). All telemetry work was conducted under licence from the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) and the National Parks and Wildlife Service.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Acoustic activity across a seabird colony reflects patterns of within‐colony flight rather than nest density

Arneill

Critchley

Wischnewski

et al. 2019

Ibis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Passive acoustic monitoring is increasingly being used as a cost‐effective way to study wildlife populations, especially those that are difficult to census using conventional methods. Burrow‐nesting seabirds are among the most threatened birds globally, but they are also one of the most challenging taxa to census, making them prime candidates for research into such automated monitoring platforms. Passive acoustic monitoring has the potential to determine presence/absence or quantify burrow‐nesting populations, but its effectiveness remains unclear. We compared passive acoustic monitoring, tape‐playbacks and GPS tracking data to investigate the ability of passive acoustic monitoring to capture unbiased estimates of within‐colony variation in nest density for the Manx Shearwater Puffinus puffinus. Variation in acoustic activity across 12 study plots on an island colony was examined in relation to burrow density and environmental factors across 2 years. As predicted fewer calls were recorded when wind speed was high, and on moon‐lit nights, but there was no correlation between acoustic activity and the density of breeding birds within the plots as determined by tape‐playback surveys. Instead, acoustic indices correlated positively with spatial variation in the in‐colony flight activity of breeding individuals detected by GPS. Although passive acoustic monitoring has enormous potential in avian conservation, our results highlight the importance of understanding behaviour when using passive acoustic monitoring to estimate density and distribution.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Acoustic activity across a seabird colony reflects patterns of within‐colony flight rather than nest density

Arneill

Critchley

Wischnewski

et al. 2019

Ibis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Correlations between tracking data and foraging radius distributions for Atlantic puffin, European storm-petrel and razorbill were higher than previously found for gannets by Grecian et al (2012), even with relatively small sample sizes for the GPS tracking data (n = 9, trips = 107; n = 8, trips = 8; n = 11, trips = 103). This is less likely to be the case for Manx shearwaters which had a large sample size (n = 24; 64) but the low correlations and lack of statistical significance could be explained by variation in behaviour due to their dual foraging strategy of frequent chick-provisioning trips and longer self-maintenance trips, which results in a bi-modal distribution of foraging range (Shoji et al 2015a, Wischnewski et al 2019. European storm-petrels, or difficulty of accessing colonies, foraging radius models provide a valuable alternative to collecting additional empirical data.…”

Section: Comparison Of Foraging Radius Distributions With Gps Trackinmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it should be noted that the relatively small sample size for tracking data is lower than that recommended by Soanes et al (2013) and may not be fully representative of the colony level distribution. This is less likely to be the case for Manx shearwaters which had a large sample size (n = 24; 64) but the low correlations and lack of statistical significance could be explained by variation in behaviour due to their dual foraging strategy of frequent chick-provisioning trips and longer self-maintenance trips, which results in a bi-modal distribution of foraging range (Shoji et al 2015a, Wischnewski et al 2019. Thus a foraging radius model based on mean maximum foraging range is unlikely to be representative of their foraging distributions.…”

Section: Comparison Of Foraging Radius Distributions With Gps Trackinmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the effectiveness of foraging radius models for seabird distributions using biotelemetry and survey data

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relatively simple foraging radius models have the potential to generate predictive distributions for a large number of species rapidly, thus providing a cost-effective alternative to large-scale surveys or complex modelling approaches. Their effectiveness, however, remains largely untested. Here we compare foraging radius distribution models for all breeding seabirds in Ireland, to distributions of empirical data collected from tracking studies and aerial surveys. At the local/colony level, we compared foraging radius distributions to GPS tracking data from seabirds with short (Atlantic puffin Fratercula arctica, and razorbill Alca torda) and long (Manx shearwater Puffinus puffinus, and European storm-petrel Hydrobates pelagicus) foraging ranges. At the regional/national level, we compared foraging radius distributions to extensive aerial surveys conducted over a two-year period. Foraging radius distributions were significantly positively correlated with tracking data for all species except Manx shearwater. Correlations between foraging radius distributions and aerial survey data were also significant, but generally weaker than those for tracking data. Correlations between foraging radius distributions and aerial survey data were benchmarked against generalised additive models (GAMs) of the aerial survey data that included a range of environmental covariates. While GAM distributions had slightly higher correlations with aerial survey data, the results highlight that the foraging radius approach can be a useful and pragmatic approach for assessing breeding distributions for many seabird species. The approach is likely to have acceptable utility in complex, temporally variable ecosystems and when logistic and financial resources are limited.

show abstract

“…mid-September to March) (Furness et al, 1986;Howell, 2012;Monteiro et al, 1996;own unpublished data). On the other hand, during the breeding-season seabirds act as central place foragers, restricting provisioning trips to waters within a range of the colony to be able to regularly feed the chick (Chaurand and Weimerskirch, 1994;Granadeiro et al, 1998;Shoji et al, 2015;Wischnewski et al, 2019). GPS tracking data from Raso, Cape Verde, place the mean maximum displacement from the colony of chick-rearing Bulwer's petrels at 335 ± 159 km (V. H. Paiva, unpublished data).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monitoring of mercury in the mesopelagic domain of the Pacific and Atlantic oceans using body feathers of Bulwer's petrel as a bioindicator

Furtado

Granadeiro

Gatt

et al. 2021

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Variation in foraging strategies over a large spatial scale reduces parent–offspring conflict in Manx shearwaters

Cited by 11 publications

References 60 publications

Acoustic activity across a seabird colony reflects patterns of within‐colony flight rather than nest density

Acoustic activity across a seabird colony reflects patterns of within‐colony flight rather than nest density

Assessing the effectiveness of foraging radius models for seabird distributions using biotelemetry and survey data

Monitoring of mercury in the mesopelagic domain of the Pacific and Atlantic oceans using body feathers of Bulwer's petrel as a bioindicator

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About