4.6 Article

Trophic Niche in a Raptor Species: The Relationship between Diet Diversity, Habitat Diversity and Territory Quality

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 10, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128855

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Project of Ministerio de economia y competitividad (MIMECO) [CGL2007-61395, CGL2010-15726]
  2. Ministerio de economia y competitividad (MIMECO) [BES-2011-043956]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recent research reports that many populations of species showing a wide trophic niche (generalists) are made up of both generalist individuals and individuals with a narrow trophic niche (specialists), suggesting trophic specializations at an individual level. If true, foraging strategies should be associated with individual quality and fitness. Optimal foraging theory predicts that individuals will select the most favourable habitats for feeding. In addition, the landscape heterogeneity hypothesis predicts a higher number of species in more diverse landscapes. Thus, it can be predicted that individuals with a wider realized trophic niche should have foraging territories with greater habitat diversity, suggesting that foraging strategies, territory quality and habitat diversity are inter-correlated. This was tested for a population of common kestrels Falco tinnunculus. Diet diversity, territory occupancy (as a measure of territory quality) and habitat diversity of territories were measured over an 8-year period. Our results show that: 1) territory quality was quadratically correlated with habitat diversity, with the best territories being the least and most diverse; 2) diet diversity was not correlated with territory quality; and 3) diet diversity was negatively correlated with landscape heterogeneity. Our study suggests that niche generalist foraging strategies are based on an active search for different prey species within or between habitats rather than on the selection of territories with high habitat diversity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available