4.4 Article

High survival of immatures in a long-lived seabird:: Insights from a long-term study of the Atlantic Puffin (Fratercula arctica)

Journal

AUK
Volume 125, Issue 3, Pages 723-730

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1525/auk.2008.07059

Keywords

Atlantic Puffin; capture-mark-recapture; Fratercula arctica; miniature survival; juvenile survival; philopatry; recruitment rate

Categories

Funding

  1. Norwegian Directorate for Nature Management
  2. Norwegian Research Council
  3. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Survival from fledging to maturity is an important life-history parameter in long-lived species such as seabirds. However, because of the long period of unobservability following fledging, few studies have reported reliable estimates of survival rates for immatures. We estimated survival to maturity of two cohorts of Atlantic Puffin (Fratercula arctica) fledglings from Hornoya in northern Norway using capture-mark-recapture methodology. By considering only juveniles that actually left their nest burrows, we arrived at unbiased estimates Of Survival rates for immatures. Contrary to many previous studies, annual Survival of immatures was not depressed in relation to adult survival. 13), the age of five years, more than two-thirds of all fledglings are still estimated to be alive. Averaged over this period, ani-Mal survival of immatures is estimated as 0.933 (95% confidence interval: 0.806-0.993). This compares to an annual adult Survival of 0.943 (0.909-0.965) during the same period. The survival estimates also imply that the cohorts Studied are overwhelmingly philopatric. Dispersal of immatures must be extremely rare or absent. The annual estimates of resighting reveal a clear age-related pattern, including a peak at three years of age and a Subsequent minimum at six years of age. Possible biological explanations for this behavior are given.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available