4.3 Article

Fledging success of little auks in the high Arctic: do provisioning rates and the quality of foraging grounds matter?

期刊

POLAR BIOLOGY
卷 37, 期 5, 页码 665-674

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00300-014-1466-1

关键词

Bimodal foraging; Fledging success; Alle alle; Calanus; Svalbard

资金

  1. Norwegian Financial Mechanisms [PNRF-234-AI-1/07(ALKEKONGE)]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Long-lived birds often face a dilemma between self-maintenance and reproduction. In order to maximize fitness, some seabird parents alternate short trips to collect food for offspring with long trips for self-feeding (bimodal foraging strategy). In this study, we examined whether temporal and spatial variation in the quality of foraging grounds affect provisioning and fledging success of a long-lived, bimodal forager, the little auk (Alle alle), the most abundant seabird species in the Arctic ecosystem. We predicted that an increase in sea surface temperature (SST), with an associated decrease in the preferred Arctic zooplankton prey, would increase foraging trip durations, decrease chick provisioning rates and decrease chick fledging success. Chick provisioning and survival were observed during three consecutive years (2008-2010) at two colonies with variable foraging conditions in Spitsbergen: Isfjorden and Magdalenefjorden. We found that a change in SST (range 1.6-5.4 A degrees C) did not influence trip durations or provisioning rates. SST was, however, negatively correlated with the number of prey items delivered to a chick. Furthermore, provisioning rates did not influence chick's probability to fledge; instead, SST was also negatively correlated with fledging probability. This was likely related to the prey availability and quality in the little auk's foraging grounds. Our findings suggest that predicted warmer climate in the Arctic will negatively influence the ability of parents to provide their chicks, and consequently, the fledging prospects of little auk chicks.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据