4.7 Article

Jellyfish and other gelata as food for four penguin species - insights from predator-borne videos

期刊

FRONTIERS IN ECOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
卷 15, 期 8, 页码 437-441

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/fee.1529

关键词

-

资金

  1. Institut Paul-Emile Victor [1091]
  2. Zone Atelier Antarctique (CNRS)
  3. WWF-UK
  4. Japanese Antarctic Research Expedition
  5. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS)
  6. JSPS KAKENHI [JP26840153, JP24681006, JP16H06541, JP17H05983]
  7. University of Otago
  8. National Agency for Scientific and Technological Promotion (Argentina)
  9. Conservation Agency from Chubut Province
  10. National Research Council of Argentina (CONICET)
  11. Parks Victoria (Australia)
  12. NIPR
  13. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [16H01769, 16H06541, 16J05814, 17H05983] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Jellyfish and other pelagic gelatinous organisms (gelata) are increasingly perceived as an important component of marine food webs but remain poorly understood. Their importance as prey in the oceans is extremely difficult to quantify due in part to methodological challenges in verifying predation on gelatinous structures. Miniaturized animal-borne video data loggers now enable feeding events to be monitored from a predator's perspective. We gathered a substantial video dataset (over 350 hours of exploitable footage) from 106 individuals spanning four species of non-gelatinous-specialist predators (penguins), across regions of the southern oceans (areas south of 30 degrees S). We documented nearly 200 cases of targeted attacks on carnivorous gelata by all four species, at all seven studied localities. Our findings emphasize that gelatinous organisms actually represent a widespread but currently under-represented trophic link across the southern oceans, even for endothermic predators, which have high energetic demands. The use of modern technological tools, such as animal-borne video data loggers, will help to correctly identify the ecological niche of gelata.

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

4.7
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