4.4 Article

Multifactorial roles of interannual variability, season, and sex for foraging patterns in a sexually size monomorphic seabird, the Australasian gannet (Morus serrator)

期刊

MARINE BIOLOGY
卷 165, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00227-018-3332-0

关键词

-

资金

  1. International Doctoral Research Scholarship from Education New Zealand (NZIDRS)
  2. University of Auckland Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Marine top predators forage in environments that show potentially extreme temporal and spatial variation in prey availability, with reproductive success being crucially linked to food supply. Multiple factors of interannual and sexual variation, as well as variation across breeding stages, can shape patterns of spatial use in foraging seabirds, yet studies that address all of these variables simultaneously are rare. We present spatial assessment of foraging patterns by mu GPS tracking of a sexually size monomorphic, long-lived species, the Australasian gannet (Morus serrator). The study spanned the incubation and chick-rearing stages in three consecutive breeding seasons. Our findings revealed high interannual variability in foraging distances and trip durations, but no consistent differences between birds across different breeding stages or the sexes. The exception was that core foraging areas were different for female and male Australasian gannets, although trip durations or distances were similar for both sexes. Our results also indicate bimodality in foraging distance and trip duration in this species, while highlighting interannual variability in the extent of bimodality. These findings contribute to a scarcely documented type of foraging behaviour in the seabird family of the Sulidae. Overall, these spatial use patterns provide a baseline for understanding the evolution of sex-specific foraging differences in biparental seabirds, and the extent to which these differences might help in securing breeding success across years of variable food availability.

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

4.4
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