4.5 Article

Modulation of heart rate response to acute stressors throughout the breeding season in the king penguin Aptenodytes patagonicus

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY
卷 218, 期 11, 页码 1686-1692

出版社

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/jeb.112003

关键词

Acute stress; Energy cost; Fasting; Heart rate; Penguin; Reproductive value; Risk assessment; Seabird

类别

资金

  1. French Polar Institute (IPEV)
  2. French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS-INEE)
  3. Terres Australes et Antarctiques Francaises [119]
  4. AXA Research Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

'Fight-or-flight' stress responses allow animals to cope adaptively to sudden threats by mobilizing energy resources and priming the body for action. Because such responses can be costly and redirect behavior and energy from reproduction to survival, they are likely to be shaped by specific life-history stages, depending on the available energy resources and the commitment to reproduction. Here, we consider how heart rate (HR) responses to acute stressors are affected by the advancing breeding season in a colonial seabird, the king penguin (Aptenodytes patagonicus). We subjected 77 birds (44 males, 33 females) at various stages of incubation and chick-rearing to three experimental stressors (metal sound, distant approach and capture) known to vary both in their intensity and associated risk, and monitored their HR responses. Our results show that HR increase in response to acute stressors was progressively attenuated with the stage of breeding from incubation to chick-rearing. Stress responses did not vary according to nutritional status or seasonal timing (whether breeding was initiated early or late in the season), but were markedly lower during chick-rearing than during incubation. This pattern was obvious for all three stressors. We discuss how 'fight-or-flight' responses may be modulated by considering the energy commitment to breeding, nutritional status and reproductive value of the brood in breeding seabirds.

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

4.5
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