1
|
Regan CE, Bogdanova MI, Newell M, Gunn C, Wanless S, Harris MP, Lopez SL, Benninghaus E, Bolton M, Daunt F, Searle KR. Seabirds show foraging site and route fidelity but demonstrate flexibility in response to local information. MOVEMENT ECOLOGY 2024; 12:46. [PMID: 38872225 DOI: 10.1186/s40462-024-00467-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2023] [Accepted: 04/03/2024] [Indexed: 06/15/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Fidelity to a given foraging location or route may be beneficial when environmental conditions are predictable but costly if conditions deteriorate or become unpredictable. Understanding the magnitude of fidelity displayed by different species and the processes that drive or erode it is therefore vital for understanding how fidelity may shape the demographic consequences of anthropogenic change. In particular, understanding the information that individuals may use to adjust their fidelity will facilitate improved predictions of how fidelity may change as environments change and the extent to which it will buffer individuals against such changes. METHODS We used movement data collected during the breeding season across eight years for common guillemots, Atlantic puffins, razorbills, and black-legged kittiwakes breeding on the Isle of May, Scotland to understand: (1) whether foraging site/route fidelity occurred within and between years, (2) whether the degree of fidelity between trips was predicted by personal foraging effort, and (3) whether different individuals made more similar trips when they overlapped in time at the colony prior to departure and/or when out at sea suggesting the use of the same local environmental cues or information on the decisions made by con- and heterospecifics. RESULTS All species exhibited site and route fidelity both within- and between-years, and fidelity between trips in guillemots and razorbills was related to metrics of foraging effort, suggesting they adjust fidelity to their personal foraging experience. We also found evidence that individuals used local environmental cues of prey location or availability and/or information gained by observing conspecifics when choosing foraging routes, particularly in puffins, where trips of individuals that overlapped temporally at the colony or out at sea were more similar. CONCLUSIONS The fidelity shown by these seabird species has the potential to put them at greater risk in the face of environmental change by driving individuals to continue using areas being degraded by anthropogenic pressures. However, our results suggest that individuals show some flexibility in their fidelity, which may promote resilience under environmental change. The benefits of this flexibility are likely to depend on numerous factors, including the rapidity and spatial scale of environmental change and the reliability of the information individuals use to choose foraging sites or routes, thus highlighting the need to better understand how organisms combine cues, prior experience, and other sources of information to make movement decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte E Regan
- UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Bush Estate, EH26 0QB, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK.
| | - Maria I Bogdanova
- UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Bush Estate, EH26 0QB, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK
| | - Mark Newell
- UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Bush Estate, EH26 0QB, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK
| | - Carrie Gunn
- UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Bush Estate, EH26 0QB, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK
| | - Sarah Wanless
- UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Bush Estate, EH26 0QB, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK
| | - Mike P Harris
- UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Bush Estate, EH26 0QB, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK
| | | | - Ella Benninghaus
- UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Bush Estate, EH26 0QB, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK
| | - Mark Bolton
- RSPB Centre for Conservation Science, AB15 6GZ, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Francis Daunt
- UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Bush Estate, EH26 0QB, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK
| | - Kate R Searle
- UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Bush Estate, EH26 0QB, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lempidakis E, Ross AN, Quetting M, Garde B, Wikelski M, Shepard ELC. Estimating fine-scale changes in turbulence using the movements of a flapping flier. J R Soc Interface 2022; 19:20220577. [PMID: 36349445 PMCID: PMC9653225 DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2022.0577] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
All animals that operate within the atmospheric boundary layer need to respond to aerial turbulence. Yet little is known about how flying animals do this because evaluating turbulence at fine scales (tens to approx. 300 m) is exceedingly difficult. Recently, data from animal-borne sensors have been used to assess wind and updraft strength, providing a new possibility for sensing the physical environment. We tested whether highly resolved changes in altitude and body acceleration measured onboard solo-flying pigeons (as model flapping fliers) can be used as qualitative proxies for turbulence. A range of pressure and acceleration proxies performed well when tested against independent turbulence measurements from a tri-axial anemometer mounted onboard an ultralight flying the same route, with stronger turbulence causing increasing vertical displacement. The best proxy for turbulence also varied with estimates of both convective velocity and wind shear. The approximately linear relationship between most proxies and turbulence levels suggests this approach should be widely applicable, providing insight into how turbulence changes in space and time. Furthermore, pigeons were able to fly in levels of turbulence that were unsafe for the ultralight, paving the way for the study of how freestream turbulence affects the costs and kinematics of animal flight.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Andrew N. Ross
- School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | | | - Baptiste Garde
- Department of Biosciences, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea, UK
| | - Martin Wikelski
- Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior, Radolfzell, Germany
- Centre for the Advanced Study of Collective Behaviour, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany
| | - Emily L. C. Shepard
- Department of Biosciences, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea, UK
- Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior, Radolfzell, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Fahlbusch JA, Czapanskiy MF, Calambokidis J, Cade DE, Abrahms B, Hazen EL, Goldbogen JA. Blue whales increase feeding rates at fine-scale ocean features. Proc Biol Sci 2022; 289:20221180. [PMID: 35975432 PMCID: PMC9382224 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2022.1180] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Marine predators face the challenge of reliably finding prey that is patchily distributed in space and time. Predators make movement decisions at multiple spatial and temporal scales, yet we have a limited understanding of how habitat selection at multiple scales translates into foraging performance. In the ocean, there is mounting evidence that submesoscale (i.e. less than 100 km) processes drive the formation of dense prey patches that should hypothetically provide feeding hot spots and increase predator foraging success. Here, we integrated environmental remote-sensing with high-resolution animal-borne biologging data to evaluate submesoscale surface current features in relation to the habitat selection and foraging performance of blue whales in the California Current System. Our study revealed a consistent functional relationship in which blue whales disproportionately foraged within dynamic aggregative submesoscale features at both the regional and feeding site scales across seasons, regions and years. Moreover, we found that blue whale feeding rates increased in areas with stronger aggregative features, suggesting that these features indicate areas of higher prey density. The use of fine-scale, dynamic features by foraging blue whales underscores the need to take these features into account when designating critical habitat and may help inform strategies to mitigate the impacts of human activities for the species.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James A. Fahlbusch
- Hopkins Marine Station, Department of Biology, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, CA, USA,Cascadia Research Collective, Olympia, WA, USA
| | - Max F. Czapanskiy
- Hopkins Marine Station, Department of Biology, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, CA, USA
| | | | - David E. Cade
- Hopkins Marine Station, Department of Biology, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, CA, USA
| | - Briana Abrahms
- Center for Ecosystem Sentinels, Department of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Elliott L. Hazen
- Hopkins Marine Station, Department of Biology, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, CA, USA,Environmental Research Division, NOAA Southwest Fisheries Science Center, Monterey, CA, USA
| | - Jeremy A. Goldbogen
- Hopkins Marine Station, Department of Biology, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Nathan R, Monk CT, Arlinghaus R, Adam T, Alós J, Assaf M, Baktoft H, Beardsworth CE, Bertram MG, Bijleveld AI, Brodin T, Brooks JL, Campos-Candela A, Cooke SJ, Gjelland KØ, Gupte PR, Harel R, Hellström G, Jeltsch F, Killen SS, Klefoth T, Langrock R, Lennox RJ, Lourie E, Madden JR, Orchan Y, Pauwels IS, Říha M, Roeleke M, Schlägel UE, Shohami D, Signer J, Toledo S, Vilk O, Westrelin S, Whiteside MA, Jarić I. Big-data approaches lead to an increased understanding of the ecology of animal movement. Science 2022; 375:eabg1780. [PMID: 35175823 DOI: 10.1126/science.abg1780] [Citation(s) in RCA: 101] [Impact Index Per Article: 50.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
Understanding animal movement is essential to elucidate how animals interact, survive, and thrive in a changing world. Recent technological advances in data collection and management have transformed our understanding of animal "movement ecology" (the integrated study of organismal movement), creating a big-data discipline that benefits from rapid, cost-effective generation of large amounts of data on movements of animals in the wild. These high-throughput wildlife tracking systems now allow more thorough investigation of variation among individuals and species across space and time, the nature of biological interactions, and behavioral responses to the environment. Movement ecology is rapidly expanding scientific frontiers through large interdisciplinary and collaborative frameworks, providing improved opportunities for conservation and insights into the movements of wild animals, and their causes and consequences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ran Nathan
- Movement Ecology Lab, A. Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, Edmond J. Safra Campus, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.,Minerva Center for Movement Ecology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Christopher T Monk
- Institute of Marine Research, His, Norway.,Centre for Coastal Research (CCR), Department of Natural Sciences, University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway.,Department of Fish Biology, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Leibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Berlin, Germany
| | - Robert Arlinghaus
- Department of Fish Biology, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Leibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Berlin, Germany.,Division of Integrative Fisheries Management, Faculty of Life Sciences and Integrative Research Institute on Transformations of Human-Environment Systems (IRI THESys), Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Timo Adam
- Centre for Research into Ecological and Environmental Modelling, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK
| | - Josep Alós
- Instituto Mediterráneo de Estudios Avanzados, IMEDEA (CSIC-UIB), Esporles, Spain
| | - Michael Assaf
- Racah Institute of Physics, Edmond J. Safra Campus, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Henrik Baktoft
- National Institute of Aquatic Resources, Section for Freshwater Fisheries and Ecology, Technical University of Denmark, Silkeborg, Denmark
| | - Christine E Beardsworth
- NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Department of Coastal Systems, Den Burg, The Netherlands.,Centre for Research in Animal Behaviour, Psychology, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Michael G Bertram
- Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Allert I Bijleveld
- NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Department of Coastal Systems, Den Burg, The Netherlands
| | - Tomas Brodin
- Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Jill L Brooks
- Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Andrea Campos-Candela
- Department of Fish Biology, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Leibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Berlin, Germany.,Instituto Mediterráneo de Estudios Avanzados, IMEDEA (CSIC-UIB), Esporles, Spain
| | - Steven J Cooke
- Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | | | - Pratik R Gupte
- NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Department of Coastal Systems, Den Burg, The Netherlands.,Groningen Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Roi Harel
- Movement Ecology Lab, A. Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, Edmond J. Safra Campus, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.,Minerva Center for Movement Ecology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Gustav Hellström
- Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Florian Jeltsch
- Plant Ecology and Nature Conservation, Institute of Biochemistry and Biology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany.,Berlin-Brandenburg Institute of Advanced Biodiversity Research (BBIB), Berlin, Germany
| | - Shaun S Killen
- Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow UK
| | - Thomas Klefoth
- Ecology and Conservation, Faculty of Nature and Engineering, Hochschule Bremen, City University of Applied Sciences, Bremen, Germany
| | - Roland Langrock
- Department of Business Administration and Economics, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany
| | - Robert J Lennox
- NORCE Norwegian Research Centre, Laboratory for Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Bergen, Norway
| | - Emmanuel Lourie
- Movement Ecology Lab, A. Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, Edmond J. Safra Campus, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.,Minerva Center for Movement Ecology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Joah R Madden
- Centre for Research in Animal Behaviour, Psychology, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Yotam Orchan
- Movement Ecology Lab, A. Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, Edmond J. Safra Campus, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.,Minerva Center for Movement Ecology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Ine S Pauwels
- Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Milan Říha
- Biology Centre of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Hydrobiology, České Budějovice, Czech Republic
| | - Manuel Roeleke
- Plant Ecology and Nature Conservation, Institute of Biochemistry and Biology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
| | - Ulrike E Schlägel
- Plant Ecology and Nature Conservation, Institute of Biochemistry and Biology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
| | - David Shohami
- Movement Ecology Lab, A. Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, Edmond J. Safra Campus, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.,Minerva Center for Movement Ecology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Johannes Signer
- Wildlife Sciences, Faculty of Forest Sciences and Forest Ecology, University of Goettingen, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Sivan Toledo
- Minerva Center for Movement Ecology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.,Blavatnik School of Computer Science, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel
| | - Ohad Vilk
- Movement Ecology Lab, A. Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, Edmond J. Safra Campus, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.,Minerva Center for Movement Ecology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.,Racah Institute of Physics, Edmond J. Safra Campus, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Samuel Westrelin
- INRAE, Aix Marseille Univ, Pôle R&D ECLA, RECOVER, Aix-en-Provence, France
| | - Mark A Whiteside
- Centre for Research in Animal Behaviour, Psychology, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.,School of Biological and Marine Sciences, University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth, UK
| | - Ivan Jarić
- Biology Centre of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Hydrobiology, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.,University of South Bohemia, Faculty of Science, Department of Ecosystem Biology, České Budějovice, Czech Republic
| |
Collapse
|