Foraging range scales with seabird colony size
Abstract: Density dependent prey depletion around breeding colonies has long been proposed as an important factor controlling the population dynamics of colonial animals. Colonial breeding provides benefits to members via information sharing and reduced predation, but may create costs via negative d...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | unknown |
| Published: |
Underline Science Inc.
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dx.doi.org/10.48448/cskb-hx58 https://underline.io/lecture/34913-foraging-range-scales-with-seabird-colony-size |
| Summary: | Abstract: Density dependent prey depletion around breeding colonies has long been proposed as an important factor controlling the population dynamics of colonial animals. Colonial breeding provides benefits to members via information sharing and reduced predation, but may create costs via negative density-dependence. Using tracking data from murres (Uria spp.), the world's most densely breeding seabirds, we show that the frequency distribution of foraging trip distances scales to the 0.31 power of colony size during the chick-rearing stage, consistent with Ashmole's Halo theory. This pattern was evident across colonies varying in size over three orders of magnitude and distributed throughout the North Atlantic region. The strong relationship between colony size and foraging range means that important foraging habitat for some colonial species can be efficiently delineated based solely on population estimates. Protected areas covering the foraging ranges of the 17 largest colonies would safeguard two-thirds of the North Atlantic population; currently, only two of those colonies have significant coverage by marine protected areas. Our results represent an important example of how behavioural modelling, in this case Ashmole's version of central place foraging theory, can be applied to inform conservation and management in colonial breeding species. Authors: Allison Patterson¹, Grant Gilchrist², Anthony Gaston², Sigurd Benjaminsen³, Mark Bolton⁴, Sebastien Descamps³, Kjell Erikstad⁵, Morten Frederiksen⁶, Jannie Linnebjerg⁶, Oliver Love⁷, Mark Mallory⁸, Flemming Merkel⁶, William Montevecchi¹, Anders Mosbech⁶, Ellie Owen⁴, Paul Regular⁹, Tone Reiertsen⁵, Yan Ropert-Coudert¹⁰, Thorkell Thórarinsson¹¹, Anne Sophie Bonnet-Lebrun¹², Gail Davoren¹³, Julia Gulka¹³, Jonas Hentati-Sundberg¹⁴, Nicholas Huffeldt⁶, Kasper Johansen⁶, Aili Labansen¹⁵, Olof Olsson¹⁶, Norman Ratcliffe¹², Hallvard Strøm¹⁷, Kyle Elliott¹ ¹McGill University, ²Environment and Climate Change Canada, ³Norwegian Polar Institute, ⁴Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, ⁵Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, ⁶Aarhus University, ⁷Windsor University, ⁸Acadia University, ⁹Fisheries and Oceans Canada, ¹⁰Centre d'Etudes Biologiques de Chizé, ¹¹Northeast Iceland Nature Research Centre, ¹²British Antarctic Survey, ¹³University of Manitoba, ¹⁴Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, ¹⁵Greenland Institute of Natural Resources, ¹⁶Stockholm University, ¹⁷Norwegian Polar Institute, FRAM Centre |
|---|