Data from: Effect of light-level geolocators on apparent survival of two highly aerial swift species

Light-level geolocators are currently widely used to track the migration of small-sized birds, but their potentially detrimental effects on survival of highly aerial species have been poorly investigated so far. We recorded capture-recapture histories of 283 common swifts Apus apus and 107 pallid sw...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Morganti, Michelangelo, Rubolini, Diego, Akesson, Susanne, Bermejo, Ana, De la Puente, Javier, Lardelli, Roberto, Liechti, Felix, Boano, Giovanni, Tomassetto, Erika, Ferri, Mauro, Caffi, Mario, Saino, Nicola, Ambrosini, Roberto
Format: Other/Unknown Material
Language:unknown
Published: Zenodo 2017
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.b1t42
_version_ 1821782003860635648
author Morganti, Michelangelo
Rubolini, Diego
Akesson, Susanne
Bermejo, Ana
De la Puente, Javier
Lardelli, Roberto
Liechti, Felix
Boano, Giovanni
Tomassetto, Erika
Ferri, Mauro
Caffi, Mario
Saino, Nicola
Ambrosini, Roberto
author_facet Morganti, Michelangelo
Rubolini, Diego
Akesson, Susanne
Bermejo, Ana
De la Puente, Javier
Lardelli, Roberto
Liechti, Felix
Boano, Giovanni
Tomassetto, Erika
Ferri, Mauro
Caffi, Mario
Saino, Nicola
Ambrosini, Roberto
author_sort Morganti, Michelangelo
collection Zenodo
description Light-level geolocators are currently widely used to track the migration of small-sized birds, but their potentially detrimental effects on survival of highly aerial species have been poorly investigated so far. We recorded capture-recapture histories of 283 common swifts Apus apus and 107 pallid swifts Apus pallidus breeding in 14 colonies in Italy, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland that were deployed with 10 different types of geolocators ('geolocator birds'), and compared their survival with that of, respectively, 215 common and 101 pallid swifts not equipped with geolocators ('control birds'). We performed both traditional GLMM using return rate as a proxy for survival and mark-recapture models to estimate survival while accounting for recapture probability. In all the analyses, geolocator birds showed reduced apparent survival compared to controls. The extent of the negative effect on survival differed between the species but the direction of the difference between species was opposite in either type of analysis. Geolocator weight was always lower 3% of body mass or less, and did not affect survival per se. Geolocators with a light-stalk, which is used in some geolocator models to reduce light sensor shading by feathers, decreased apparent survival more than models without light-stalk. Apparent survival of geolocator birds significantly varied among sites, being much higher in northern Europe. Despite in our analyses we could only partly account for variable recapture probabilities among sites and for inter-annual variability in survival, our results generally showed that equipping swifts with geolocators decreased their survival prospects, but also that the magnitude of this effect may depend on species-specific traits. These conclusions are in line with those of other studies on aerial foragers. We suggest that future studies tracking the movements of aerial insectivorous birds should use devices designed to minimize drag. return rates table showing return rates of geolocator and control birds in form of ...
format Other/Unknown Material
genre Apus apus
genre_facet Apus apus
id ftzenodo:oai:zenodo.org:5024990
institution Open Polar
language unknown
op_collection_id ftzenodo
op_doi https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.b1t4210.1111/jav.01521
op_relation https://doi.org/10.1111/jav.01521
https://zenodo.org/communities/dryad
https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.b1t42
oai:zenodo.org:5024990
op_rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode
publishDate 2017
publisher Zenodo
record_format openpolar
spelling ftzenodo:oai:zenodo.org:5024990 2025-01-16T19:47:18+00:00 Data from: Effect of light-level geolocators on apparent survival of two highly aerial swift species Morganti, Michelangelo Rubolini, Diego Akesson, Susanne Bermejo, Ana De la Puente, Javier Lardelli, Roberto Liechti, Felix Boano, Giovanni Tomassetto, Erika Ferri, Mauro Caffi, Mario Saino, Nicola Ambrosini, Roberto 2017-09-15 https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.b1t42 unknown Zenodo https://doi.org/10.1111/jav.01521 https://zenodo.org/communities/dryad https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.b1t42 oai:zenodo.org:5024990 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode Apus pallidus aerial foragers capture-mark-recapture Apus apus geolocator info:eu-repo/semantics/other 2017 ftzenodo https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.b1t4210.1111/jav.01521 2024-12-06T05:55:59Z Light-level geolocators are currently widely used to track the migration of small-sized birds, but their potentially detrimental effects on survival of highly aerial species have been poorly investigated so far. We recorded capture-recapture histories of 283 common swifts Apus apus and 107 pallid swifts Apus pallidus breeding in 14 colonies in Italy, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland that were deployed with 10 different types of geolocators ('geolocator birds'), and compared their survival with that of, respectively, 215 common and 101 pallid swifts not equipped with geolocators ('control birds'). We performed both traditional GLMM using return rate as a proxy for survival and mark-recapture models to estimate survival while accounting for recapture probability. In all the analyses, geolocator birds showed reduced apparent survival compared to controls. The extent of the negative effect on survival differed between the species but the direction of the difference between species was opposite in either type of analysis. Geolocator weight was always lower 3% of body mass or less, and did not affect survival per se. Geolocators with a light-stalk, which is used in some geolocator models to reduce light sensor shading by feathers, decreased apparent survival more than models without light-stalk. Apparent survival of geolocator birds significantly varied among sites, being much higher in northern Europe. Despite in our analyses we could only partly account for variable recapture probabilities among sites and for inter-annual variability in survival, our results generally showed that equipping swifts with geolocators decreased their survival prospects, but also that the magnitude of this effect may depend on species-specific traits. These conclusions are in line with those of other studies on aerial foragers. We suggest that future studies tracking the movements of aerial insectivorous birds should use devices designed to minimize drag. return rates table showing return rates of geolocator and control birds in form of ... Other/Unknown Material Apus apus Zenodo
spellingShingle Apus pallidus
aerial foragers
capture-mark-recapture
Apus apus
geolocator
Morganti, Michelangelo
Rubolini, Diego
Akesson, Susanne
Bermejo, Ana
De la Puente, Javier
Lardelli, Roberto
Liechti, Felix
Boano, Giovanni
Tomassetto, Erika
Ferri, Mauro
Caffi, Mario
Saino, Nicola
Ambrosini, Roberto
Data from: Effect of light-level geolocators on apparent survival of two highly aerial swift species
title Data from: Effect of light-level geolocators on apparent survival of two highly aerial swift species
title_full Data from: Effect of light-level geolocators on apparent survival of two highly aerial swift species
title_fullStr Data from: Effect of light-level geolocators on apparent survival of two highly aerial swift species
title_full_unstemmed Data from: Effect of light-level geolocators on apparent survival of two highly aerial swift species
title_short Data from: Effect of light-level geolocators on apparent survival of two highly aerial swift species
title_sort data from: effect of light-level geolocators on apparent survival of two highly aerial swift species
topic Apus pallidus
aerial foragers
capture-mark-recapture
Apus apus
geolocator
topic_facet Apus pallidus
aerial foragers
capture-mark-recapture
Apus apus
geolocator
url https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.b1t42