Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T06:17:15.152Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Energy conservation by formation swimming: metabolic evidence from ducklings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2012

Frank E. Fish
Affiliation:
West Chester University
Get access

Summary

Formation movement, particularly during swimming and flying, has been hypothesized to reduce an individual animal's energy expenditure. Although a number of aeroand hydrodynamic models have been proposed to estimate energy savings of animals travelling in formation, little empirical data are available that test this presumption. An examination of the metabolic energetics of formation swimming was undertaken with mallard ducklings (Anas platyrhynchos) trained to swim behind a decoy in a flow tank. Oxygen consumption was measured for ducklings in clutches of one, two or four individuals, with the decoy in the water or suspended above the surface. Metabolic rate per individual duckling decreased with increasing clutch size by 7·8-43·5%. Following in the wake of a decoy significantly decreased metabolic swimming effort by ducklings and this effect was most pronounced at three days of age and in small clutches. These findings suggest that the flow pattern generated by the formation and in the wake of an adult reduces the resistance of the water to locomotion and allows an individual duckling to conserve energy.

INTRODUCTION

Locomotion is an energetically costly activity that may comprise a significant component of an animal's overall energy budget (Weihs & Webb, 1983; Fish, 1992). Therefore it is advantageous for animals to use locomotor strategies which minimize energetic expenditure. Such strategies include gait transition, intermittent locomotion, soaring, tidal stream transport, wave riding, submerged swimming, porpoising and formation movement (Cone, 1962; Lissaman & Schollenberger, 1970; Pennycuick, 1972; Weihs, 1973, 1974, 1978; Au & Weihs, 1980; Hoyt & Taylor, 1981; Williams, 1989; Fish et al., 1991; Williams et al., 1992).

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×