Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T06:20:16.617Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Chick production at the largest emperor penguin colony decreases by 50% from 2008–10

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2013

G.L. Kooyman  and
P.J. Ponganis
G.L. Kooyman*
Affiliation:
Scholander Hall, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UCSD, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA
P.J. Ponganis
Affiliation:
Scholander Hall, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UCSD, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The emperor penguin colony at Coulman Island is reputedly the largest known. This reputation is based on intermittent ground and aerial surveys performed since 1958. From an aerial survey obtained on 28 October 2010 we discovered that the total number of chicks was 56% of the lowest previous estimate of 2006 and only 41% of the most recent estimate in 2008. All of the counts tallied since 1983 were determined either by ground counts or from aerial film or digital photographs, or estimates from adult counts. We also determined the sea ice conditions in autumn, which is close to the time the adults arrive to breed. We present three hypotheses of what might have happened from 2008–10 to cause the step change in chick production, the small recovery of chick numbers in 2011, and the complete recovery of number of adults from 2010–11. We conclude that local circumstances may have strongly influenced the breeding behaviour of the emperor penguins in 2010 and to a lesser degree in 2011 when many adults elected not to breed.

Keywords

aerial photographsAptenodytes forsteriCape WashingtonCoulman IslandPointe Géologiepopulation
Type
Biological Sciences
Information
Antarctic Science , Volume 26 , Issue 1 , February 2014 , pp. 33 - 37
Copyright
Copyright © Antarctic Science Ltd 2013 

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.)

References

Ainley, D., Russell, J., Jenouvrier, S., Woehler, E., Lyver, P.O., Fraser, W.R. Kooyman, G.L. 2010. Antarctic penguin response to habitat change as Earth's troposphere reaches 2°C above preindustrial levels. Ecological Monographs, 80, 49–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber-Meyer, S., Kooyman, G. Ponganis, P. 2008. Trends in western Ross Sea emperor penguin chick abundances and their relationships to climate. Antarctic Science, 20, 3–11.Google Scholar
Barbraud, C. Weimerskirch, H. 2001. Emperor penguins and climate change. Nature, 411, 183–186.Google Scholar
Barbraud, C., Gavrilo, M., Mizin, Y. Weimerskirch, H. 2011. Comparison of emperor penguin declines between Pointe Geologie and Haswell Island over the past 50 years. Antarctic Science, 23, 461–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cranfield, H.J. 1966. Emperor penguin rookeries of Victoria Land. Antarctic, 4, 365–366.Google Scholar
Jenouvrier, S., Holland, M., Stroeve, J., Barbraud, C., Weimerskirch, H., Serreze, M. Caswell, H. 2012. Effects of climate change on an emperor penguin population: analysis of coupled demographic and climate models. Global Change Biology, 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02744.x.Google Scholar
Kooyman, G.L. 1993. Breeding habitats of emperor penguins in the western Ross Sea. Antarctic Science, 5, 143–148.Google Scholar
Kooyman, G.L. 1994. Natural history of emperor penguin colonies of the Ross Sea, 1993. Antarctic Journal Review, 29, 170–171.Google Scholar
Kooyman, G.L. Mullins, J. 1990. Ross Sea emperor penguin breeding populations estimated by aerial photography. In Kerry, K. & Hempel, G., eds. Antarctic ecosystems, ecological change and conservation. Hobart: Springer, 427 pp.Google Scholar
Micol, T. Jouventin, P. 2001. Long-term population trends in seven Antarctic seabirds at Pointe Géologie (Terre Adélie). Human impact compared with environmental change. Polar Biology, 24, 175–185.Google Scholar