Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T21:45:34.276Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Larger foraging range but similar habitat selection in non-breeding versus breeding sub-Antarctic penguins

Part of: Antarctic Science International Bursary collection: Biosciences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2011

Jean-Baptiste Thiebot ,
Amélie Lescroël ,
David Pinaud ,
Philip N. Trathan  and
Charles-André Bost
Jean-Baptiste Thiebot*
Affiliation:
Centre d'Etudes Biologiques de Chizé, UPR 1934 CNRS, 79360 Villiers-en-bois, France
Amélie Lescroël
Affiliation:
Centre d'Etudes Biologiques de Chizé, UPR 1934 CNRS, 79360 Villiers-en-bois, France
David Pinaud
Affiliation:
Centre d'Etudes Biologiques de Chizé, UPR 1934 CNRS, 79360 Villiers-en-bois, France
Philip N. Trathan
Affiliation:
British Antarctic Survey, NERC, High Cross, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0ET, UK
Charles-André Bost
Affiliation:
Centre d'Etudes Biologiques de Chizé, UPR 1934 CNRS, 79360 Villiers-en-bois, France
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

For land-breeding marine organisms such as seabirds, knowledge about their habitat use has mainly been gained through studies of breeding individuals that are constrained to return frequently to their breeding grounds. In this study we set out to measure whether: a) habitat selection in the non-breeding period predicts habitat selection in the breeding period, and b) whether breeding individuals concentrated their activity on the closest suitable habitats. Macaroni Eudyptes chrysolophus and gentoo Pygoscelis papua penguins, two marine predators with contrasting foraging strategies, were tracked from the Iles Kerguelen and their habitat selection investigated through Mahalanobis distances factorial analysis. This study presents the first data about gentoo penguins’ juvenile dispersal. For both species, results showed 6.9 times larger maximum ranges and up to 12.2 times greater distances travelled during the non-breeding period. Habitat suitability maps suggested both species made similar environmental selections whatever the period. Macaroni penguins targeted pelagic areas beyond the shelf break while gentoo penguins always remained over the shelf. We consider the ecological significance of larger scale movements made outside the breeding period and suggest that this non-breeding period is of particular interest when attempting to understand an animal's habitat selection.

Keywords

central place foragersecological nicheIles Kerguelenjuvenilewinter
Type
Biological Sciences
Information
Antarctic Science , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , April 2011 , pp. 117 - 126
Copyright
Copyright © Antarctic Science Ltd 2011

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.G., Ribic, C.A., Ballard, G., Heath, S., Gaffney, I., Karl, B.J., Barton, K.J., Wilson, P.R. Webb, S. 2004. Geographic structure of Adélie penguin populations: overlap in colony-specific foraging areas. Ecological Monographs, 74, 159–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashmole, N.P. 1963. The regulation of numbers of tropical oceanic birds. Ibis, 103, 458–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birt, V.L., Birt, T.P., Goulet, D., Cairns, D.K. Montevecchi, W.A. 1987. Ashmole's halo: direct evidence for prey depletion by a seabird. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 40, 205–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bost, C.A. Jouventin, P. 1990. Evolutionary ecology of the gentoo penguin (Pygoscelis papua). In Darby, J.T. & Davis, L.S., eds. Penguin biology. Orlando, FL: Academic Press, 85–112.Google Scholar
Bost, C.A., Thiebot, J.B., Pinaud, D., Cherel, Y. Trathan, P.N. 2009. Where do penguins go during the interbreeding period? Using geolocation to track the winter dispersion of the macaroni penguin. Biology Letters, 5, 473–476.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brooke, M.D. 2004. The food consumption of the world's seabirds. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B271, S246–S248.Google Scholar
Brown, C.R. 1987. Travelling speed and foraging range of macaroni and rockhopper penguins at Marion Island. Journal of Field Ornithology, 58, 118–125.Google Scholar
Calenge, C., Darmon, G., Basille, M., Loison, A. Julien, J.-M. 2008. The factorial decomposition of the Mahalanobis distances in habitat selection studies. Ecology, 89, 555–566.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Charrassin, J.B., Park, Y.H., Le Maho, Y. Bost, C.A. 2002. Penguins as oceanographers unravel hidden mechanisms of marine productivity. Ecology Letters, 5, 317–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, A. 1988. Seasonality in the Antarctic marine environment. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, B90, 461–473.Google Scholar
Cresswell, K.A., Wiedenmann, J. Mangel, M. 2008. Can macaroni penguins keep up with climate- and fishing-induced changes in krill? Polar Biology, 31, 641–649.Google Scholar
Croxall, J.P. Prince, E.D. 1980. Food, feeding ecology and ecological segregation of seabirds at South Georgia. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 14, 103–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croxall, J.P., Silk, J.R.D., Phillips, R.A., Afanasyev, V. Briggs, D.R. 2005. Global circumnavigations: tracking year-round ranges of non-breeding albatrosses. Science, 307, 249–250.Google Scholar
Deagle, B.E., Gales, N.J. Hindell, M.A. 2008. Variability in foraging behaviour of chick-rearing macaroni penguins Eudyptes chrysolophus and its relation to diet. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 359, 295–309.Google Scholar
Durant, J.M., Hjermann, D.Ø., Anker-Nilssen, T., Beaugrand, G., Mysterud, A., Pettorelli, N. Stenseth, N.C. 2005. Timing and abundance as key mechanisms affecting trophic interactions in variable environments. Ecology Letters, 8, 952–958.Google Scholar
Grémillet, D., Wilson, R.P., Wanless, S. Chater, T. 2000. Blackbrowed albatrosses, international fisheries and the Patagonian Shelf. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 195, 269–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guisan, A. Zimmermann, N.E. 2000. Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecological Modelling, 135, 147–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koslov, A.N., Shust, K.V. Zemsky, A.V. 1991. Seasonal and interannual variability in the distribution of Electrona carlsbergi in the southern Polar Front area. SC-CAMLR-SSP/7. Hobart: CCAMLR, 320–337.Google Scholar
Lescroël, A. Bost, C.A. 2005. Foraging under contrasting oceanographic conditions: the gentoo penguin at Kerguelen Archipelago. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 302, 245–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lescroël, A. Bost, C.A. 2006. Recent decrease in gentoo penguin populations at Iles Kerguelen. Antarctic Science, 18, 171–174.Google Scholar
Lescroël, A., Ridoux, V. Bost, C.A. 2004. Spatial and temporal variation in the diet of the gentoo penguin (Pygoscelis papua) at Kerguelen Islands. Polar Biology, 27, 206–216.Google Scholar
McConnell, B.J., Fedak, M.A., Burton, H.R., Englehard, G.H. Reijnders, P. 2002. Movements and foraging areas of naive, recently weaned southern elephant seal pups. Journal of Animal Ecology, 71, 65–78.Google Scholar
Mori, Y. Boyd, I.L. 2004. Segregation of foraging between two sympatric penguin species: does rate maximisation make the difference? Marine Ecology Progress Series, 275, 241–249.Google Scholar
Phillips, R.A., Silk, J.R.D., Croxall, J.P. Afanasyev, V. 2006. Year-round distribution of white-chinned petrels from South Georgia: relationships with oceanography and fisheries. Biological Conservation, 129, 336–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, R.A., Silk, J.R.D., Croxall, J.P., Afanasyev, V. Bennett, V.J. 2005. Summer distribution and migration of non-breeding albatrosses: individual consistencies and implications for conservation. Ecology, 86, 2386–2396.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team 2009. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: Wirtschafts Universität, http://www.R-project.org.Google Scholar
Rey, A.R., Trathan, P.N., Pütz, K. Schiavini, A. 2007. Effect of oceanographic conditions on the winter movements of rockhopper penguins Eudyptes chrysocome chrysocome from Staten Island, Argentina. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 330, 285–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, S.A. Hindell, M.A. 1996. Foraging ecology of gentoo penguins Pygoscelis papua at Macquarie Island during the period of chick care. Ibis, 138, 722–731.Google Scholar
Stahl, J.C., Derenne, P., Jouventin, P., Mougin, J.L., Teulières, L. Weimerskirch, H. 1985. Le cycle reproducteur des gorfous de l'archipel Crozet: Eudyptes chrysolophus, le Gorfou macaroni et Eudyptes chrysocome, le Gorfou sauteur. L'Oiseau et la Revue Française d'Ornithologie, 55, 27–43.Google Scholar
Tanton, J.L., Reid, K., Croxall, J.P. Trathan, P.N. 2004. Winter distribution and behaviour of gentoo penguins Pygoscelis papua at South Georgia. Polar Biology, 27, 299–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trathan, P.N., Green, C., Tanton, J., Peat, H., Poncet, J. Morton, A. 2006. Foraging dynamics of macaroni penguins Eudyptes chrysolophus at South Georgia during brood-guard. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 323, 239–251.Google Scholar
Tsoar, A., Allouche, O., Steinitz, O., Rotem, D. Kadmon, R. 2007. A comparative evaluation of presence-only methods for modelling species distribution. Diversity and Distributions, 13, 397–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weimerskirch, H. 2007. Are seabirds foraging for unpredictable resources? Deep-Sea Research II, 54, 211–223.Google Scholar
Weimerskirch, H., Zotier, R. Jouventin, P. 1988. The avifauna of the Iles Kerguelen. Emu, 89, 15–29.Google Scholar
Weimerskirch, H., Pinaud, D., Pawlowski, F. Bost, C.A. 2007. Does prey capture induce area-restricted search? A fine-scale study using GPS in a marine predator, the wandering albatross. American Naturalist, 170, 734–743.Google Scholar
Williams, A.D. 1995. The penguins. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 295 pp.Google Scholar
Wilson, R.P., Alvarrez, B., Latorre, L., Adelung, D., Culik, B. Bannasch, R. 1998. The movements of gentoo penguins Pygoscelis papua from Ardley Island, Antarctica. Polar Biology, 19, 407–413.Google Scholar
Wilson, R.P., Grémillet, D., Syder, J., Kierspel, M.A.M., Garthe, S., Weimerskirch, H., Schafer-Neth, C., Scolaro, J.A., Bost, C.A., Plötz, J. Nel, D. 2002. Remote-sensing systems and seabirds: their use, abuse and potential for measuring marine environmental variables. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 228, 241–261.Google Scholar
Woehler, E.J. 1993. The distribution and abundance of Antarctic and sub-Antarctic penguins. Cambridge: Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research, 76 pp.Google Scholar