Advertisement

Marine Biology

, Volume 161, Issue 8, pp 1861–1872 | Cite as

Can variations in the spatial distribution at sea and isotopic niche width be associated with consistency in the isotopic niche of a pelagic seabird species?

  • Filipe R. CeiaEmail author
  • Vitor H. Paiva
  • Stefan Garthe
  • João C. Marques
  • Jaime A. Ramos
Original Paper

Abstract

This study tested for fluctuations on short-term consistency (within about 1 month) in the isotopic niche of a pelagic seabird species. Short-term consistency in the isotopic niche was assessed using a wide-ranging apex predator, the Cory’s shearwaters Calonectris diomedea, along a 3-year study (2010–2012), during both the pre-laying and chick-rearing periods, with markedly inter- and intra-annual differences in the foraging spatial distribution at sea and isotopic niche width. We used individual movement data and stable isotope data, analysed using recent metrics based in a Bayesian framework, of 69 adults breeding on a small neritic island in the North Atlantic (39°24′N, 009°30′W). As expected, our results confirm that isotopic niche expansion could arise via increased variation in spatial distribution at sea among individuals. Results suggest fluctuations on short-term consistency in the isotopic niche of Cory’s shearwaters related to their different foraging patterns among periods and, ultimately, to presumably temporal changes in the availability and predictability of food resources. Short-term consistency in the isotopic niche was higher and persistent during periods when the population showed an intermediate isotopic niche width and absent when isotopic niche was either smaller or larger during the study period. These results suggest that consistency in the isotopic niche is an important characteristic of this population during the breeding period that may fluctuate depending on resources availability and should be important to understand the dynamics of foraging ecology of pelagic seabirds in general.

Keywords

Niche Width Isotopic Niche Pelagic Seabird Standard Ellipse Area Isotopic Niche Width 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was cosponsored by the Foundation for Science and Technology (Portugal) and the European Social Found (POPH, EU) through a PhD grant attributed to Filipe R. Ceia (SFRH/BD/64558/2009) and a postdoc grant attributed to Vitor H. Paiva (SFRH/BDP/63825/2009), and by the project FAME (Future of the Atlantic Marine Environment; Project No. 2009-1/089—Atlantic Area) funded by the EU. We are grateful to the support given by the Berlengas Nature Reserve for permission to work on the island and for providing accommodation. Special thanks to wardens P. Crisóstomo and E. Mourato. We thank A. Werner, F. Haug, V. Fidalgo and M. Soares for help in the field and C. Docal and A. Baeta for running stable isotope samples.

References

  1. Bearhop S, Teece MA, Waldron S, Furness RW (2000) Influence of lipid and uric acid on δ13C and δ15 N values of avian blood: implications for trophic studies. Auk 117:504–507Google Scholar
  2. Bearhop S, Adams CE, Waldron S, Fuller RA, Macleod H (2004) Determining trophic niche width: a novel approach using stable isotope analysis. J Anim Ecol 73:1007–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bearhop S, Phillips RA, McGill R, Cherel Y, Dawson DA, Croxall JP (2006) Stable isotopes indicate sex-specific and long-term individual foraging specialisation in diving seabirds. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 311:157–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bolnick DI, Svanbäck R, Fordyce JA, Yang LH, Davis JM, Hulsey CD, Forister ML (2003) The ecology of individuals: incidence and implications of individual specialization. Am Nat 161:1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bolnick DI, Svanbäck R, Araújo MS, Persson L (2007) Comparative support for the niche variation hypothesis that more generalized populations also are more heterogeneous. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:10075–10079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bolnick DI, Ingram T, Stutz WE, Snowberg LK, Lau OL, Paull JS (2010) Ecological release from interspecific competition leads to decoupled changes in population and individual niche width. Proc R Soc B 277:1789–1797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bolnick DI, Amarasekare P, Araújo MS, Bürger R, Levine JM, Novak M, Rudolf VHW, Schreiber SJ, Urban MC, Vasseur DA (2011) Why intraspecific trait variation matters in community ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 26:183–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Calenge C (2006) The package “adehabitat” for the R software: a tool for the analysis of space and habitat use by animals. Ecol Modell 197:516–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ceia FR, Phillips RA, Ramos JA, Cherel Y, Vieira RP, Richard P, Xavier JC (2012) Short- and long-term consistency in the foraging niche of wandering albatrosses. Mar Biol 159:1581–1591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ceia FR, Paiva VH, Fidalgo V, Morais L, Baeta A, Crisóstomo P, Mourato E, Garthe S, Marques JC, Ramos JA (2014) Annual and seasonal consistency in the feeding ecology of an opportunistic species, the yellow-legged gull Larus michahellis. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 497:273–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cherel Y, Hobson KA (2007) Geographical variation in carbon stable isotope signatures of marine predators: a tool to investigate their foraging areas in the Southern Ocean. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 329:281–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cherel Y, Hobson KA, Hassani S (2005a) Isotopic discrimination between food and blood and feathers of captive penguins: implications for dietary studies in the wild. Physiol Biochem Zool 78:106–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cherel Y, Hobson KA, Weimerskirch H (2005b) Using stable isotopes to study resource acquisition and allocation in procellariiform seabirds. Oecologia 145:533–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fair J, Whitaker S, Pearson B (2007) Sources of variation in haematocrit in birds. Ibis 149:535–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fieberg J, Kochanny CO (2005) Quantifying home-range overlap: the importance of the utilization distribution. J Wildl Manag 69:1346–1359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Granadeiro JP (1993) Variation in measurements of Cory’s shearwater between populations and sexing by discriminant analysis. Ring Migr 14:103–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Igual JM, Forero MG, Tavecchia G, González-Solis J, Martínez-Abraín A, Hobson KA, Ruiz X, Oro D (2005) Short-term effects of data-loggers on Cory’s shearwater (Calonectris diomedea). Mar Biol 146:619–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jackson AL, Inger R, Parnell AC, Bearhop S (2011) Comparing isotopic niche widths among and within communities: SIBER—stable isotope bayesian ellipses in R. J Anim Ecol 80:595–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jaeger A, Lecomte VJ, Weimerskirch H, Richard P, Cherel Y (2010) Seabird satellite tracking validates the use of latitudinal isoscapes to depict predators’ foraging areas in the Southern Ocean. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 24:3456–3460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Layman CA, Arrington DA, Montaña CG, Post DM (2007) Can stable isotope ratios provide for community-wide measures of trophic structure? Ecology 88:42–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lecoq M, Geraldes P, Andrade J (2011) First complete census of Cory’s Shearwaters Calonectris diomedea borealis breeding at Berlengas Islands (Portugal), including the small islets of the archipelago. Airo 21:31–34Google Scholar
  22. Louzao M, Bécares J, Rodríguez B, Hyrenbach K, Ruiz A, Arcos J (2009) Combining vessel-based surveys and tracking data to identify key marine areas for seabirds. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 391:183–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Magalhães M, Santos R, Hamer K (2008) Dual-foraging of Cory’s shearwaters in the Azores: feeding locations, behaviour at sea and implications for food provisioning of chicks. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 359:283–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Matich P, Heithaus MR, Layman CA (2011) Contrasting patterns of individual specialization and trophic coupling in two marine apex predators. J Anim Ecol 80:294–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Montoya J, Carpenter E, Capone D (2002) Nitrogen fixation and nitrogen isotope abundances in zooplankton of the oligotrophic North Atlantic. Limnol Oceanogr 47:1617–1628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nakagawa S, Schielzeth H (2010) Repeatability for Gaussian and non-Gaussian data: a practical guide for biologists. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 85:935–956Google Scholar
  27. Navarro J, González-Solís J (2007) Experimental increase of flying costs in a pelagic seabird: effects on foraging strategies, nutritional state and chick condition. Oecologia 151:150–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Navarro J, González-Solís J, Viscor G (2007) Nutritional and feeding ecology in Cory’s shearwater Calonectris diomedea during breeding. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 351:261–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Neves V, Nolf D, Clarke M (2012) Spatio-temporal variation in the diet of Cory’s shearwater Calonectris diomedea in the Azores archipelago, northeast Atlantic. Deep Sea Res Part I 70:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Newsome SD, del Rio CM, Bearhop S, Phillips DL (2007) A niche for isotopic ecology. Front Ecol Environ 5:429–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Paiva VH, Geraldes P, Ramírez I, Meirinho A, Garthe S, Ramos JA (2010) Foraging plasticity in a pelagic seabird species along a marine productivity gradient. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 398:259–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Paiva VH, Geraldes P, Marques V, Rodríguez R, Garthe S, Ramos JA (2013a) Effects of environmental variability on different trophic levels of the North Atlantic food web. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 477:15–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Paiva VH, Geraldes P, Ramirez I, Werner A, Garthe S, Ramos JA (2013b) Overcoming difficult times: the behavioural resilience of a marine predator when facing environmental stochasticity. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 486:277–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Parnell AC, Inger R, Bearhop S, Jackson AL (2010) Source partitioning using stable isotopes: coping with too much variation. PLoS ONE 5:e9672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Phillips RA, Xavier JC, Croxall JP (2003) Effects of satellite transmitters on albatrosses and petrels. Auk 120:1082–1090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Phillips RA, Bearhop S, McGill RAR, Dawson DA (2009) Stable isotopes reveal individual variation in migration strategies and habitat preferences in a suite of seabirds during the nonbreeding period. Oecologia 160:795–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Phillips RA, McGill RAR, Dawson DA, Bearhop S (2011) Sexual segregation in distribution, diet and trophic level of seabirds: insights from stable isotope analysis. Mar Biol 158:2199–2208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ramos JA, Granadeiro JP, Phillips RA, Catry P (2009) Flight morphology and foraging behavior of male and female Cory’s shearwaters. Condor 111:424–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sánchez-Guzmán JM, Villegas A, Corbacho C, Morán R, Marzal A, Real R (2004) Response of the haematocrit to body condition changes in Northern Bald Ibis Geronticus eremita. Comp Biochem Physiol Part A 139:41–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Soanes LM, Arnould JPY, Dodd SG, Sumner MD, Green JA (2013) How many seabirds do we need to track to define home-range area? J Appl Ecol 50:671–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sousa FM, Nascimento S, Casimiro H, Boutov D (2008) Identification of upwelling areas on sea surface temperature images using fuzzy clustering. Remote Sens Environ 112:2817–2823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Svanbäck R, Bolnick DI (2007) Intraspecific competition drives increased resource use diversity within a natural population. Proc R Soc B 274:839–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Svanbäck R, Persson L (2004) Individual diet specialization, niche width and population dynamics: implications for trophic polymorphisms. J Anim Ecol 73:973–982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Syvaranta J, Lensu A, Marjomaki TJ, Oksanen S, Jones RI (2013) An empirical evaluation of the utility of convex hull and standard ellipse areas for assessing population niche widths from stable isotope data. PLoS ONE 8:e56094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tinker MT, Bentall G, Estes JA (2008) Food limitation leads to behavioral diversification and dietary specialization in sea otters. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:560–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Van Valen L (1965) Morphological variation and width of ecological niche. Am Nat 99:377–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vandenabeele SP, Shepard EL, Grogan A, Wilson RP (2012) When three per cent may not be three per cent; device-equipped seabirds experience variable flight constraints. Mar Biol 159:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Votier SC, Bearhop S, Ratcliffe N, Furness RW (2004) Reproductive consequences for great skuas specializing as seabird predators. Condor 106:275–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Votier SC, Bearhop S, Witt MJ, Inger R, Thompson D, Newton J (2010) Individual responses of seabirds to commercial fisheries revealed using GPS tracking, stable isotopes and vessel monitoring systems. J Appl Ecol 47:487–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Weimerskirch H (2007) Are seabirds foraging for unpredictable resources? Deep Sea Res Part II 54:211–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Weimerskirch H, Bonadonna F, Bailleul F, Mabille G, Dell’Omo G, Lipp H-P (2002) GPS tracking of foraging albatrosses. Science 295:1259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Weimerskirch H, Gault A, Cherel Y (2005) Prey distribution and patchiness: factors in foraging success and efficiency of wandering albatrosses. Ecology 86:2611–2622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Woo KJ, Elliott KH, Davidson M, Gaston AJ, Davoren GK (2008) Individual specialization in diet by a generalist marine predator reflects specialization in foraging behaviour. J Anim Ecol 77:1082–1091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Xavier JC, Magalhães MC, Mendonça AS, Antunes M, Carvalho N, Machete M, Santos RS, Paiva V, Hamer KC (2011) Changes in diet of Cory’s Shearwaters Calonectris diomedea breeding in the Azores. Mar Ornithol 39:129–134Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Filipe R. Ceia
    • 1
    Email author
  • Vitor H. Paiva
    • 1
  • Stefan Garthe
    • 2
  • João C. Marques
    • 1
  • Jaime A. Ramos
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Life Sciences, Marine and Environmental Research Centre (IMAR/CMA)University of CoimbraCoimbraPortugal
  2. 2.Research and Technology Centre (FTZ)University of KielBüsumGermany

Personalised recommendations