Marine Biology

, 165:72 | Cite as

Multifactorial roles of interannual variability, season, and sex for foraging patterns in a sexually size monomorphic seabird, the Australasian gannet (Morus serrator)

  • Diana Besel
  • Mark E. Hauber
  • Colin Hunter
  • Tamsin Ward-Smith
  • David Raubenheimer
  • Craig D. Millar
  • Stefanie M. H. IsmarEmail author
Original paper


Marine top predators forage in environments that show potentially extreme temporal and spatial variation in prey availability, with reproductive success being crucially linked to food supply. Multiple factors of interannual and sexual variation, as well as variation across breeding stages, can shape patterns of spatial use in foraging seabirds, yet studies that address all of these variables simultaneously are rare. We present spatial assessment of foraging patterns by µGPS tracking of a sexually size monomorphic, long-lived species, the Australasian gannet (Morus serrator). The study spanned the incubation and chick-rearing stages in three consecutive breeding seasons. Our findings revealed high interannual variability in foraging distances and trip durations, but no consistent differences between birds across different breeding stages or the sexes. The exception was that core foraging areas were different for female and male Australasian gannets, although trip durations or distances were similar for both sexes. Our results also indicate bimodality in foraging distance and trip duration in this species, while highlighting interannual variability in the extent of bimodality. These findings contribute to a scarcely documented type of foraging behaviour in the seabird family of the Sulidae. Overall, these spatial use patterns provide a baseline for understanding the evolution of sex-specific foraging differences in biparental seabirds, and the extent to which these differences might help in securing breeding success across years of variable food availability.



We thank the Department of Conservation, New Zealand (DOC), and particularly the DOC Napier office for their helpful support of our work and field accommodation. Our research was supported by an International Doctoral Research Scholarship from Education New Zealand (NZIDRS) to SMHI, and funds from the University of Auckland Research Council to MEH. For assistance and discussions, we thank C. Anagnostou, S. H. Anderson, G. Ballard, D. Dearborn, J. Johnson, N. Leuschner, M. Lenz, A. F. Little, G. Machovsky-Capuska, S. Patel, M. Rayner, P. Samaš, R. Shaw, and B. Stephenson, as well as D. M. Allen for copy-editing, and two anonymous referees and Victor Paiva for helpful reviewing and editing of this paper.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. All animal handling was conducted under University of Auckland Animal Ethics Approval (R342, R654) and under New Zealand Department of Conservation Research Permits (National Permit number ECHB-23237-RES, DOC File NHS-12-12).

Supplementary material

227_2018_3332_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (162 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 162 kb)
227_2018_3332_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (325 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (PDF 325 kb)
227_2018_3332_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (220 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (PDF 219 kb)
227_2018_3332_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (455 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (PDF 455 kb)
227_2018_3332_MOESM5_ESM.pdf (484 kb)
Supplementary material 5 (PDF 484 kb)
227_2018_3332_MOESM6_ESM.pdf (89 kb)
Supplementary material 6 (PDF 88 kb)


  1. Adams NJ, Klages NTW (1999) Foraging effort and prey choice in Cape gannets. S Afr J Mar Sci 21:157–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adams NJ, Navarro RA (2005) Foraging of a coastal seabird: flight patterns and movements of breeding Cape gannets Morus capensis. Afr J Mar Sci 27:239–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Angel LP, Wells MR, Rodríguez-Malagón MA, Tew E, Speakman JR, Arnould JPY (2015a) Sexual size dimorphism and body condition in the Australasian gannet. PLoS One 10(12):e0142653Google Scholar
  4. Angel LP, Barker S, Berlincourt M, Tew E, Warwick-Evans V, Arnould JPY (2015b) Eating locally: Australasian gannets increase their foraging effort in a restricted range. Biol Open 4(10):1298–1305Google Scholar
  5. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effect models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67:1–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bunce A (2001a) Effects of supplementary feeding and artificial twinning on nestling growth and survival in Australasian gannets (Morus serrator). Emu 101:157–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bunce A (2001b) Prey consumption of Australasian gannets (Morus serrator) breeding in Port Phillip Bay, southeast Australia, and potential overlap with commercial fisheries. ICES J Mar Sci 58:904–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cairns DK (1987) Seabirds as indicators of marine food supplies. Biol Oceanogr 5:261–271Google Scholar
  9. Camphuysen KCJ, Shamoun-Baranes J, van Loon EE, Bouten W (2015) Sexually distinct foraging strategies in an omnivorous seabird. Mar Biol 162:1417–1428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carneiro APB, Manica A, Phillips RA (2014) Foraging behaviour and habitat use by brown skuas Stercorarius lonnbergi breeding at South Georgia. Mar Biol 161:1755–1764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carter MID, Cox SL, Scales KL, Bicknell AWJ, Nicholson MD, Atkins KM, Morgan G, Morgan L, Grecian WJ, Patrick SC, Votier SC (2016) GPS tracking reveals rafting behaviour of Northern gannets (Morus bassanus): implications for foraging ecology and conservation. Bird Study 63:83–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Castillo-Guerrero JA, Mellink E (2011) Occasional inter-sex differences in diet and foraging behavior of the blue-footed booby: maximizing chick rearing in a variable environment? J Ornithol 152:269–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chaurand T, Weimerskirch H (1994) The regular alternation of short and long foraging trips in the blue petrel Halobaena caerulea: a previously undescribed strategy of food provisioning in a pelagic seabird. J Anim Ecol 63:275–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chivers LS, Lundy MG, Colhoun K, Newton SF, Houghton JDR, Reid N (2012) Foraging trip time-activity budgets and reproductive success in the black-legged kittiwake. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 456:269–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cleasby IR, Wakefield ED, Bearhop S, Bodey TW, Votier SC, Hamer KC (2015a) Three-dimensional tracking of a wide-ranging marine predator: flight heights and vulnerability to offshore wind farms. J Appl Ecol 52:1474–1482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cleasby IR, Wakefield ED, Bodey TW, Davies RD, Patrick SC, Newton J, Votier SC, Bearhop S, Hamer KC (2015b) Sexual segregation in a wide-ranging marine predator is a consequence of habitat selection. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 518:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cury PM, Boyd IL, Bonhommeau S, Anker-Nilssen T, Crawford RJM, Furness RW, Mills JA, Murphy EJ, Österblom H, Paleczny M, Piatt JF, Roux J-P, Shannon L, Sydeman WJ (2011) Global seabird response to forage fish depletion—one-third for the birds. Science 334:1703–1706CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Daniel C, Millar CD, Ismar SMH, Stephenson BM, Hauber ME (2007) Evaluating molecular and behavioural sexing methods for the Australasian gannet (Morus serrator). Aust J Zool 55:377–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Davoren GK, Burger AE (1999) Differences in prey selection and behaviour during self-feeding and chick provisioning in rhinoceros auklets. Anim Behav 58:853–863CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Dean B, Kirk H, Fayet A, Shoji A, Freeman R, Leonard K, Perrins CM, Guilford T (2015) Simultaneous multi-colony tracking of a pelagic seabird reveals cross-colony utilization of a shared foraging area. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 538:239–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Elliott KH, Gaston AJ, Crump D (2010) Sex-specific behavior by a monomorphic seabird represents risk partitioning. Behav Ecol 21:1024–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Frederiksen M, Wright PJ, Harris MP, Mavor RA, Heubeck M, Wanless S (2005) Regional patterns of kittiwake Rissa tridactyla breeding success are related to variability in sandeel recruitment. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 300:201–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Furness RW, Camphuysen KCJ (1997) Seabirds as monitors of the marine environment. ICES J Mar Sci 54:726–737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Garthe S, Grémillet D, Furness RW (1999) At-sea-activity and foraging efficiency in chick-rearing Northern gannets Sula bassana: a case study in Shetland. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 185:93–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Garthe S, Benvenuti S, Montevecchi WA (2003) Temporal patterns of foraging activities of Northern gannets, Morus bassanus, in the northwest Atlantic Ocean. Can J Zool 81:453–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Garthe S, Montevecchi WA, Chapdelaine G, Rail J-F, Hedd A (2007) Contrasting foraging tactics by Northern gannets (Sula bassana) breeding in different oceanographic domains with different prey fields. Mar Biol 151:687–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Garthe S, Montevecchi WA, Davoren GK (2011) Inter-annual changes in prey fields trigger different foraging tactics in a large marine predator. Limnol Oceanogr 56:802–812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Garthe S, Peschko V, Kubetzki U, Corman AM (2017) Seabirds as samplers of the marine environment—a case study of Northern gannets. Ocean Sci 13:337–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. González-Solís J, Croxall JP, Wood AG (2000) Sexual dimorphism and sexual segregation in foraging strategies of Northern giant petrels, Macronectes halli, during incubation. Oikos 90:390–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hamer KC, Phillips RA, Harris S, Wanless MP, Wood AG (2000) Foraging ranges, diets and feeding locations of gannets Morus bassanus in the North Sea: evidence from satellite telemetry. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 200:257–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hamer KC, Phillips RA, Hill JK, Wanless S, Wood AG (2001) Contrasting foraging strategies of gannets Morus bassanus at two North Atlantic colonies: foraging trip duration and foraging area fidelity. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 224:283–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hamer KC, Humphreys EM, Garthe S, Hennicke J, Peters G, Grémillet D, Phillips RA, Harris MP, Wanless S (2007) Annual variation in diets, feeding locations and foraging behaviour of gannets in the North Sea: flexibility, consistency and constraint. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 338:295–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ismar SMH (2010) Foraging and breeding ecology of the Australasian gannet Morus serrator, with applications for rare New Zealand seabirds. PhD thesis, University of Auckland, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  34. Ismar SMH, Daniel C, Stephenson BM, Hauber ME (2010a) Mate replacement entails a fitness cost for a socially monogamous seabird. Naturwissenschaften 97:109–113CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Ismar SMH, Hunter C, Lay K, Ward-Smith T, Wilson RP, Hauber ME (2010b) A virgin flight across the Tasman Sea? Satellite tracking of post-fledging movement in the Australasian Gannet Morus serrator. J Ornithol 151:755–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ismar SMH, Phillips RA, Rayner MJ, Hauber ME (2011) Geolocation tracking of the annual migration of Australasian gannets Morus serrator breeding in New Zealand. Wilson J Ornithol 123:121–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ismar SMH, Daniel C, Igic B, Morrison-Whittle PK, Ballard G, Millar CD, Fidler AE, McGraw KJ, Wakamatsu K, Stephenson BM, Cassey P, Dearborn DC, Hauber ME (2014) Sexual plumage dichromatism in a size monomorphic seabird. Wilson J Ornithol 126:417–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ismar SMH, Raubenheimer D, Bury SJ, Millar CD, Hauber ME (2017) Sex-specific foraging during parental care in a size-monomorphic seabird, the Australasian gannet (Morus serrator). Wilson J Ornithol 129:139–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ito M, Takahashi A, Kokubun N, Kitaysky AS, Watanuki Y (2010) Foraging behavior of incubating and chick-rearing thick-billed murres Uria lomvia. Aquat Biol 8:279–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Iverson SA, Esler D (2006) Site fidelity and the demographic implications of winter movements by a migratory bird, the Harlequin duck Histrionicus histrionicus. J Avian Biol 37:219–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jaeger A, Goutte A, Lecomte VJ, Richard P, Chastel O, Barbraud C, Weimerskirch H, Cherel Y (2014) Age, sex, and breeding status shape a complex foraging pattern in an extremely long-lived seabird. Ecology 95:2324–2333CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Kato A, Watanuki Y, Nishiumi I, Kuroki M, Shaughnessy P, Naito Y (2000) Variation in foraging and parental behavior of King cormorants. Auk 117:718–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Krull C, Ranjard L, Landers T, Ismar SMH, Matthews JL, Hauber ME (2012) Analyses of sex and individual differences in vocalizations of Australasian gannets using a dynamic time warping algorithm. J Acoust Soc Am 132:1189–1198CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Lewis S, Sherratt TN, Hamer KC, Wanless S (2001) Evidence of intra-specific competition for food in a pelagic seabird. Nature 412:816–819CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Lewis S, Benvenuti S, Dall’Antonia L, Griffiths R, Money L, Sherratt TN, Wanless S, Hamer KC (2002) Sex-specific foraging behaviour in a monomorphic seabird. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:1687–1693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lewis S, Schreiber EA, Daunt F, Schenk GA, Orr K, Adams A, Wanless S, Hamer KC (2005) Sex-specific foraging behaviour in tropical boobies: does size matter? Ibis 147:408–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lewis S, Phillips RA, Burthe SJ, Wanless S, Daunt F (2015) Contrasting responses of male and female foraging effort to year-round wind conditions. J Anim Ecol 84:1490–1496CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. Machovsky-Capuska GE, Hauber ME, Dassis M, Libby E, Wikelski MC, Schuckard R, Melville DS, Cook W, Houston M, Raubenheimer D (2014) Foraging behaviour and habitat use of chick-rearing Australasian gannets in New Zealand. J Ornithol 155:379–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Machovsky-Capuska GE, Senior AM, Benn EC, Tait AH, Schuckard R, Stockin KA, Cook W, Ogle M, Barna K, Melville D, Wright B, Purvin C, Raubenheimer D (2016) Sex-specific macronutrient foraging strategies in a highly successful marine predator: the Australasian gannet. Mar Biol 163:75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Matthews JL, Ismar SMH, Hauber ME (2008) Seaweed provisioning behaviour confers thermal benefit for nesting Australasian gannets (Morus serrator). Behaviour 145:1823–1837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mendez L, Cotté C, Prudor A, Weimerskirch H (2016) Variability in foraging behaviour of red-footed boobies nesting on Europa Island. Acta Oecol 72:87–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Monticelli D, Ramos JA, Quartly GD (2007) Effects of annual changes in primary productivity and ocean indices on breeding performance of tropical roseate terns in the western Indian Ocean. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 351:273–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mullers RHE, Tinbergen JM (2009) Parental provisioning behaviour predicts survival of Cape gannet chicks under poor conditions. Ardea 97:89–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nelson B (1978) The Sulidae: gannets and boobies. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  55. Ochi D, Oka N, Watanuki Y (2010) Foraging trip decisions by the streaked shearwater Calonectris leucomelas depend on both parental and chick state. J Ethol 28:313–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ottersen G, Planque B, Belgrano A, Post E, Reid PC, Stenseth NC (2001) Ecological effects of the North Atlantic oscillation. Oecologia 128:1–14CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Patrick SC, Bearhop S, Grémillet D, Lescroël A, Grecian WJ, Bodey TW, Hamer KC, Wakefield E, Le Nuz M, Votier SC (2014) Individual differences in searching behaviour and spatial foraging consistency in a central place marine predator. Oikos 123:33–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pettex E, Lorentsen S-H, Grémillet D, Gimenez O, Barrett RT, Pons J-B, Le Bohec C, Bonadonna F (2012) Multi-scale foraging variability in Northern gannet (Morus bassanus) fuels potential foraging plasticity. Mar Biol 159:2743–2756Google Scholar
  59. Piatt JF, Harding AMA, Shultz M, Speckman SG, van Pelt TI, Drew GS, Kettle AB (2007) Seabirds as indicators of marine food supplies: cairns revisited. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 352:221–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Pichegru L, Ryan PG, Crawford RJM, van der Lingen CD, Gremillet D (2010) Behavioural inertia places a top marine predator at risk from environmental change in the Benguela upwelling system. Mar Biol 157:537–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pinet P, Jaquemet S, Phillips RA, Le Corre M (2012) Sex-specific foraging strategies throughout the breeding season in a tropical, sexually monomorphic small petrel. Anim Behav 83:979–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Quillfeldt P, Michalik A, Veit-Köhler G, Strange IJ, Masello JF (2010) Inter-annual changes in diet and foraging trip lengths in a small pelagic seabird, the thin-billed prion Pachyptila belcheri. Mar Biol 157:2043–2050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Quinn JS (1990) Sexual size dimorphism and parental care patterns in a monomorphic and a dimorphic larid. Auk 107:260–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Quintana F, Wilson R, Dell’Arciprete P, Shepard E, Gómez Laich A (2011) Women from Venus, men from Mars: inter-sex foraging differences in the imperial cormorant Phalacrocorax atriceps a colonial seabird. Oikos 120:350–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. R Core Team (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
  66. 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
  67. Rishworth GM, Tremblay Y, Green DB, Connan M, Pistorius PA (2014) Drivers of time-activity budget variability during breeding in a pelagic seabird. PLoS One 9(12):e116544Google Scholar
  68. Rodríguez DH, Dassis M, de Léon AP, Barreiro C, Farenga M, Bastida RO, Davis RW (2013) Foraging strategies of Southern sea-lion females in the La Plata River Estuary (Argentina–Uruguay). Deep-Sea Res PT II 88–89:120–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Ropert-Coudert Y, Grémillet D, Kato A, Ryan PG, Naito Y, Le Maho Y (2004) A fine-scale time budget of Cape gannets provides insights into the foraging strategies of coastal seabirds. Anim Behav 67:985–992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Seaman DE, Powell RA (1996) An evaluation of the accuracy of kernel density estimators for home range analysis. Ecology 77:2075–2085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Seutin G, White BN, Boag PT (1991) Preservation of avian blood and tissue samples for DNA analyses. Can J Zool 69:82–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Shoji A, Aris-Brosou S, Fayet A, Padget O, Perrins C, Guilford T (2015) Dual foraging and pair coordination during chick provisioning by Manx shearwaters: empirical evidence supported by a simple model. J Exp Biol 218:2116–2123CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  73. Soanes LM, Arnould JPY, Dodd SG, Milligan G, Green JA (2014) Factors affecting the foraging behaviour of the European shag: implications for seabird tracking studies. Mar Biol 161:1335–1348CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  74. Sommerfeld J, Kato A, Ropert-Coudert Y, Garthe S, Hindell MA (2013) The individual counts: within sex differences in foraging strategies are as important as sex-specific differences in masked boobies Sula dactylatra. J Avian Biol 44:531–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Stauss C, Bearhop S, Bodey TW, Garthe S, Gunn C, Grecian WJ, Inger R, Knight ME, Newton J, Patrick SC, Phillips RA, Waggitt JJ, Votier SC (2012) Sex-specific foraging behaviour in Northern gannets Morus bassanus: incidence and implications. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 457:151–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Stenseth NC, Mysterud A, Ottersen G, Hurrell JW, Chan K-S, Lima M (2002) Ecological effects of climate fluctuations. Science 297:1292–1296CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Stephenson BM (2005) Variability in the breeding ecology of Australasian gannets, Morus serrator, at Cape Kidnappers, New Zealand. PhD thesis, Massey University, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  78. Tasker ML, Camphuysen KCJ, Cooper J, Garthe S, Montevecchi WA, Blaber SJM (2000) The impacts of fishing on marine birds. ICES J Mar Sci 57:531–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Thaxter CB, Daunt F, Hamer KC, Watanuki Y, Harris MP, Grémillet D, Peters G, Wanless S (2009) Sex-specific food provisioning in a monomorphic seabird, the common guillemot Uria aalge: nest defence, foraging efficiency or parental effort? J Avian Biol 40:75–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Wakefield ED, Cleasby IR, Bearhop S, Bodey TW, Davies RD, Miller PI, Newton J, Votier SC, Hamer KC (2015) Long-term individual foraging site fidelity—why some gannets don’t change their spots. Ecology 96:3058–3074CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Weimerskirch H (1998) How can a pelagic seabird provision its chick when relying on a distant food resource? Cyclic attendance at the colony, foraging decision and body condition in sooty shearwaters. J Anim Ecol 67:99–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Weimerskirch H, Cherel Y, Cuenot-Chaillet F, Ridoux V (1997) Alternative foraging strategies and resource allocation by male and female wandering albatrosses. Ecology 78:2051–2063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 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
  84. Weimerskirch H, Le Corre M, Ropert-Coudert Y, Kato A, Marsac F (2006) Sex-specific foraging behaviour in a seabird with reversed sexual dimorphism: the red-footed booby. Oecologia 146:681–691CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Weimerskirch H, Le Corre M, Gadenne H, Pinaud D, Kato A, Ropert-Coudert Y, Bost C-A (2009a) Relationship between reversed sexual dimorphism, breeding investment and foraging ecology in a pelagic seabird, the masked booby. Oecologia 161:637–649CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Weimerskirch H, Shaffer SA, Tremblay Y, Costa DP, Gadenne H, Kato A, Ropert-Coudert Y, Sato K, Aurioles D (2009b) Species- and sex-specific differences in foraging zones in blue-footed and brown boobies in the Gulf of California. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 391:267–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Welcker J, Steen H, Harding AMA, Gabrielsen GW (2009) Sex-specific provisioning behaviour in a monomorphic seabird with a bimodal foraging strategy. Ibis 151:502–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Wells MR, Angel LP, Arnould JPY (2016) Habitat-specific foraging strategies in Australasian gannets. Biol Open 5:921–927CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  89. Wodzicki K, Robertson CJR, Thompson HR, Alderton CJT (1984) The distribution and numbers of gannets (Sula serrator) in New Zealand. Notornis 31(232):261Google Scholar
  90. Yamamoto T, Takahashi A, Oka N, Iida T, Katsumata N, Sato K, Trathan PN (2011) Foraging areas of streaked shearwaters in relation to seasonal changes in the marine environment of the Northwestern Pacific: inter-colony and sex-related differences. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 424:191–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Zavalaga CB, Halls JN, Mori GP, Taylor SA, Dell’Omo G (2010) At-sea movement patterns and diving behavior of Peruvian boobies Sula variegata in northern Peru. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 404:259–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Experimental Ecology, Food WebsGEOMAR Helmholtz Center for Ocean Research KielKielGermany
  2. 2.School of Biological SciencesUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  3. 3.Department of Animal Biology, School of Integrative BiologyUniversity of IllinoisUrbana-ChampaignUSA
  4. 4.SIRTRACK LimitedHavelock NorthNew Zealand
  5. 5.Cape SanctuaryHastingsNew Zealand
  6. 6.School of Life and Environmental Sciences, and Charles Perkins Centre, Faculty of Veterinary ScienceUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations