GPS tracking during parental care does not affect early offspring development in lesser black-backed gulls
Tracking devices are increasingly used to monitor individual movement patterns continuously and in high resolution. However, carrying a device could potentially compromise an individual’s physiology or behaviour, thereby making tracking data unreliable for detailed behavioural measurements. To this end, we assessed the possible consequences of the application of GPS devices on offspring development in an opportunistic seabird species, the lesser black-backed gull (Larus fuscus), by comparing the growth and survival of nestlings of which none, one or both parents were equipped with a GPS device. We found that the developmental trajectories of the nestlings were not affected, and there were no differences in skeletal size and body mass at the fledging stage. A lack of negative effects on offspring development strongly suggests that the parental behaviour, and thus likely the foraging behaviour, did not differ between tagged and non-tagged individuals. The evidence that GPS data can be used to reliably study parental care, as well as other aspects of the bird’s behaviour, opens up new possibilities to study behavioural and evolutionary ecological questions in ever-increasing resolution.
We are grateful to LifeWatch and NaturaPeople for funding of GPS devices and infrastructure; Fransisco Hernandes and Robin Houthoofdt (VLIZ) for logistical support; Peter Desmet (INBO), Bart Aelterman (INBO), Fransisco Hernandez (VLIZ) and Willem Bouten (UvABiTS) for data support; ANB, Hilbran Verstraete, Nicolas Vanermen, Marc Van de Walle, Wouter Courtens, Aurélie Dailledouze and Jorn Suijkerbuijk for their support in the field. We thank the authorities of Zeebrugge Port (MBZ) and Zeeland Seaports for their permission to access the ports, and PSA, APM, COVRA, EPZ, Pacorini and Van Citters Beheer BV for access to their sites. We are also grateful to the reviewers for their constructive comments on a previous version of the manuscript. This study was funded by the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO ID: 11ZI716N and G0E1614N).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Research involving animals
All procedures performed in this study have been approved by the University of Antwerp ethical committee (file number 2013-73) and the University of Groningen ethical committee (file number 6986/6986A).
- Ackerman JT, Adams J, Takekawa JY, Carter HR, Whitworth DL, Newman SH, Golighty RT, Orthmeyer DL (2004) Effects of radiotransmitters on the reproductive performance of Cassin’s auklets. Wildl Soc Bull 32:1229–1241. https://doi.org/10.2193/0091-7648(2004)032[1229:eorotr]2.0.co;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bannasch R, Wilson RP, Culik B (1994) Hydrodynamic aspects of design and attachment of a back-mounted device in penguins. J Exp Biol 194:83–96Google Scholar
- Bodey TW, Cleasby IR, Bell F, Parr N, Schultz A, Votier SC, Bearhop S (2017) A phylogenetically controlled meta-analysis of biologging device effects on birds: deleterious effects and a call for more standardized reporting of study data. Methods Ecol Evol 2017:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12934 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 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 497:273–284. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps10586 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Costa DP, Breed GA, Robinson PW (2012) New insights into pelagic migrations: implications for ecology and conservation. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 43:73–96. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102710-145045 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Development Core Team R (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Austria, ViennaGoogle Scholar
- Drent R, Daan S (1980) The prudent parent: energetic adjustments in avian breeding. Ardea 68:225–252Google Scholar
- Griffiths R (1992) Sex-biased mortality in the lesser black-backed gull Larus fuscus during the nestling stage. Ibis 134:237–244. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.1992.tb03805.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hernández F, Arredondo JA, Hernandez F, Hewitt DG, DeMaso SJ, Bingham RL (2004) Effects of radiotransmitters on body mass, feed consumption, and energy expenditure of northern bobwhites. Wildl Soc Bull 32:394–400. https://doi.org/10.2193/0091-7648(2004)32[394:EOROBM]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Klaassen R, Reneerkens J (2014) Bird tracking. Limosa 87:58–73Google Scholar
- Phillips RA, Xavier JC, Croxall JP (2003) Effects of satellite transmitters on albatrosses and petrels. Auk 120:1082–1090. https://doi.org/10.1642/0004-8038(2003)120[1082:EOSTOA]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D, R Core Team (2018) nlme: Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1-137. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=nlme. Accessed 12 Mar 2018
- Sergio F, Tavecchia G, Tanferna A, López Jiménez L, Blas J, De Stephanis R, Marchant TA, Kumar N, Hiraldo F (2015) No effect of satellite tagging on survival, recruitment, longevity, productivity and social dominance of a raptor, and the provisioning and condition of its offspring. J Appl Ecol 52:1665–1675. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12520 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Shaffer SA, Cockerham S, Warzybok P, Bradley RW, Jahncke J, Clatterbuck CA, Lucia M, Jelincic JA, Cassell AL, Kelsey EC, Adams J (2017) Population-level plasticity in foraging behavior of western gulls (Larus occidentalis). Mov Ecol 5:27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40462-017-0118-9 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Stienen EWM, Desmet P, Aelterman B, Courtens W, Feys S, Vanermen N, Verstraete H, Van de Walle M, Deneudt K, Hernandez F, Houthoofdt R, Vanhoorne B, Bouten W, Buijs R-J, Kavelaars MM, Müller W, Herman D, Matheve H, Sotillo A, Lens L (2016) GPS tracking data of lesser black-backed gulls and herring gulls breeding at the southern North Sea coast. Zookeys 555:115–124. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.555.6173 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thaxter CB, Ross-Smith VH, Clark JA, Clark NA, Conway GJ, Marsh M, Leat EHK, Burton NHK (2014) A trial of three harness attachment methods and their suitability for long-term use on lesser black-backed gulls and Great skuas. Ringing Migr 29:65–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/03078698.2014.995546 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thaxter CB, Ross-Smith VH, Bouten W, Clark NA, Conway GJ, Rehfisch MM, Burton NHK (2015) Seabird–wind farm interactions during the breeding season vary within and between years: A case study of lesser black-backed gull Larus fuscus in the UK. Biol Conserv 186:347–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.03.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thaxter CB, Ross-Smith VH, Clark JA, Clark NA, Conway GJ, Masden EA, Wade HM, Leat EHK, Gear SC, Marsh M, Booth C, Furness RW, Votier SC, Burton NHK (2016) Contrasting effects of GPS device and harness attachment on adult survival of lesser black-backed gulls Larus fuscus and Great skuas Stercorarius skua. Ibis 158:279–290. https://doi.org/10.1111/ibi.12340 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Vandenabeele SP, Wilson R, Grogan A (2011) Tags on seabirds; how seriously are we considering instrument-induced behaviors? Anim Welf 20:559–571Google Scholar