Polar Biology

, Volume 30, Issue 12, pp 1565–1570 | Cite as

Estimating the relative abundance of emperor penguins at inaccessible colonies using satellite imagery

  • Shannon M. Barber-Meyer
  • Gerald L. Kooyman
  • Paul J. Ponganis
Original Paper

Abstract

Emperor penguin (Aptenodytes forsteri) populations are useful environmental indicators due to the bird’s extreme reliance on sea ice. We used remote sensing technology to estimate relative adult bird abundance at two inaccessible emperor penguin colonies in the Ross Sea, Antarctica. We performed supervised classification of 12 panchromatic satellite images of the seven known Ross Sea colonies. We used regression to predict adult bird counts at the inaccessible colonies by relating the number of pixels classified as “penguin” in the satellite images of the accessible colonies to corresponding known adult bird counts from aerial photographs or ground counts. While our analysis was hampered by excessive guano and shadows, we used satellite imagery to differentiate between relatively small (<3,000 adult birds) and larger colonies (>5,000 adult birds). Remote sensing technology is logistically less intense and less costly than aerial or ground censuses when the objective is to document penguin presence and/or large emperor penguin population changes (e.g., catastrophic changes). Improvements expected soon in the resolution of the satellite images should allow for more accurate abundance estimates.

Keywords

Abundance Antarctica Aptenodytes forsteri Emperor penguin Inaccessible colonies Remote sensing Ross Sea Satellite imagery 

References

  1. Ainley DG, Ballard G, Emslie SD, Fraser WR, Wilson PR, Woehler EJ (2003) Adélie penguins and environmental change. Science 300:429PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barber-Meyer SM, Kooyman GL, Ponganis PP (2007) Trends in western Ross Sea emperor penguin chick abundances and their relationships to climate. Antarct Sci (in press)Google Scholar
  3. Barbraud C, Weimerskirch H (2001) Emperor penguins and climate change. Nature 411:183–186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bargagli R (2005) Antarctic ecosystems: environmental contamination, climate change, and human impact. In: Ecological studies, vol 175. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  5. Burn DM, Cody MB (2005) Use of satellite imagery to estimate walrus abundance at Round Island, Alaska. Poster presentation at The December 2005 society for marine mammalogy annual meeting. San Diego, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  6. Cook RD, Weisberg S (1999) Applied regression including computing and graphics. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Croxall JP, Trathan PN, Murphy EJ (2002) Environmental change and Antarctic seabird populations. Science 297:1510–1514PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Croxall JP, Trathan PN, Murphy EJ (2003) Response to Ainley et al. Adélie penguins and environmental change. Science 300:429–430Google Scholar
  9. Guinet C, Jouventin P, Malacamp J (1995) Satellite remote sensing in monitoring change of seabirds: use of Spot Image in king penguin population increase at the Ile aux Cochons, Crozet Archipelago. Polar Biol 15:511–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kato A, Watanabe K, Naito Y (2004) Population changes of Adélie and emperor penguins along the Prince Olav Coast and on the Riiser-Larsen Peninsula. Polar Biosci 17:117–122Google Scholar
  11. Kooyman GL (1993) Breeding habitats of emperor penguins in the western Ross Sea. Antarct Sci 5:143–148Google Scholar
  12. Kooyman GL, Mullins JL (1990) Ross Sea emperor penguin breeding populations estimated by aerial photography. In: Kerry KR, Hempel G (eds) Antarctic ecosystems: ecological change and conservation. Springer, Berlin, pp 169–176Google Scholar
  13. Kooyman GL, Siniff DB, Stirling I, Bengston JL (2004) Moult habitat, pre- and post-moult diet and post-moult travel of Ross Sea emperor penguins. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 267:281–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kooyman GL, Ainley DG, Ballard G, Ponganis PJ (2007) Effects of giant icebergs on two emperor penguin colonies in the Ross Sea, Antarctica. Antarct Sci 19(1):31–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Murphy EJ, Clarke A, Symon C, Priddle J (1995) Temporal variation in Antarctic sea–ice—analysis of a long-term fast-ice record from the South-Orkney Islands. Deep Sea Res (A Oceanogr Res Pap) 42:1045–1062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Schwaller MR, Benninghoff WS, Olson CE Jr (1984) Prospects for satellite remote sensing of Adélie penguin rookeries. Int J Remote Sens 5(5):849–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Siniff D (1981) Seal population dynamics and ecology. J R Soc NZ 11:317–327Google Scholar
  18. Smith RC, Ainley D, Baker K, Domack E, Emslie S, Fraser B, Kennett J, Leventer A, Mosely-Thompson E, Stammerjohn S, Vernet M (1999) Marine ecosystem sensitivity to climate change. Biosci 49:393–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Vaughan DG, Marshall GJ, Connolley WM, King JC, Mulvaney R (2001) Climate change: devil in the detail. Science 293:1777–1779PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wilson PR, Ainley DG, Nur N, Jacobs SS, Barton KJ, Ballard G, Comiso JC (2001) Adélie penguin population change in the pacific sector of Antarctica: relation to sea-ice extent and the Antarctic Circumpolar Current. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 213:301–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shannon M. Barber-Meyer
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Gerald L. Kooyman
    • 1
  • Paul J. Ponganis
    • 1
  1. 1.Scripps Institution of OceanographyUniversity of CaliforniaSan DiegoUSA
  2. 2.Scholander HallCenter for Marine Biotechnology and BiomedicineLa JollaUSA
  3. 3.Mexican Wolf Reintroduction Project Interagency Field OfficeAlpineUSA

Personalised recommendations