Advertisement

Polar Biology

, Volume 32, Issue 4, pp 593–597 | Cite as

Stomach stones in king penguin chicks

  • David Beaune
  • Céline Le BohecEmail author
  • Fabrice Lucas
  • Michel Gauthier-Clerc
  • Yvon Le Maho
Original Paper

Abstract

Many animals that possess a gizzard swallow stones or sandy grit, supposedly to aid in the mechanical breakdown of food. While this has been well documented in the literature, our study is the first to report the presence of stones in the gizzard of king penguin chicks. We found stones, so called ‘gastroliths’, in the pyloric region of the gizzard, the part of the digestive tract that is specialised for the mechanical breakdown of food. Stones were already present in the gizzard of chicks and, hence, during the first year of the life of king penguins, which is spent on land. Some chicks were found to have more than 130 stones (0.5–22 mm in size) in their gizzard. The gastroliths we found in king penguins are of the same geological origin as rocks present at the colony, which suggests that birds swallowed them there. The functional role of gastroliths in penguin chicks and adults is still unknown. We discuss the potential roles that these gastroliths might play in king penguins (i.e. aid in digestion, buoyancy control during foraging at sea, adaptation to fasting).

Keywords

Gastrolith Grit Seabird Digestion Adaptive behaviour 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Institut Polaire Français-Paul-Emile Victor (IPEV), by the project Zones Ateliers of the Programme Environnement Vie et Société of the CNRS, and by grants from the French Ministry for Foreign and European Affairs-Lavoisier (to C.L.B.). We are grateful to Manfed Enstipp, Jean-Patrice Robin, Sylvie Geiger, Nicolas Hanuise, Matthieu Guillemain and two anonymous referees for constructive comments on the manuscript. This study was approved by an independent Ethics Committee appointed by the Institut Polaire Français-Paul-Emile Victor.

References

  1. Barrat (1976) Quelques aspects de la biologie et de l’écologie du Manchot royal (Aptenodytes patagonicus) des Iles Crozet. Corn Nat Fr Res Antarct 40:9–52Google Scholar
  2. Boswall J, Maciver D (1975) The magellanic penguin Spheniscus magellanicus. The biology of penguins. MacMillan Press, Stonehouse B. Bristol, pp 271–306Google Scholar
  3. Cherel Y (1995) Nutriment reserves storage, energetics, and food consumption during the prebreeding and premoulting foraging periods of king penguins. Polar Biol 15(3):209–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chevallier L (1980) Notice géologique au 1:50000 de l’île de la Possession, îles Crozet. TAAF, LGFSA. pp 16Google Scholar
  5. Clausen A, Pütz K (2003) Winter diet and foraging range of gentoo penguins (Pygoscelis papua) from Kidney Cove, Falkland Islands. Polar Biol 26:32–40Google Scholar
  6. Cooper J (1985) Adélie Penguins breeding in eastern Enderby Land, Antarctica. Emu 85:205–206Google Scholar
  7. Descamps S, Gauthier-Clerc M, Gendner J-P, Le Maho Y (2002) The annual breeding cycle of unbanded king penguins Aptenodytes patagonicus on Possession Island (Crozet). Avian Sci 2:87–98Google Scholar
  8. De Villiers MS, De Bruyn PJN (2004) Stone-swallowing by three species of penguin at sub-Antarctic Marion Island. Mar Ornithol 32:183–184Google Scholar
  9. Figuerola J, Mateo R, Green AJ, Mondain-Monval JY, Le Franc H, Mentaberre G (2005) Grit selection in waterfowl and how it determines exposure to ingested lead shot in Mediterranean wetlands. Env Cons 33:1–9Google Scholar
  10. Godin AJ (1967) Test of grit types in alleviating lead poisoning in mallards. US Fish and Wildlife Service Special Science Report: Wildlife 107Google Scholar
  11. Hocken AG (2005) Necropsy findings in yellow-eyed penguins (Megadyptes antipodes) from Otago, New Zealand. N Z J Zool 32:1–8Google Scholar
  12. Kent S, Seddon J, Robertson G, Weinecke BC (1998) Diet of adélie penguins Pygoscelis adeliae at Hirley Island, East Antarctica, January 1992. Mar Ornithol 26:7–10Google Scholar
  13. Le Bohec C (2007) Life history strategies in long-lived birds: the king penguin. Ph.D. Thesis, Louis Pasteur University, p. 290Google Scholar
  14. Le Bohec C, Gauthier-Clerc M, Le Maho Y (2005) The adaptative significance of crèches in the king penguin. Anim Behav 70:527–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lee DE, Hamman MG, Black JM (2004) Grit-site selection of black brant: particle size or calcium content? Wilson Bull 116:304–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Maddock L (1994) Stone, bone or blubber? Buoyancy control strategies in aquatic tetrapods. In: Maddock L, Bone Q, Rayner JMV (eds) Mechanics and physiology of animal swimming. Cambridge Univ. Press, London, pp 151–161Google Scholar
  17. Rand RW (1960) The biology of guano-producing sea-birds. The distribution, abundance and feeding habits of the Cape penguin, Spheniscus demersus, off the south-western coast of the Cape Province. Invest Rep Sea Fish Res Inst, Cape Town 41: 1–27Google Scholar
  18. Sato K, Naito Y, Kato A, Niizuma Y, Watanuki Y, Charassin JB, Bost C-A, Handrich Y, Le Maho Y (2002) Buoyancy and maximal diving depth in penguins: do they control inhaling air volume? J Exp Biol 205:1189–1197PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Skead DM, Mitchell RJH (1983) Grit ingested by waterfowl in relation to diet. S Af J Wildl Res 13:32–34Google Scholar
  20. Splettstoesser J, Todd FS (1999) Stomach stone from emperor penguins Aptenodytes forsteri colonies in the Weddell Sea. Mar Ornithol 27:97–100Google Scholar
  21. Taylor MA (1993) Stomach Stones for Feeding or Buoyancy? The Occurrence and Function of Gastroliths in Marine Tetrapods. Phil Trans R Soc London 341:163–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Trost RE (1981) Dynamics of grit selection and retention in captive mallards. J Wildl Manag 45:64–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wings O (2007) A review of gastrolith function with implications for fossil vertebrates and a revised classification. Acta Palaeontol Pol 52(1):1–16Google Scholar
  24. Ziswiller V, Farner DS (1972) Digestion and the digestive system. In: Farner DS, King JR, Parkes KC (Eds) Avian biology, vol 2. Academic Press, New York, pp 343–430Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Beaune
    • 1
  • Céline Le Bohec
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Fabrice Lucas
    • 3
  • Michel Gauthier-Clerc
    • 4
  • Yvon Le Maho
    • 1
  1. 1.Département d’Écologie, Physiologie et Éthologie, Institut Pluridisciplinaire Hubert Curien (IPHC)Centre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueStrasbourg Cedex 02France
  2. 2.Department of Biology, Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES)University of OsloBlindernNorway
  3. 3.Ecole et Observatoire des Sciences de la TerreStrasbourgFrance
  4. 4.Centre de Recherche de la Tour du ValatArlesFrance

Personalised recommendations