Polar Biology

, Volume 35, Issue 11, pp 1753–1758

Use of Deschampsia antarctica for nest building by the kelp gull in the Argentine Islands area (maritime Antarctica) and its possible role in plant dispersal

  • I. Parnikoza
  • I. Dykyy
  • V. Ivanets
  • I. Kozeretska
  • V. Kunakh
  • A. Rozhok
  • R. Ochyra
  • P. Convey
Short Note

Abstract

During the last 50 years, the western coast of the Antarctic Peninsula and adjacent archipelagos, also known as the maritime Antarctic, has experienced notable climate warming. As a result, expansion of the local distributions of the two native species of vascular plants, Deschampsia antarctica Desv. and Colobanthus quitensis (Kunth.) Bartl., over previously unoccupied ground has been noted. Birds have been suggested to be partially responsible for this spread. The focus of the present study was to document the use of vascular plants in nest building by the kelp gull (Larusdominicanus) in the Argentine Islands region. During the 2009/2010 season, samples from kelp gull nests were collected and analyzed. Besides nests, material lost by birds during transfer was also studied. We demonstrate that, in the Argentine Islands region, Deschampsia antarctica and some bryophytes contribute the majority of nest building material for the kelp gull. Other materials, including lichens, gull feathers, and limpet shells, are used less frequently. The plants can reestablish upon transfer via vegetative or generative means. It thus seems that the kelp gull may potentially serve as a dispersal agent for Deschampsia antarctica.

Keywords

Deschampsia antarctica Maritime Antarctic Nesting material Grass Moss Plant colonisation 

References

  1. Convey P, Bindschadler RA, di Prisco G, Fahrbach E, Gutt J, Hodgson DA, Mayewski P, Summerhayes CP, Turner J (2009) Antarctic climate change and the environment. Antarctic Sci 21:541–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. D’Agostino RB, Belanger A, D’Agostino RB Jr (1990) A suggestion for using powerful and informative tests of normality. Am Stat 44:316–321Google Scholar
  3. Fowbert JA, Lewis Smith RI (1994) Rapid population increases in native vascular plants in the Argentine Islands, Antarctic Peninsula. Arctic Alpine Res 3:290–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Furness RW (1996) Family Stercorariidae Skuas. In: Handbook of the birds of the world. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, pp 556–571Google Scholar
  5. Gianoli E, Inostoza P, Zuniga-Feest A, Reyes-Diaz M, Cavieres LA, Bravo LA, Corcuera LJ (2004) Ecotypic differentiation in morphology and cold resistance in populations of Colobanthus quitensis (Caryophyllaceae) from Andes of Central Chile and the Maritime Antarctic. AAAR 364:484–489Google Scholar
  6. Hughes K, Ott S, Bölter M, Convey P (2006) Colonisation processes. Trends in Antarctic terrestrial and limnetic ecosystems. In: Bergstrom DM, Convey P, Huiskes A (eds) Antarctica as a global indicator. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 35–54Google Scholar
  7. Longton RE (1979) Vegetation ecology and classification in the Antarctic Zone. Can J Bot 57:2264–2278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ochyra R, Smith R, Bednarek-Ochyra H (2008) Illustrated moss flora of Antarctica. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  9. Øvstedal DO, Smith RIL (2001) Lichens of Antarctica and South Georgia: a guide to their identification. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Parnikoza I, Inozemtseva DM, Tyschenko OV, Mustafa O, Kozeretska IA (2008a) Antarctic herb tundra colonization zones in the context of ecological gradient of glacial retreat. Ukrainian Bot J 65:504–511Google Scholar
  11. Parnikoza I, Kozeretska O, Kozeretska I (2008b) Is a translocation of indigenous plant material successful in the Maritime Antarctic? Polarforschung 78:25–27Google Scholar
  12. Parnikoza I, Convey P, Dykyy I, Trokhymets V, Milinevsky G, Inozemtseva D, Kozeretska I (2009a) Current status of the Antarctic herb tundra formation in the central Argentine Islands. Global Change Biol 15:1685–1693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Parnikoza I, Trokhymets V, Smykla J, Kunakh V, Kozeretska I (2009b) Comparative study on utilization of vascular plants by Antarctic birds. Electronic Conference on Interactions between Antarctic Life and Environmental Factors, October 22–23, pp 43–47Google Scholar
  14. Peklo AM (2007) The birds of Argentine Islands and Petermann Island. Mineral Publishers, Kryvyi RihGoogle Scholar
  15. Rosner B (1983) Percentage points for a generalized ESD many-outlier procedure. Technometrics 25:165–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Smith RIL (1994) Vascular plants as bioindicators of regional warming in Antarctica. Oecologia 88:322–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Smith RIL, Corner RWM (1973) Vegetation of the Arthur Harbour–Argentine Islands region of the Antarctic Peninsula. Br Antarct Surv Bull 33–34:89–122Google Scholar
  18. Turner J, Colwell SR, Marshall GJ, Lachlan-Cope TA, Carleton AM, Jones PD, Lagun V, Reid PA, Iagovkina S (2005) Antarctic climate change during the last 50 years. Int J Climatol 25:279–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • I. Parnikoza
    • 1
  • I. Dykyy
    • 2
  • V. Ivanets
    • 3
  • I. Kozeretska
    • 4
  • V. Kunakh
    • 1
  • A. Rozhok
    • 4
  • R. Ochyra
    • 5
  • P. Convey
    • 6
  1. 1.Institute of Molecular Biology and Genetics of NAS of UkraineKyivUkraine
  2. 2.Ivan Franko National University of LvivLvivUkraine
  3. 3.National University of Kyiv-Mohyla AcademyKyiv-70Ukraine
  4. 4.Taras Shevchenko National University of KyivKyivUkraine
  5. 5.Institute of BotanyPolish Academy of SciencesKrakówPoland
  6. 6.British Antarctic SurveyCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations