Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 164, Issue 1, pp 277–286 | Cite as

Pre-laying climatic cues can time reproduction to optimally match offspring hatching and ice conditions in an Arctic marine bird

  • Oliver P. Love
  • H. Grant Gilchrist
  • Sébastien Descamps
  • Christina A. D. Semeniuk
  • Joël Bêty
Global change ecology - Original Paper

Abstract

Individuals breeding in seasonal environments are under strong selection to time reproduction to match offspring demand and the quality of the post-natal environment. Timing requires both the ability to accurately interpret the appropriate environmental cues, and the flexibility to respond to inter-annual variation in these cues. Determining which cues are linked to reproductive timing, what these cues are predicting and understanding the fitness consequences of variation in timing, is therefore of paramount interest to evolutionary and applied ecologists, especially in the face of global climate change. We investigated inter-annual relationships between climatic variation and the timing of reproduction in Canada’s largest breeding population of Arctic common eiders (Somateria mollissima) in East Bay, Nunavut. Warmer spring temperatures predicted both earlier mean annual laying dates and the earlier ice-free conditions required by ducklings for post-natal growth. Warmer springs had higher variation in this temperature cue, and the population laying distribution became increasingly positively-skewed in warmer summers, potentially indicating that more low-quality females had the opportunity to commence laying in warmer years. Females that timed laying to match duckling hatching just prior to fully ice-free conditions obtained the highest duckling survival probability. Inter-annual data on repeated breeding attempts revealed that the individuals examined show a similar degree of laying flexibility in response to climatic variation; however, there was significant individual variation in the absolute timing of laying within an average year. This work sheds light on how reproductive timing is related to and influenced by variation in local climate and provides vital information on how climate-related variation in reproductive timing influence a fitness measure in an Arctic species. Results are especially relevant to future work in polar environments given that global climatic changes are predicted to be most intense at high latitudes.

Keywords

Timing of breeding Temperature cue Climatic variability Offspring survival Common eider (Somateria mollissima

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by grants and logistical support from the Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, Polar Continental Shelf Project, Nunavut Research Trust, Sea Duck Joint Venture, Northern Studies Trust, Fonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies, Canadian Network of Centres of Excellence ArcticNet, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC). O.P.L. and S.D. were supported by NSERC post-doctoral fellowships. We wish to thank Maureen Kay for her help at different stages of the eider study, the East Bay eider team for help in data collection, and I. Butler and R. Kelly specifically for help in coordinating and collecting field data. We would also like to thank T.D. Williams and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

References

  1. Allard KA, Breton AR, Gilchrist HG, Diamond AW (2006) Adult survival of herring gulls breeding in the Canadian Arctic. Waterbirds 29:163–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnold TW, Rohwer FC (1991) Do egg formation costs limit clutch size in waterfowl? a sceptical view. Condor 93:1032–1038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bêty J, Gauthier G, Giroux J-F (2003) Body condition, migration, and timing of reproduction in snow geese: a test of the condition-dependent model of optimal clutch-size. Am Nat 162:110–121CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Both C, Bouwhuis S, Lessells CM, Visser ME (2006) Climate change and population declines in a long-distance migratory bird. Nature 441:81–83CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bottita G, Nol E, Gilchrist HG (2003) Effects of experimental manipulation on body condition and incubation behaviour among common eiders: consequences for reproductive success. Waterbirds 26:100–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brommer JE, Pietiäinen H, Kolunen H (2003) Natural selection on individual clutch size-laying date trends in the Ural owl. Evol Ecol Res 5:229–237Google Scholar
  7. Brommer JE, Rattiste K, Wilson AJ (2008) Exploring plasticity in the wild: laying date–temperature reaction norms in the common gull Larus canus. Proc R Soc Lond B 275:687–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bustnes JO, Erikstad KE (1991) The role of failed nesters and brood abandoning females in the creching system of the common eider Somateria mollissima. Ornis Scand 22:335–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Charmantier A, McCleery RH, Cole LR, Perrins C, Kruuk LEB, Sheldon BC (2008) Adaptive phenotypic plasticity in response to climate change in a wild bird population. Science 320:800–803CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Christensen TK (1999) Effects of cohort and individual variation in duckling body condition on survival and recruitment in the common eider Somateria mollissima. J Avian Biol 30:302–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. D’Alba L, Monaghan P, Nager RG (2010) Advances in laying date and increasing population size suggest positive responses to climate change in common eiders Somateria mollissima in Iceland. Ibis 152:19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Descamps S, Gilchrist HG, Bêty J, Buttler EI, Forbes MR (2009) Costs of reproduction in a long-lived bird: large clutch size is associated with low survival in the presence of a highly virulent disease. Biol Lett 5:278–281PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Dickey MH, Gauthier G, Cadieux M-C (2008) Climatic effects on the breeding phenology and reproductive success of an Arctic-nesting goose species. Glob Chang Biol 14:1973–1985CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dunn, P (2004) Breeding dates and reproductive performance. In: Møller A, Fiedler W, Berthold P (eds) Birds and climate change. Advances in ecological research, vol 35. Elsevier Academic, London, pp 69–87Google Scholar
  15. Erikstad KE, Bustnes JO, Moum T (1993) Clutch-size determination in precocial birds: a study of the common eider. Auk 110:623–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Findlay CS, Cooke F (1982) Synchrony in the lesser snow goose (Anser caerulescens caerulescens) II: the adaptive value of reproductive synchrony. Evolution 36:786–799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Garant D, Kruuk LEB, McCleery RH, Sheldon BC (2007) The effects of environmental heterogeneity on multivariate selection on reproductive traits in female great tits. Evolution 61:1546–1559CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Gaston AJ, Gilchrist HG, Hipfner JM (2005a) Climate change, ice conditions and reproduction in an Arctic nesting marine bird, Brunnich’s guillemot (Uria lomvia). J Anim Ecol 74:832–841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gaston AJ, Gilchrist HG, Mallory ML (2005b) Variation in ice conditions has strong effects on the breeding of marine birds at Prince Leopold Island, Nunavut. Ecography 28:331–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gaston AJ, Gilchrist HG, Mallory M, Smith PA (2009) Changes in seasonal events, peak food availability, and consequent breeding adjustment in a marine bird: a case of progressive mismatching. Condor 111:111–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gauthier G, Bêty J, Hobson K (2003) Are greater snow geese capital breeders? new evidence from a stable isotope model. Ecology 84:3250–3264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goudie IR, Robertson GJ, Reed A (2000) Common eider (Somateria mollissima). In: Poole A et al, (eds) The birds of North America, no. 546. The birds of North America, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  23. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) Fourth assessment report (AR4) of the IPCC (2007) on climate change part I—the physical science basis. IPCC, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  24. Jónsson JE, Gardarsson A, Gill JA, Petersen A, Gunnarsson TG (2009) Seasonal weather effects on the common eider, a subarctic capital breeder, in Iceland over 55 years. Clim Res 38:237–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lehikoinen A, Kilpi M, Öst M (2006) Winter climate affects subsequent breeding success of common eiders. Glob Chang Biol 12:1355–1365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lepage D, Gauthier G, Menu S (2000) Reproductive consequences of egg-laying decisions in snow geese. J Anim Ecol 69:414–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McKinnon L, Gilchrist HG, Scribner KT (2006) Genetic evidence for kin-based female social structure in common eiders (Somateria mollissima). Behav Ecol 17:614–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nussey DH, Postma E, Gienapp P, Visser ME (2005) Selection on heritable phenotypic plasticity in a wild bird population. Science 310:304–306CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Öst M, Smith BD, Kilpi M (2008) Social and maternal factors affecting duckling survival in eiders Somateria mollissima. J An Ecol 77:315–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Perrins CM (1970) The timing of birds’ breeding seasons. Ibis 112:242–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pethon P (1967) Food and feeding habits of the common eider (Somateria mollissima). Nytt Mag Zool 15:97–111Google Scholar
  32. Pettifor RA, Perrins CM, McCleery RH (1988) Individual optimization of clutch size in great tit. Nature 336:160–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Post E et al (2009) Ecological dynamics across the Arctic associated with recent climate change. Science 325:1355–1358CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Réale D, McAdam AG, Boutin S, Berteaux D (2003) Genetic and plastic responses of a northern mammal to climate change. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:591–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Reed ET, Gauthier G, Giroux J-F (2004) Effects of spring conditions on breeding propensity of greater snow goose females. Anim Biodivers Conserv 27:35–46Google Scholar
  36. Reed TE, Wanless S, Harris MP, Frederiksen M, Kruuk LEB, Cunningham E (2006) Responding to environmental change: plastic responses vary little in a synchronous breeder. Proc R Soc Lond B 273:2713–2719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Reed TE, Warzybok P, Wilson AJ, Bradley RW, Wanless S, Sydeman WJ (2009) Timing is everything: flexible phenology and shifting selection in a colonial seabird. J Anim Ecol 78:376–387CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Robertson GJ (1995) Annual variation in common eider egg size: effects of temperature, clutch size, date, and laying sequence. Can J Zool 73:1579–1587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rönkä MTH, Saari CLV, Lehikoinen EA, Suomela J, Häkkilä K (2005) Environmental changes and population trends of breeding waterfowl in northern Baltic Sea. Ann Zool Fenn 42:587–602Google Scholar
  40. Sénéchal E (2009) Phénologie de la reproduction et allocation des ressources dans les œufs chez un reproducteur sur épargne, l’eider à duvet (Somateria mollissima) nichant en arctique. MSc Thesis, Université du Québec à RimouskiGoogle Scholar
  41. Stearns SC (1992) The evolution of life histories. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  42. Sutherland WJ (1996) From individual behaviour to population ecology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  43. Swennen C (1990) Dispersal and migratory movements of eiders Somateria mollissima breeding in the Netherlands. Ornis Scand 21:17–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tiedemann R, Von Kistowski KG, Noer H (1999) On sex-specific dispersal and mating tactics in the common eider Somateria mollissima as inferred from the genetic structure of breeding colonies. Behaviour 136:1145–1155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Visser ME (2008) Keeping up with a warming world; assessing the rate of adaptation to climate change. Proc R Soc Lond B 275:649–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Visser ME, Holleman LJM, Caro SP (2009) Temperature has a causal effect on avian timing of reproduction. Proc R Soc Lond B (in press)Google Scholar
  47. Wakeley JS, Mendall HL (1976) Migrational homing and survival of adult female eiders in Maine. J Wildl Manage 40:15–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zar JH (2009) Biostatistical analysis, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Oliver P. Love
    • 1
    • 2
  • H. Grant Gilchrist
    • 3
  • Sébastien Descamps
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Christina A. D. Semeniuk
    • 5
  • Joël Bêty
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of WindsorWindsorCanada
  2. 2.Département de Biologie and Centre d’études nordiquesUniversité du Québec à RimouskiRimouskiCanada
  3. 3.National Wildlife Research Centre, Environment CanadaOttawaCanada
  4. 4.Department of BiologyCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada
  5. 5.Department of Geomatics EngineeringUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations