European Journal of Wildlife Research

, Volume 58, Issue 2, pp 441–450 | Cite as

Spatial contraction in a large gull colony in relation to the position of arctic fox dens

Original Paper
  • 156 Downloads

Abstract

Many species of colonial ground-nesting birds are known to be sensitive to predation by terrestrial predators. The response of prey under the pressure of predation can either be direct (depletion of prey) or indirect due to prey avoiding the predator. We studied the recolonization of arctic foxes into a large and growing breeding colony of lesser black-backed gulls. The gull colony reached the size of 20,000 pairs during the period of no foxes. The number of breeding gulls continued to increase after the colonization of foxes and reached a maximum of 40,000 pairs about 15 years later. During the same time period, the spatial coverage of the gull colony shrunk from 31.4 down to 18.6 km2, and the change in distribution was closely linked with position of fox dens, which ranged in number from one to three annually. In 2005, the number of breeding gulls decreased slightly with an ongoing shrinkage in spatial coverage. Food analyses from fox scats and stomachs showed that birds of the order Charadriiformes, particularly gulls, were the key prey item. Survival rates of gull nests were higher in the middle of the colony than at the colony edge close to a fox den. The colony area lost could be explained solely by the number of eggs removed by foxes but is unlikely, e.g., due to reclutching. We suggest that intraspecific predation contributes additionally to the effects of direct fox predation although to an unknown degree.

Keywords

Biological control Colonial breeding Larus fuscus Predation Vulpes lagopus 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study is dedicated to my supervisor, co-author, and a friend Prof. Pall Hersteinsson who sadly passed away during the reviewing process of this paper. Pall was enthusiastic in studying the ecology of the arctic fox and was the first to encourage a study on the system between foxes and gulls presented here. The study was partially financed by the Icelandic Civil Aviation Authority and Keflavik International Airport. Best thanks to Gordon Edie, Halfdan H. Helgason, Elinborg S. Palsdottir, Eva Pier, and Arnor T. Sigfusson for help counting the gull colony and to Halfdan for drawing and analyzing distribution maps in ArcMap. Fox hunters provided specimens for the study, and sincere thanks to Pall Þórðarson, Sigurður Kr. Eiríksson, and Guðmundur Óskarsson for their contribution. Agnar Ingolfsson and Olafur K. Nielsen provided valuable comments throughout the project, and two anonymous reviewers made comments that improved the manuscript.

References

  1. Allen A, Melfi RC (1985) Improvements in techniques for ageing mammals by dental cementum annuli. Proc Iowa Acad Sci 92:100–102Google Scholar
  2. Bailey EP (1993) Introduction of foxes to Alaskan islands -history, effects on avifauna, and eradication. US Dept Interior Fish and Wildl Serv Resource Publication 193:1–55Google Scholar
  3. Blackburn TM, Cassey P, Duncan RP, Evans KL, Gaston KJ (2004) Avian extinction and mammalian introductions on oceanic islands. Science 24:1955–1958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Caro T (2005) Antipredator defences in birds and mammals. The University of Chicago Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Cote IM, Sutherland WJ (1997) The Effectiveness of removing predators to protect bird populations. Conserv Biol 11:395–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coulson JC (2002) Colonial breeding in seabirds. In: Schreiber EA, Burger J (eds) The biology of marine birds. CRC Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Ellis JC, Shulman MJ, Jessop H, Suomala R, Morris SR, Seng V, Wagner M, Mach K (2007) Impact of raccoons on breeding success in large colonies of great black-backed gulls and herring gulls. Waterbirds 30:375–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Emlen JT, Miller DE, Evans RM, Thompson DH (1966) Predator-induced parental neglect in a ring-billed gull colony. Auk 83:677–679Google Scholar
  9. Fletcher K, Aebischer NJ, Baines D, Foster R, Hoodless AN (2010) Changes in breeding success and abundance of ground-nesting moorland birds in relation to the experimental deployment of legal predator control. J Appl Ecol 25:487–503Google Scholar
  10. Frafjord K (1993) Energy intake of captive adult sized arctic foxes Alopex lagopus in Svalbard, in relation to body weight, climate, and activity. Z Saugetierkd 58:266–274Google Scholar
  11. Fuglei E, Øritsland NA (1999) Seasonal trends in body mass, food intake and resting metabolic rate, and induction of metabolic depression in arctic foxes (Alopex lagopus) at Svalbard. J Comp Physiol B Biochem Syst Environ Physiol 169:361–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gudmundsson F (1955) Icelandic Birds XII. The Lesser Blackback (Larus fuscus). Natturufraedingurinn 25:215–226 [in Icelandic with an English summary]Google Scholar
  13. Grue J, Jensen B (1976) Annual cementum structures in canine teeth in Arctic foxes (Alopex lagopus L.) from Greenland and Denmark. Dan Rev Game Biol 10:1–12Google Scholar
  14. Götmark F, Andersson M (1984) Colonial breeding reduces nest predation in the common gull Larus canus. Anim Behav 32:485–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hallgrimsson GT, Valdimarsson SK, Hersteinsson P (2005) Lesser Black-backed Gulls breeding in Lupin fields. Natturufraedingurinn 73:103–105 [in Icelandic with an English summary]Google Scholar
  16. Harris MP (1964) Aspects on the breeding biology of the gulls, Larus argentatus, L. fuscus and L. marinus. Ibis 106:432–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hersteinsson P (1992) Demography of the arctic fox (Alopex lagopus) population in Iceland. In: McCullough DR, Barrett RH (eds) Wildlife 2001: Populations. Elsevier, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Hersteinsson P, Nyström V, Johannsson JH, Gudjonsdottir B, Hallsdottir M (2007) The oldest known remains of Arctic foxes in Iceland. Natturufraedingurinn 76:13–21 [in Icelandic with an English summary]Google Scholar
  19. Hersteinsson P, Sigfusson AT, Bjornsson TT (1990) Population size of Lesser Black-backed Gulls and culling experiments in SW Iceland in 1990. Wildlife Management Institute (Iceland), Report Series No. 1 [in Icelandic]Google Scholar
  20. Ingolfsson A, Ottosson JG (1975) Rannsóknir á umferð fugla við Keflavíkurflugvöll. Unpublished report for the Civil Aviation Authority Keflavik International Airport, University of Iceland [in Icelandic]Google Scholar
  21. Krebs CJ (1989) Ecological Methodology. HarperCollins, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Lima SL (1998) Stress and decision-making under the risk of predation: recent developments from behavioural reproductive and ecological perspectives. Adv Stud Behav 27:215–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jackson DB (2001) Experimental removal of introduced hedgehogs improves wader nest success in the Western Isles, Scotland. J Appl Ecol 38:802–812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marcström V, Kenward RE, Engren E (1988) The impact of predation on boreal tetraonids during vole cycles: an experimental study. J Anim Ecol 57:859–872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Martin TE (1996) Fitness costs of resource overlap among coexisting bird species. Nature 380:338–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mayfield HF (1961) Nesting success calculated from exposure. Wilson B 73:255–261Google Scholar
  27. Mayfield HF (1975) Suggestions for calculating nest success. Wilson B 87:456–466Google Scholar
  28. Meathrel CE, Ryder JP, Termaat BM (1987) Size and composition of herring gull eggs: Relationship to position in the laying sequence and the body condition of females. Colon Waterbird 10:55–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Meckstroth AM, Miles AK (2005) Predator removal and nesting waterbird success at San Francisco Bay, California. Waterbirds 28:250–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nagy KA, Girard IA, Brown TK (1999) Energetics of free-ranging mammals, reptiles and, birds. Annu Rev Nutr 19:247–277PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Newton I (1998) Population limitation in birds. Academic press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  32. Norrdahl K, Korpimäki E (1998) Fear in farmlands: how much does predator avoidance affect bird community structure? J Avian Biol 29:79–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ormerod SJ (2002) Applied issues with predators and predation: editor’s introduction. J Appl Ecol 39:181–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Parsons J (1976) Factors determining the number and size of eggs laid by the herring gull. Condor 78:481–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Petersen A (1998) Islenskir fuglar. Vaka Helgafell, ReykjavikGoogle Scholar
  36. Ruiz-Olmo J, Blanch F, Vidal F (2003) Relationships between the red fox and waterbirds in the Ebro Delta Natural Park, N.E. Spain. Waterbirds 26:217–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Samelius G, Alisauskas RT (2000) Foraging pattern of arctic foxes at a large arctic goose colony. Arctic 53:279–288Google Scholar
  38. Skarphedinsson KH, Petursson G, Hilmarsson, JO (1994) Atlas of breeding birds in southwestern Iceland: a survey 1987–1992. Icelandic Institute of Natural History series report no. 25. [in Icelandic with an English summary]Google Scholar
  39. Southern WE, Patton SR, Southern LK, Hanners LA (1985) Effects of nine years of fox predation on two species of breeding gulls. Auk 102:827–833Google Scholar
  40. Suhonen J (1993) Predation risk influences the use of foraging sites by tits. Ecology 74:1197–1203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Suhonen J, Norrdahl K, Korpimäki E (1994) Avian predation risk modifies breeding bird community on a farmland area. Ecology 75:1626–1634CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of BiologyUniversity of Iceland, ASKJAReykjavikIceland
  2. 2.Reykjanes Environmental Research InstituteSandgerdiIceland

Personalised recommendations