Where to Forage in the Absence of Sea Ice? Bathymetry As a Key Factor for an Arctic Seabird

Type Article
Date 2016-07
Language English
Author(s) Amelineau FrancoiseORCID1, Gremillet DavidORCID1, 2, Bonnet Delphine3, Le Bot Tangi1, Fort Jerme4, 5
Affiliation(s) 1 : Univ Montpellier 3, Univ Montpellier, EPHE, CNRS,CEFE UMR 5175, Montpellier, France.
2 : Univ Cape Town, DST NRF Ctr Excellence, Percy FitzPatrick Inst, Rondebosch, South Africa.
3 : Univ Montpellier, Lab MARBEC, Montpellier, France.
4 : Aarhus Univ, Dept Biosci, Roskilde, Denmark.
5 : Univ La Rochelle, CNRS, LIENSs, UMR 7266, La Rochelle, France.
Source Plos One (1932-6203) (Public Library Science), 2016-07 , Vol. 11 , N. 7 , P. e0157764. (19p.)
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0157764
WOS© Times Cited 40

The earth is warming at an alarming rate, especially in the Arctic, where a marked decline in sea ice cover may have far-ranging consequences for endemic species. Little auks, endemic Arctic seabirds, are key bioindicators as they forage in the marginal ice zone and feed preferentially on lipid-rich Arctic copepods and ice-associated amphipods sensitive to the consequences of global warming. We tested how little auks cope with an ice-free foraging environment during the breeding season. To this end, we took advantage of natural variation in sea ice concentration along the east coast of Greenland. We compared foraging and diving behaviour, chick diet and growth and adult body condition between two years, in the presence versus nearby absence of sea ice in the vicinity of their breeding site. Moreover, we sampled zooplankton at sea when sea ice was absent to evaluate prey location and little auk dietary preferences. Little auks foraged in the same areas both years, irrespective of sea ice presence/concentration, and targeted the shelf break and the continental shelf. We confirmed that breeding little auks showed a clear preference for larger copepod species to feed their chick, but caught smaller copepods and nearly no ice-associated amphipod when sea ice was absent. Nevertheless, these dietary changes had no impact on chick growth and adult body condition. Our findings demonstrate the importance of bathymetry for profitable little auk foraging, whatever the sea-ice conditions. Our investigations, along with recent studies, also confirm more flexibility than previously predicted for this key species in a warming Arctic.

Full Text
File Pages Size Access
Publisher's official version 19 1 MB Open access
S1 Fig. GPS tracks of 3 little auks in 2011 and sea ice extent. 1 175 KB Open access
S2 Fig. Chick Growth curves for 2012 (black, n = 24 chicks) and 2014 (red, n = 29 chicks). 1 107 KB Open access
S3 Fig. Adult body condition index (mean±SE) in 2012 (black, n = 65) and 2014 (red, n = 120) calculated following [42]. 1 101 KB Open access
S1 Table. Model selection using Akaike’s information criterion (AIC) to test the effects of age and year on chick body mass (51 chicks, 256 observations). 1 197 KB Open access
S2 Table. Parameter estimation of model 1 testing the effects of age on chick body mass. 1 81 KB Open access
Top of the page