Long-term individual foraging site fidelity – why some gannets don’t change their spots

To follow

Long-term individual foraging site fidelity – why some gannets don’t change their spots

Many established models of animal foraging assume that individuals are ecologically equivalent. However, it is increasingly recognized that populations may comprise individuals who differ consistently in their diets and foraging behaviors. For example, recent studies have shown that individual foraging site fidelity (IFSF, when individuals consistently forage in only a small part of their population's home range) occurs in some colonial breeders. Short‐term IFSF could result from animals using a win–stay, lose–shift foraging strategy. Alternatively, it may be a consequence of individual specialization. Pelagic seabirds are colonial central‐place foragers, classically assumed to use flexible foraging strategies to target widely dispersed, spatiotemporally patchy prey. However, tracking has shown that IFSF occurs in many seabirds, although it is not known whether this persists across years. To test for long‐term IFSF and to examine alternative hypotheses concerning its cause, we repeatedly tracked 55 Northern Gannets (Morus bassanus) from a large colony in the North Sea within and across three successive breeding seasons. Gannets foraged in neritic waters, predictably structured by tidal mixing and thermal stratification, but subject to stochastic, wind‐induced overturning. Both within and across years, coarse to mesoscale (tens of kilometers) IFSF was significant but not absolute, and foraging birds departed the colony in individually consistent directions. Carbon stable isotope ratios in gannet blood tissues were repeatable within years and nitrogen ratios were also repeatable across years, suggesting long‐term individual dietary specialization. Individuals were also consistent across years in habitat use with respect to relative sea surface temperature and in some dive metrics, yet none of these factors accounted for IFSF. Moreover, at the scale of weeks, IFSF did not decay over time and the magnitude of IFSF across years was similar to that within years, suggesting that IFSF is not primarily the result of win–stay, lose–shift foraging. Rather, we hypothesize that site familiarity, accrued early in life, causes IFSF by canalizing subsequent foraging decisions. Evidence from this and other studies suggests that IFSF may be common in colonial central‐place foragers, with far‐reaching consequences for our attempts to understand and conserve these animals in a rapidly changing environment.

Marine biodiversity and ecosystem function relationships:the potential for practical monitoring applications

There is an increasing demand for environmental assessments of the marine environment to include ecosystem function. However, existing schemes are predominantly based on taxonomic (i.e. structural) measures of biodiversity. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Function (BEF) relationships are suggested to provide a mechanism for converting taxonomic information into surrogates of ecosystem function. This review assesses the evidence for marine BEF relationships and their potential to be used in practical monitoring applications (i.e. operationalized). Five key requirements were identified for the practical application of BEF relationships: (1) a complete understanding of strength, direction and prevalence of marine BEF relationships, (2) an understanding of which biological components are influential within specific BEF relationships, (3) the biodiversity of the selected biological components can be measured easily, (4) the ecological mechanisms that are the most important for generating marine BEF relationships, i.e. identity effects or complementarity, are known and (5) the proportion of the overall functional variance is explained by biodiversity, and hence BEF relationships, has been established. Numerous positive and some negative BEF relationships were found within the literature, although many reproduced poorly the natural species richness, trophic structures or multiple functions of real ecosystems (requirement 1). Null relationships were also reported. The consistency of the positive and negative relationships was often low that compromised the ability to generalize BEF relationships and confident application of BEF within marine monitoring. Equally, some biological components and functions have received little or no investigation. Expert judgement was used to attribute biological components using spatial extent, presence and functional rate criteria (requirement 2). This approach highlighted the main biological components contributing the most to specific ecosystem functions, and that many of the particularly influential components were found to have received the least amount of research attention. The need for biodiversity to be measureable (requirement 3) is possible for most biological components although difficult within the functionally important microbes. Identity effects underpinned most marine BEF relationships (requirement 4). As such, processes that translated structural biodiversity measures into functional diversity were found to generate better BEF relationships. The analysis of the contribution made by biodiversity, over abiotic influences, to the total expression of a particular ecosystem function was rarely measured or considered (requirement 5). Hence it is not possible to determine the overall importance of BEF relationships within the total ecosystem functioning observed. In the few studies where abiotic factors had been considered, it was clear that these modified BEF relationships and have their own direct influence on functional rate. Based on the five requirements, the information required for immediate ‘operationalization’ of BEF relationships within marine functional monitoring is lacking. However, the concept of BEF inclusion within practical monitoring applications, supported by ecological modelling, shows promise for providing surrogate indicators of functioning.

The ocean sampling day consortium.

Ocean Sampling Day was initiated by the EU-funded Micro B3 (Marine Microbial Biodiversity, Bioinformatics, Biotechnology) project to obtain a snapshot of the marine microbial biodiversity and function of the world's oceans. It is a simultaneous global mega-sequencing campaign aiming to generate the largest standardized microbial data set in a single day. This will be achievable only through the coordinated efforts of an Ocean Sampling Day Consortium, supportive partnerships and networks between sites. This commentary outlines the establishment, function and aims of the Consortium and describes our vision for a sustainable study of marine microbial communities and their embedded functional traits.