Comparison of Diets in the California Least Tern (Sternula antillarum browni) at Two Sites in Central California, U.S.A.

IF 0.7 4区 生物学 Q3 ORNITHOLOGY
Waterbirds Pub Date : 2023-11-22 DOI:10.1675/063.046.0109
Alyssa G. Leicht, D. Robinette, Meredith L. Elliott, Michael H. Horn
{"title":"Comparison of Diets in the California Least Tern (Sternula antillarum browni) at Two Sites in Central California, U.S.A.","authors":"Alyssa G. Leicht, D. Robinette, Meredith L. Elliott, Michael H. Horn","doi":"10.1675/063.046.0109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. We evaluated diet and diet assessment methods for the California Least Tern (Sternula antillarum browni) at two nesting sites in California over 12 years (2001–2012). California Least Tern diets at Alameda Point (37° 47′ 14″ N, 122° 19′ 12″ W), an estuarine site, and Purisima Point (34° 46′ 39″ N, 120° 37′ 35″ W), an open coast site, were compared using dropped fish and hard parts (otoliths and scales) from regurgitated pellets and fecal samples. SIMPER analyses, Kendall's tau, Kruskal-Wallis, Dunn's test, rank-sum tests, and Welch's t-test determined any differences in assessment methods, chick and adult diets, and sizes of prey items. Diet composition differed between sites for both dropped fish (25% similar) and fecal samples (26%). Assessment methods showed similar results at Alameda Point (79%) for dropped fish and fecal samples but not at Purisima Point when comparing dropped fish to fecal samples (12%) and fecal samples to regurgitated pellets (19%). There was no difference in diet composition at either site or between any method using adult-only samples. All differences in diet composition appeared during the rearing/fledging stage. Fish species dropped at both sites were deeper-bodied (17 mm) than those consumed (11.9 mm), with terns at Purisima Point dropping deep-bodied species typically not consumed and those at Alameda Point dropping larger individuals of usually-consumed species. When comparing adult and chick diets at Alameda Point using fecal samples, composition was similar, and chicks ate larger prey. Our results suggest that more than one assessment method is necessary to provide a complete dietary picture.","PeriodicalId":54408,"journal":{"name":"Waterbirds","volume":"37 2","pages":"67 - 77"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Waterbirds","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1675/063.046.0109","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORNITHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract. We evaluated diet and diet assessment methods for the California Least Tern (Sternula antillarum browni) at two nesting sites in California over 12 years (2001–2012). California Least Tern diets at Alameda Point (37° 47′ 14″ N, 122° 19′ 12″ W), an estuarine site, and Purisima Point (34° 46′ 39″ N, 120° 37′ 35″ W), an open coast site, were compared using dropped fish and hard parts (otoliths and scales) from regurgitated pellets and fecal samples. SIMPER analyses, Kendall's tau, Kruskal-Wallis, Dunn's test, rank-sum tests, and Welch's t-test determined any differences in assessment methods, chick and adult diets, and sizes of prey items. Diet composition differed between sites for both dropped fish (25% similar) and fecal samples (26%). Assessment methods showed similar results at Alameda Point (79%) for dropped fish and fecal samples but not at Purisima Point when comparing dropped fish to fecal samples (12%) and fecal samples to regurgitated pellets (19%). There was no difference in diet composition at either site or between any method using adult-only samples. All differences in diet composition appeared during the rearing/fledging stage. Fish species dropped at both sites were deeper-bodied (17 mm) than those consumed (11.9 mm), with terns at Purisima Point dropping deep-bodied species typically not consumed and those at Alameda Point dropping larger individuals of usually-consumed species. When comparing adult and chick diets at Alameda Point using fecal samples, composition was similar, and chicks ate larger prey. Our results suggest that more than one assessment method is necessary to provide a complete dietary picture.
美国加利福尼亚州中部两个地点的加州燕鸥(Sternula antillarum browni)膳食比较
摘要。我们评估了加州燕鸥(Sternula antillarum browni)在加州两个筑巢地点 12 年(2001-2012 年)的饮食和饮食评估方法。我们使用掉落的鱼和从反刍颗粒和粪便样本中提取的硬质部分(耳石和鳞片)对河口筑巢点阿拉米达点(北纬 37° 47′ 14″,西经 122°19′12″)和开放海岸筑巢点普里西马点(北纬 34°46′39″,西经 120°37′35″)的加州燕鸥食量进行了比较。通过 SIMPER 分析、Kendall's tau、Kruskal-Wallis、Dunn's 检验、秩和检验和 Welch's t 检验确定了评估方法、雏鸟和成鸟食物以及猎物大小的差异。不同地点的掉落鱼类(25%相似)和粪便样本(26%)的食物组成存在差异。在阿拉米达点,掉落的鱼和粪便样本的评估方法显示出相似的结果(79%),但在普里西马点,将掉落的鱼与粪便样本(12%)和粪便样本与反刍颗粒(19%)进行比较时,结果却不尽相同。两个地点的食物组成没有差异,仅使用成鱼样本的任何方法之间也没有差异。食物组成的所有差异都出现在饲养/育苗阶段。两个地点丢弃的鱼种(17 毫米)比吃掉的鱼种(11.9 毫米)体型要深,普里西马角的燕鸥丢弃的鱼种体型较深,通常不被吃掉,而阿拉米达角的燕鸥丢弃的鱼种体型较大,通常被吃掉。利用粪便样本比较阿拉米达点的成年燕鸥和雏燕鸥的食物时发现,两者的组成相似,雏燕鸥吃的猎物较大。我们的研究结果表明,要想提供完整的膳食情况,必须采用一种以上的评估方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Waterbirds
Waterbirds 生物-鸟类学
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Waterbirds is an international scientific journal of the Waterbird Society. The journal is published four times a year (March, June, September and December) and specializes in the biology, abundance, ecology, management and conservation of all waterbird species living in marine, estuarine and freshwater habitats. Waterbirds welcomes submission of scientific articles and notes containing the results of original studies worldwide, unsolicited critical commentary and reviews of appropriate topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信