Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-v2srd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-30T01:01:05.226Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Multi-state mark-recapture models as a novel approach to estimate factors affecting attendance patterns of lactating subantarctic fur seals from Marion Island

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 November 2014

M. Wege ,
M. Nevoux ,
P.J.N. de Bruyn  and
M.N. Bester
M. Wege*
Affiliation:
Mammal Research Institute, Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20, Hatfield, 0028, South Africa
M. Nevoux
Affiliation:
Mammal Research Institute, Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20, Hatfield, 0028, South Africa Agrocampus Ouest, 65 rue de Saint Brieuc, CS 84215, 35042 RENNES Cedex, France
P.J.N. de Bruyn
Affiliation:
Mammal Research Institute, Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20, Hatfield, 0028, South Africa
M.N. Bester
Affiliation:
Mammal Research Institute, Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20, Hatfield, 0028, South Africa
*
mwege@zoology.up.ac.za
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Observer-based studies often underestimate key ecological parameters. Here a fresh approach was used to analyse six years (2006–11) of attendance cycles to estimate foraging trip lengths of a lactating flipper-tagged otariid: subantarctic fur seals at Marion Island. Multi-state mark-recapture models were used to calculate detection failures of females, correct estimates accordingly, and investigate the effects of year, season, pup sex and the presence of a telemetry device on attendance cycle parameters. There were no differences between corrected and uncorrected attendance data. This is attributed to the high capture probability across all seasons (range: 83–98%). This illustrates that observer-based studies are useful to augment telemetry studies. Only season and pup sex had a significant impact on female provisioning rates. In winter, foraging trip durations were longer (t-value=25.22, P<0.0001) and attendance durations shorter (t-value=-2.15, P=0.01) than during summer. Females with female pups spent a higher proportion of their time on land (χ2=6.6, P<0.05). Male pups have higher growth demands and are larger which suggests they can deplete female milk-stores faster.

Keywords

Arctocephalus tropicalisdetection probabilitypup sexseasonal effectstransition probability

Information

Type
Biological Sciences
Information
Antarctic Science , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , June 2015 , pp. 252 - 262
Check for updates
Copyright
© Antarctic Science Ltd 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ansorge, I.J. & Lutjeharms, J.R.E. 2002. The hydrography and dynamics of the ocean environment of the Prince Edward Islands (Southern Ocean). Journal of Marine Systems, 37, 107–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnould, J.P.Y. & Hindell, M.A. 2001. Dive behaviour, foraging locations and maternal attendance patterns of Australian fur seals (Arctocephalus pusillus doriferus). Canadian Journal of Zoology, 79, 35–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnould, J.P.Y., Boyd, I.L. & Socha, D.G. 1996b. Milk consumption and growth efficiency in Antarctic fur seal (Arctocephalus gazella) pups. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 74, 254–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnould, J.P.Y., Boyd, I.L. & Speakman, J.R. 1996a. The relationship between foraging behaviour and energy expenditure in Antarctic fur seals. Journal of Zoology, 239, 769–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bester, M.N. 1981. Seasonal changes in the population composition of the fur seal Arctocephalus tropicalis at Gough Island. South African Journal of Wildlife Research, 11, 49–55.Google Scholar
Bester, M.N. 1982. Distribution, habitat selection and colony types of the Amsterdam Island fur seal Arctocephalus tropicalis at Gough Island. Journal of Zoology, 196, 217–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bester, M.N. 1995. Reproduction in the female subantarctic fur seal. Arctocephalus tropicalis. Marine Mammal Science, 11, 362–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bester, M.N. & Bartlett, P.A. 1990. Attendance behavior of Antarctic and subantarctic fur seal females at Marion Island. Antarctic Science, 2, 309–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonadonna, F., Lea, M.A., Dehorter, O. & Guinet, C. 2001. Foraging ground fidelity and route-choice tactics of a marine predator: the Antarctic fur seal Arctocephalus gazella . Marine Ecology Progress Series, 223, 287–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, I.L. 1999. Foraging and provisioning in Antarctic fur seals: interannual variability in time-energy budgets. Behavioral Ecology, 10, 198–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, I.L., Lunn, N.J. & Barton, T. 1991. Time budgets and foraging characteristics of lactating Antarctic fur seals. Journal of Animal Ecology, 60, 577–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnham, K.P. & Anderson, D.R. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. New York, NY: Springer, 520 pp.Google Scholar
Choquet, R., Reboulet, A.M., Pradel, R., Gimenez, O. & Lebreton, J.D. 2004. User’s manual for M-SURGE 1.4. Montpellier: CEFE/CNRS.Google Scholar
Costa, D.P. 1991. Reproductive and foraging energetics of pinnipeds: implications for live history patterns. In Renouf, D., ed. Behaviour of pinnipeds. London: Chapman & Hall, 293–314.Google Scholar
Costa, D.P. 2008. A conceptual model of the variation in parental attendance in response to environmental fluctuation: foraging energetics of lactating sea lions and fur seals. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 17, S44–S52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawley, M.J. 2007. The R book. Chichester: John Wiley, 950 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Bruyn, P.J.N., Tosh, C.A., Oosthuizen, W.C., Bester, M.N. & Arnould, J.P.Y. 2009. Bathymetry and frontal system interactions influence seasonal foraging movements of lactating subantarctic fur seals from Marion Island. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 394, 263–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentry, R.L. & Kooyman, G.L. 1986. Fur seals: maternal strategies on land and at sea. Princeton, NY: Princeton University Press, 309 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Georges, J.Y. & Guinet, C. 2000. Maternal care in the subantarctic fur seals on Amsterdam Island. Ecology, 81, 295–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsworthy, S.D. 1995. Differential expenditure of maternal resources in Antarctic fur seals, Arctocephalus gazella, at Heard Island, southern Indian Ocean. Behavioral Ecology, 6, 218–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsworthy, S.D. 1999. Maternal attendance behaviour of sympatrically breeding Antarctic and subantarctic, Arctocephalus spp., at Macquarie Island. Polar Biology, 21, 316–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsworthy, S.D. 2006. Maternal strategies of the New Zealand fur seal: evidence for interannual variability in provisioning and pup growth strategies. Australian Journal of Zoology, 54, 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guinet, C., Jouventin, P. & Georges, J.Y. 1994. Long-term population changes of fur seals Arctocephalus gazella and Arctocephalus tropicalis on sub-Antarctic (Crozet) and subtropical (St Paul and Amsterdam) islands and their possible relationship to El Niño Southern Oscillation. Antarctic Science, 6, 473–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harcourt, R.G., Bradshaw, C.J.A., Dickson, K. & Davis, L.S. 2002. Foraging ecology of a generalist predator, the New Zealand fur seal. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 227, 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmeyr, G.J.G, Bester, M.N., Makhado, A.B. & Pistorius, P.A. 2006. Population changes in subantarctic and Antarctic fur seals at Marion Island. South African Journal of Wildlife Research, 36, 55–68.Google Scholar
Hofmeyr, G.J.G., Bester, M.N., Pistorius, P.A., Mulaudzi, T.W., de Bruyn, P.J.N., Ramunasi, J.A., Tshithabane, H.N., McIntyre, T. & Radzilani, P.M. 2007. Median pupping date, pup mortality and sex ratio of fur seals at Marion Island. South African Journal of Wildlife Research, 37, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerley, G.I.H. 1985. Pup growth in the fur seals Arctocephalus tropicalis and Arctocephalus gazella on Marion Island. Journal of Zoology, 205, 315–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkman, S.P., Bester, M.N., Hofmeyr, G.J.G., Pistorius, P.A. & Makhado, A.B. 2002. Pup growth and maternal attendance patterns in subantarctic fur seals. African Zoology, 37, 13–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lea, M.A., Guinet, C., Cherel, Y., Duhamel, G., Dubroca, L., Pruvost, P. & Hindell, M. 2006. Impacts of climatic anomalies on provisioning strategies of a Southern Ocean predator. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 310, 77–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lea, M.A., Guinet, C., Cherel, Y., Hindell, M., Dubroca, L. & Thalmann, S. 2008. Colony-based foraging segregation by Antarctic fur seals at the Kerguelen Archipelago. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 358, 273–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebreton, J.D. & Pradel, R. 2002. Multistate recapture models: modelling incomplete individual histories. Journal of Applied Statistics, 29, 353–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orians, G.H. & Pearson, N.E. 1979. On the theory of central place foraging: analysis of ecological system. In Horn, D.J., Stairs, E.T. & Mitchell, R.T., eds. Analysis of ecological system. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 155–177.Google Scholar
Pinheiro, J., Bates, D., Debroy, S. & Sarkar, D. 2011. nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1–102.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team . 2012. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: http://www.R-project.orgGoogle Scholar
Staniland, I.J., Gales, N., Warren, N.L., Robinson, S.L., Goldsworthy, S.D. & Casper, R.M. 2010. Geographical variation in the behaviour of a central place forager: Antarctic fur seals foraging in contrasting environments. Marine Biology, 157, 2383–2396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephens, D.W. & Krebs, J.R. 1986. Foraging theory. Princeton, NY: Princeton University Press, 262 pp.Google Scholar
Verrier, D., Groscolas, R., Guinet, C. & Arnould, J.P.Y. 2009. Physiological response to extreme fasting in subantarctic fur seal (Arctocephalus tropicalis) pups: metabolic rates, energy reserve utilization, and water fluxes. American Journal of Physiology - Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology, 297, 10.1152/ajpregu.90857.2008.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wege, M. 2013. Maternal foraging behaviour of subantarctic fur seals from Marion Island. MSc thesis, University of Pretoria, 154 pp. [Unpublished].Google Scholar