Advertisement

Titi (sooty shearwaters) on Whero Island: Analysis of historic data using modern techniques

  • R. Paul Scofield
  • David J. Fletcher
  • Christopher J. R. Robertson
Article

Abstract

A reanalysis of titi (sooty shearwater, Puffinus griseus) banding data collected between 1940 and 1957 by Lance Richdale demonstrates that well-documented archival material can be usefully reanalyzed using newly developed statistical techniques. In this study, we compare the results obtained by Richdale using empirical techniques to those obtained using a multistate mark-recapture model. Although the two approaches produce similar estimates for some of the parameters, the multistate model additionally provides estimates of precision and can be used to answer biologically significant questions not raised by the original worker. Our analysis provides some evidence for two conclusions that Richdale put forward but could not justify rigorously: (a) nonbreeders have a lower survival rate than breeders, although the difference is not statistically significantly; and (b) nonbreeders are more difficult to capture than breeders. We argue that reanalysis should be carried out more frequently on historical data and lament the fact that it can be rare for such data to be made available for future scrutiny.

Key Words

Archival data Mark-recapture Multistate model Puffinus griseus Reanalysis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arnason, A. N. (1972), “Parameter Estimates From Mark-Recapture Experiments on Two Populations Subject to Migration and Death,” Researches on Population Ecology, 13, 97–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. — (1973), “The Estimation of Population Size, Migration Rates, and Survival in a Stratified Population,” Researches on Population Ecology, 15, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bradley, J. S., Wooller, J. D., and Skira, I. J. (1989), “Age-Dependent Survival of Breeding Short-Tailed Shearwaters Puffinus tenuirostris,” Journal of Animal Ecology, 58, 175–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brownie, C., Hines, J. E., Nichols, J. D., Pollock, K. H., and Hestbeck, J. B. (1993), “Capture-Recapture Studies for Multiple State Including Non-Markovian Transitions,” Biometrics, 49, 1173–1187.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buckland, S. T., Burnham, K. P., and Augustin, N. H. (1997), “Model Selection: An Integral Part of Inference,” Biometrics, 53, 603–618.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burnham, K. P. (in press), “On Random Effects Models for Tag-Recovery and Capture-Recapture Data,” in Statistics in Ecology and Statistics in Ecology and Environmental Monitoring III, Dunedin, New Zealand; Otago University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Cam, E., Hines, J. E., Monnat, J.-Y., Nichols, J. D., and Danchin, E. (1998), “Are Adult Non-Breeders Prudent Parents? The Kittiwake Model,” Ecology, 79, 2917–2930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clobert, J. (1995), “Capture-Recapture and Evolutionary Ecology: A Difficult Wedding,” Journal of Applied Statistics, 22, 989–1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cuthbert, R., Fletcher, D., and Davis, L. S. (in press), “A Sensitivity Analysis of Hutton’s Shearwater: Prioritizing Conservation, Research and Management,” Biological Conservation.Google Scholar
  10. Fisher, R. A. (1930), The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection, Oxford: Clarendon Press.MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Hamer, K. C., and Hill, J. K. (1993), “Variation and Regulation of Meal Size and Feeding Frequency,” Journal of Animal Ecology, 62, 441–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lack, D. (1968), Ecological Adaptations for Breeding in Birds, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Lebreton, J.-D., Burnham, K. P., Clobert, J., and Anderson, D. R. (1992), “Modeling Survival and Testing Biological Hypotheses Using Marked Animals: A Unified Approach With Case Studies,” Ecological Monographs, 62, 67–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Loery, G., Nichols, J. D., and Hines, J. E. (1997), “Capture-Recapture Analysis of a Wintering Black-Capped Chickadee Population in Connecticut, 1958–1993,” Auk, 114, 431–442.Google Scholar
  15. Nichols, J. D., and Kendall, W. L. (1995), “The Use of Multi-State Capture-Recapture Models to Address Questions in Evolutionary Ecology,” Journal of Applied Statistics, 22, 835–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Oka, N., Maruyama, N., and Skira, I. (1987), “Chick Growth and Mortality of Short-Tailed Shearwaters in Comparison With Sooty Shearwaters, as a Possible Index of Fluctuations of Australian Krill Abundance,” Proceedings of the National Institute of Polar Research Symposium on Polar Biology, 1, 166–174.Google Scholar
  17. Reznick, D. (1985), “Costs of Reproduction: An Evaluation of the Empirical Evidence,” Oikos, 44, 257–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Richdale, L. E. (1942), “Whero: Island Home of Petrels and Other Birds,” Emu, 42, 85–105.Google Scholar
  19. — (1943), “Whero: Island of Sea-Birds,” Wild Life Series, 1, 26–40. Dunedin: Otago Daily Times.Google Scholar
  20. — (1944), “The Sooty Shearwater in New Zealand,” Condor, 46, 93–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. — (1945), “The Nestling of the Sooty Shearwater,” Condor, 47, 45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. — (1954), “Duration of Parental Attentiveness in the Sooty Shearwater,” Ibis, 96, 586–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. — (1963), “The Biology of the Sooty Shearwater Puffinus griseus,” Proceeding of the Zoological Society of London, 31, 1–86.Google Scholar
  24. Ricklefs, R. E., Day, C. H., Huntington, C. E., and Williams, J. B. (1985), “Variability in Feeding Rate and Meal Size of Leach’s Storm-Petrel at Kent Island, New Brunswick,” Journal of Animal Ecology, 54, 883–898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schwarz, C. J., Schweigert, J. F., and Arnason, A. N. (1993), “Estimating Migration Rates Using Tag-Recovery Data,” Biometrics, 49, 177–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Teiepa, T., Lyver, P., Horsley, P., Davis, P. J., Bragg, M., Moller, H. (1997), “Co-Management of New Zealand’s Conservation Estate by Maori and Pakeha: A Review,” Environmental Conservation, 24, 236–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Warham, J., and Wilson, G. J. (1982), “The Size of the Sooty Shearwater Population at the Snares Islands, New Zealand,” Notornis, 29, 23–30.Google Scholar
  28. Weimerskirch, H. (1998), “How Can a Pelagic Seabird Provision Its Chick When Relying on a Distant Food Resource? Cyclic Attendance at the Colony, Foraging Decision and Body Condition in Sooty Shearwaters,” Journal of Animal Ecology, 67, 99–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. White, G. C., and Burnham, K. P. (1999), “Program MARK: Survival Estimation From Populations of Marked Animals,” Bird Study, 46 (Supplement), 120–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Williams, G. C. (1966), “Natural Selection, the Cost of Reproduction, and a Refinement of Lack’s Principle,” America Naturalist, 100, 687–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wooller, R., and Bradley, S. (1996), “Monogamy in a Long-Lived Seabird: The Short-Tailed Shearwater,” in Partnerships in Birds. The Study of Monogamy, ed. J. M. Black, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 223–234.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Biometric Society 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Paul Scofield
    • 1
  • David J. Fletcher
    • 2
  • Christopher J. R. Robertson
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics and StatisticsUniversity of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand
  3. 3.Science and Research DivisionDepartment of ConservationWellingtonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations