A Preliminary Comparison of Marine Bird Biomass and Food Consumption Between the Southeastern Bering Sea and Parts of the Southern Ocean

  • G. L. HuntJr
Conference paper

Summary

Seabird density, biomass and C demand were compared in open waters of the southeastern Bering Sea shelf and the Argentine shelf at comparable latitudes and seasons; comparisons were also made for waters near Bering Sea colonies and near the South Orkney Islands. Away from colonies, seabird densities were generally higher in the Bering Sea than off southeastern Argentina, but the biomass of seabirds was similar. However, since the mean weight of birds in the Bering Sea was less than that off Argentina, C demand was higher in the Bering Sea as a consequence of the allo-metric nature of the metabolic equations. Similarly, limited sampling near the South Orkney Islands encountered a lower density of birds than sampling near islands at comparable latitudes in the Bering Sea. Again, the biomass of birds near the South Orkney Islands was similar to that found near the Bering Sea colonies due to the larger mean size of the southern hemisphere birds, but overall C demand of seabirds was similar or somewhat greater in the Bering Sea. Seabird use of the waters near the South Orkney Islands may have been under-estimated due to the departure of birds for moulting.

Keywords

Biomass Petroleum Assimilation Hunt Argentina 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ainley DG; Morrell S; Lewis Tl (1974) Patterns in the life histories of storm petrels on the Farallon Islands. Living Bird 18: 295–312Google Scholar
  2. Cody M (1973) Coexistence, coevolution and convergent evolution in seabird communities. Ecology 54: 31–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cooper J (1979) Energetic requirements for growth and maintenance of the Cape Gannet (AYES: Sulidae). Zool Afr 13: 305–317Google Scholar
  4. Croxall JP; Prince PA (1980) Food, feeding ecology and ecological segregation of seabirds at South Georgia. Biol J Lim Soc 14: 103–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Croxall JP; Prince PA (1981) A preliminary assessment of the impact of seabrids on marine resources at South Georgia. CNFRA 51: 501–509Google Scholar
  6. Croxall JP; Prince PA; Ricketts C (1985) Relationships between prey life-cycles and the extent, nature and timing of seal and seabird predation in the Scotia Sea. In: Siegfried WR, Condy PR, Laws RM (eds) Antarctic nutrient cycles and food webs (Proceedings of the 4th SCAR symposium on Antarctic biology). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Curl HS (1962) Analysis of carbon in marine organisms. J Mar Res 20: 181–188Google Scholar
  8. Everson I (1977) The living resources of the Southern Ocean. Food and Agriculture Organisation Southern Ocean Fisheries Survey Programme, RomeGoogle Scholar
  9. Furness RW (1978) Energy requirements of seabird communities: a bioenergetics model. J Anim Ecol 47: 39–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Furness RW (1983) Competition between fisheries and seabird communities. Adv Mar Biol 20: 225–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Furness RW; Cooper J (1982) Interactions between breeding seabird and pelagic fish populations in the southern Benguela region. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 8: 243–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hunt GL; Burgeson B; Sanger GA (1981) Feeding ecology of seabirds of the eastern Bering Sea. In: Hood DW, Calder JA (eds) The eastern Bering Sea shelf: Oceanography and resources, vol 2. US Govt Printing Office Washington DC pp 629Google Scholar
  13. Hunt GL; Eppley Z; Burgeson B; Squibb R (1982) Reproductive ecology, foods and foraging areas of seabirds nesting on the Pribilof Islands, 1975–1979. Environmental assessment of the Alaskan continental shelf. Biol Stud 12: 1–258Google Scholar
  14. Idyll CP (1973) The Anchovy crisis. Sci Am 228: 22–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Iverson RL; Coachman LK; Cooney RT; English TS; Goering JJ; Hunt GL; Maccauley MC; McRoy CP; Reeburgh WR; Whitledge TE (1979) Ecological significance of fronts in the southeastern Bering Sea. In: Livingston RJ (ed) Ecological processes in coastal marine ecosystems. Plenum, New York pp 437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jouventin P; Mougin JL (1981) Les strategies adaptives des oiseaux de mer. Rep Ecol (Tierre et Vie) 35: 217–272Google Scholar
  17. Kendeigh SC (1970) Energy requirements for existence in relation to size of bird. Condor 72: 60–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kendeigh SC; Dol’nik VR; Garrilov VM (1977) Avian energetics. In: Pinowski J, Kendeigh SC (eds) Granivorous birds in ecosystems. International Biological Programme 12: 127–402. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Lasiewski RC; Dawson WR (1967) A re-examination of the relation between standard metabolic rate and body weight in birds. Condor 69: 13–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. MacMillen RE; Carpenter FL (1977) Daily energy costs and body weight in nectivorous birds. Comp Biochem Physiol 56A: 439–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mougin JL; Prevost J (1980) Evolution annuelle des effectifs et des biomasses des oiseaux antarctiques. Rev Ecol (Tierre et Vie) 34: 101–133Google Scholar
  22. Nishiyama T (1977) Food-energy requirements of Bristol Bay Sockeye Salmon Oncorhynchus nerka ( Walbaum) during the last marine stage. Spec Vol Res Inst N Pacific Fish Hokkaido Univ Fac Fish pp 289–320Google Scholar
  23. Sanger GA (1972) Preliminary standing stock and biomass estimates of seabirds in the subarctic Pacific region. In: Takenouti AY et al. (eds) Biological oceanography of the northern North Pacific Ocean. Idemitsu Shoten, Tokyo p 626Google Scholar
  24. Schneider D; Hunt GL (1982) Carbon flux to seabirds in waters with different mixing regimes in the southeastern Bering Sea. Mar Biol 67: 337–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shuntov VP (1972) Marine birds and the biological structure of the Ocean (In Russian Dalnevastochnoe Knizhnoe Izdat, Vladivostok (Trans. 1974 ) Nat Tech Inf Service, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  26. Weathers WW; Nagy KA (1980) Simultaneously labelled water (3 HH’b O) and time-budget estimates of energy expenditure in Phainopepla nitens. Auk 97: 861–867Google Scholar
  27. Wiens JA; Scott JM (1975) Model estimation of energy flow in Oregon coastal seabird populations. Condor 77: 430–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wiens JA; Ford RG; Heinemann D; Fieber C (1979) Simulation modelling of marine bird population energetics, food consumption and sensitivity to perturbation. Environmental assessment of the Alaskan continental shelf. Annu Rep Prinicp Invest 1:217–270Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. L. HuntJr
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA

Personalised recommendations