Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-07T05:55:30.999Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - The use of biologically meaningful oceanographic indices to separate the effects of climate and fisheries on seabird breeding success

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2009

C. J. Camphuysen
By
B. E. Scott ,
J. Sharples ,
S. Wanless ,
O. N. Ross ,
M. Frederiksen  and
F. Daunt
Edited by
I. L. Boyd  and
S. Wanless
C. J. Camphuysen
Affiliation:
Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research
B. E. Scott
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Tillydrone Avenue, Aberdeen AB24 2TZ, UK
J. Sharples
Affiliation:
Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory, Bidston Observatory, Birkenhead CH43 7RA, UK
S. Wanless
Affiliation:
NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Banchory Research Station, Hill of Brathens, Banchory AB31 4BW, UK
O. N. Ross
Affiliation:
University of Southampton, School of Ocean and Earth Sciences, Southampton Oceanography Centre, Empress Dock, Southampton S14 3ZH, UK
M. Frederiksen
Affiliation:
NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Banchory Research Station, Hill of Brathens, Banchory AB31 4BW, UK
F. Daunt
Affiliation:
NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Banchory Research Station, Hill of Brathens, Banchory AB31 4BW, UK
I. L. Boyd
Affiliation:
University of St Andrews, Scotland
S. Wanless
Affiliation:
NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, UK
Get access

Summary

An important issue when considering seabird breeding success is what factors affect prey availability. If availability reflects absolute prey abundance, different species preying on the same prey population should show synchronized variation in breeding success. If, on the other hand, species-specific foraging techniques coupled with prevailing oceanographic conditions result in differential access to prey, then, breeding success is likely to vary asynchronously between species. Furthermore, for each species, long-term variation in breeding success should be predictable using appropriate oceanographic covariates. Currently, commercial fishing quotas are set on the assumption that prey abundance is the only important factor for multispecies management. Therefore, it is essential to understand prey availability in the context of both climate change and fishing pressure. This requires an integrated approach and in this chapter we demonstrate the potential of combining long-term demographic data from seabirds with output from a one-dimensional physical–biological model. Using data from the North Sea, we examine relationships between breeding performance and biologically meaningful indices of the physical environment during a period of years with and without an industrial fishery. We speculate how the contrasting responses shown by two seabird species might reflect differences in prey availability mediated by foraging technique.

Over the last 20 to 30 years, seabirds in the North Sea have shown considerable temporal variability in breeding success (Ratcliffe 2004).

Type
Chapter
Information
Top Predators in Marine Ecosystems
Their Role in Monitoring and Management
 , pp. 46 - 62
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

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.)

References

Aebischer, N. J., Coulson, J. C. & Colebrook, J. M. (1990). Parallel long-term trends across four marine trophic levels and weather. Nature, 347, 753–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertram, D. F., Mackas, D. L. & McKinnell, S. M. (2001). The seasonal cycle revisited: interannual variation and ecosystem consequences. Prog. Oceanogr., 49, 283–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canuto, V. M., Howard, A., Cheng, Y. & Dubovikov, M. S. (2001). Ocean turbulence. Part I: one-point closure model – momentum and heat vertical diffusivities. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 31, 1413–26.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Covill, R. W. (1959). Food and feeding habits of larvae and postlarvae of Ammodytes americanus. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll., 17, 125–46.Google Scholar
Croxall, J. P. & Rothery, P. (1991). Population regulation of seabirds: implications of their demography for conservation. In Bird Population Studies: Relevance to Conservation and Management, eds. Perrins, Lebreton, J.-D. & Hirons, G. J. M.. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 272–96.Google Scholar
Cushing, D. H. (1975). Marine Ecology and Fisheries. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, M. & Richardson, A. J. (2004). Impact of climate change on marine pelagic phenology and trophic mismatch. Nature, 430, 881–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edwards, M., Beaugrand, G., Reid, P. C., Rowden, A. A. & Jones, M. B. (2002). Ocean climate anomalies and the ecology of the North Sea. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 239, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franks, P. J. S. (1992). New models for the exploration of biological processes at fronts. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 54, 161–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frederiksen, M., Wanless, S., Harris, M. P., Rothery, P. & Wilson, L. J. (2004). The role of industrial fishery and oceanographic change in the decline of North Sea black-legged kittiwakes. J. Appl. Ecol., 41, 1129–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furness, R. W. (2002). Management implications of interactions between fisheries and sandeel-dependent seabirds and seals in the North Sea. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 59, 261–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furness, R. W. & Tasker, M. L. (2000). Seabird–fishery interactions: quantifying the sensitivity of seabirds to reductions in sandeel abundance, and identification of key areas for sensitive seabirds in the North Sea. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 202, 354–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gjerdrum, C., Vallee, A. M. J., Clair, St C. C.et al. (2003). Tufted puffin reproduction reveals ocean climate variability. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 100, 9377–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haren, H. Van, Mills, D. K & Wetsteyn, L. P. M. J. (1998). Detailed observations of the phytoplankton spring bloom in the stratifying central North Sea. J. Mar. Res., 56, 655–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, M. P. & Wanless, S. (1985). Fish fed to young guillemots, Uria aalge, and used in display on the Isle of May, Scotland. J. Zool. Lond., 207, 441–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hjort, J. (1914). Fluctuations in the great fisheries of northern Europe viewed in the light of biological research. Rapp. P.-V. Reun., Cons. Int. Explor. Mer 20, 1–228.Google Scholar
ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea) (2004). Report of the Working Group on Seabird Ecology, ICES CM 2004/C:05. Copenhagen, Denmark: ICES.
Jensen, H., Wright, P. J. & Munk, P. (2003). Vertical distribution of pre-settled sandeel (Ammodytes marinus) in the North Sea in relation to size and environmental variables. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 60, 1342–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fèvre, J. (1986). Aspects of the biology of frontal systems. Adv. Mar. Biol., 23, 164–299.Google Scholar
Lewis, S., Wanless, S., Wright, P. J.et al. (2001). Diet and breeding performance of black-legged kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla at a North Sea colony. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 221, 277–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, K. H. & Lazier, J. R. N. (1996). Dynamics of Marine Ecosystems. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science.Google Scholar
Miller, G. B. (2004). Biological Oceanography. Oxford UK: Blackwell Science.Google Scholar
Monaghan, P. (1992). Seabirds and sandeels: the conflict between exploitation and conservation in the northern North Sea. Biodiversity Conserv., 1, 98–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monteleone, D. M. & Peterson, W. T. (1986). Feeding ecology of American sand lance Ammodytes americanus larvae from Long Island Sound. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 30, 133–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munk, P., Wright, P. J. & Pihl, N. J. (2002). Distribution of the early larval stages of cod, plaice and lesser sandeel across haline fronts in the North Sea. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci., 55, 139–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otto, L., Zimmerman, J. T. F., Furnes, G. K.et al. (1990). Review of the physical oceanography of the North Sea. Neth. J. Sea Res., 26, 161–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, W. H., Woodruff, D. L. & Sugarmann, P. C. (1984). The burrowing behaviour of sand lance, Ammodytes hexapterus: effects of oil-contaminated sediment. Mar. Environ. Res., 11, 17–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pingree, R. D., Pugh, P. R., Holligan, P. M. & Forster, G. R. (1975). Summer phytoplankton blooms and red tides along tidal fronts in the approaches to the English Channel. Nature, 258, 672–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pingree, R. D., Bowman, M. J. & Esaias, W. E. (1978). Headland fronts. In Oceanic Fronts in Coastal Processes, eds. Bowman, M. J. & Esaias, W. E.. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 78–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Platt, T., Fuentes-Yaco, C. & Frank, K. T. (2003). Spring algal bloom and larval fish survival. Nature, 423, 398–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Proctor, R., Wright, P. J. & Everitt, A. (1998). Modelling the transport of larval sandeels on the north-west European shelf. Fish. Oceanogr., 7, 347–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ratcliffe, N. (2004). Causes of seabird population change. In Seabird Populations of Britain and Ireland, eds. Mitchell, P. I., S. F. Newton, , N. Ratcliffe, & T. E. Dunn, . London: T. & A. D. Poyser, pp. 407–37.Google Scholar
Reay, P. J. (1970). Synopsis of Biological Data on North Atlantic Sandeels of the genus Ammodytes (A. tobianus, A. dubius, A. americanus and A. marinus). FAO Fisheries Synopsis 82. Rome, Italy: FAO.Google Scholar
Rindorf, A., Wanless, S. & Harris, M. P. (2000). Effects of sandeel availability on the reproductive output of seabirds. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 202, 241–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharples, J. (1999). Investigating the seasonal vertical structure of phytoplankton in shelf seas. Mar. Models, 1, 3–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharples, J., Ross, O. N., Scott, B. E., Greenstreet, S. P. R. & Fraser, H.Inter-annual variability in the timing of stratification and the spring bloom in a temperate shelf sea. Cont. Shelf Res, in press.Google Scholar
Simpson, J. & Bowers, D. (1981). Models of stratification and frontal movement in shelf seas. Deep-Sea Res. Part I, 28, 727–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, J. H. (1981). The shelf-sea fronts: implications of their existence and behaviour. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A, 302, 531–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turrell, W. R. (1992). New hypotheses concerning the circulation of the northern North Sea and its relation to North Sea fish stock recruitment. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 49, 107–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waniek, J. J. (2003). The role of physical forcing in the initiation of spring blooms in the northeast Atlantic. J. Mar. Syst., 39, 57–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winslade, P. (1974a). Behavioural studies on the lesser sand eel Ammodytes marinus (Raitt) I. The effect of food availability on the activity and the role of olfaction in food detection. J. Fish Biol., 6, 565–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winslade, P. (1974b). Behavioural studies on the lesser sand eel Ammodytes marinus (Raitt) II. The effect of light intensity on activity. J. Fish Biol., 6, 577–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winslade, P. (1974c). Behavioural studies on the lesser sand eel Ammodytes marinus (Raitt) III. The effect of temperature on activity and environmental control of the annual cycle of activity. J. Fish Biol., 6, 587–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wors⊘e, L. A. (1999). Emergence and growth of juvenile sandeel (Ammodytes marinus): Comparison of two areas in the North Sea. M.Sc thesis, Marine Biological Laboratory, Helsing⊘r, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×