A partial migrant relies upon a range-wide cue set but uses population-specific weighting for migratory timing.
Control mechanisms
Departure decision
Environmental cues
Songbird migration
Journal
Movement ecology
ISSN: 2051-3933
Titre abrégé: Mov Ecol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101635009
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Dec 2021
20 Dec 2021
Historique:
received:
08
10
2021
accepted:
05
12
2021
entrez:
21
12
2021
pubmed:
22
12
2021
medline:
22
12
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Many birds species range over vast geographic regions and migrate seasonally between their breeding and overwintering sites. Deciding when to depart for migration is one of the most consequential life-history decisions an individual may make. However, it is still not fully understood which environmental cues are used to time the onset of migration and to what extent their relative importance differs across a range of migratory strategies. We focus on departure decisions of a songbird, the Eurasian blackbird Turdus merula, in which selected Russian and Polish populations are full migrants which travel relatively long-distances, whereas Finnish and German populations exhibit partial migration with shorter migration distances. We used telemetry data from the four populations (610 individuals) to determine which environmental cues individuals from each population use to initiate their autumn migration. When departing, individuals in all populations selected nights with high atmospheric pressure and minimal cloud cover. Fully migratory populations departed earlier in autumn, at longer day length, at higher ambient temperatures, and during nights with higher relative atmospheric pressure and more supportive winds than partial migrants; however, they did not depart in higher synchrony. Thus, while all studied populations used the same environmental cues, they used population-specific and locally tuned thresholds to determine the day of departure. Our data support the idea that migratory timing is controlled by general, species-wide mechanisms, but fine-tuned thresholds in response to local conditions.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Many birds species range over vast geographic regions and migrate seasonally between their breeding and overwintering sites. Deciding when to depart for migration is one of the most consequential life-history decisions an individual may make. However, it is still not fully understood which environmental cues are used to time the onset of migration and to what extent their relative importance differs across a range of migratory strategies. We focus on departure decisions of a songbird, the Eurasian blackbird Turdus merula, in which selected Russian and Polish populations are full migrants which travel relatively long-distances, whereas Finnish and German populations exhibit partial migration with shorter migration distances.
METHODS
METHODS
We used telemetry data from the four populations (610 individuals) to determine which environmental cues individuals from each population use to initiate their autumn migration.
RESULTS
RESULTS
When departing, individuals in all populations selected nights with high atmospheric pressure and minimal cloud cover. Fully migratory populations departed earlier in autumn, at longer day length, at higher ambient temperatures, and during nights with higher relative atmospheric pressure and more supportive winds than partial migrants; however, they did not depart in higher synchrony. Thus, while all studied populations used the same environmental cues, they used population-specific and locally tuned thresholds to determine the day of departure.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our data support the idea that migratory timing is controlled by general, species-wide mechanisms, but fine-tuned thresholds in response to local conditions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34930467
doi: 10.1186/s40462-021-00298-y
pii: 10.1186/s40462-021-00298-y
pmc: PMC8686659
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
63Subventions
Organisme : Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
ID : ExcellenceStrategy - EXC 2117 - 422037984
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Mov Ecol. 2020 Feb 7;8:6
pubmed: 32047634
J Exp Biol. 1996;199(Pt 1):57-64
pubmed: 9317335
Int J Biometeorol. 2019 Feb;63(2):231-239
pubmed: 30687905
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Jul 21;117(29):17056-17062
pubmed: 32601181
Front Zool. 2017 Mar 20;14:17
pubmed: 28344630
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2017 Nov 19;372(1734):
pubmed: 28993496
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2017 Jun 19;372(1723):
pubmed: 28483870
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Jul 13;118(28):
pubmed: 34260383
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Jan 15;105(2):577-81
pubmed: 18184811
PeerJ. 2018 May 23;6:e4794
pubmed: 29844961
J Theor Biol. 2012 Sep 7;308:56-67
pubmed: 22683380
Proc Biol Sci. 2011 Nov 22;278(1723):3437-43
pubmed: 21450737
Mov Ecol. 2019 Oct 31;7:32
pubmed: 31695918
Proc Biol Sci. 2009 May 7;276(1662):1619-26
pubmed: 19203918
Science. 2018 Sep 14;361(6407):1115-1118
pubmed: 30213913
J Econ Entomol. 2011 Dec;104(6):1870-6
pubmed: 22299347
J Anim Ecol. 2012 Sep;81(5):1024-33
pubmed: 22471701
Proc Biol Sci. 2011 May 7;278(1710):1339-46
pubmed: 20980299
Science. 1998 Dec 4;282(5395):1884-6
pubmed: 9836637
Elife. 2017 Nov 21;6:
pubmed: 29157357
Proc Biol Sci. 2006 Dec 22;273(1605):3023-9
pubmed: 17015341
Mov Ecol. 2018 Nov 27;6:23
pubmed: 30505448
J Anim Ecol. 2016 Mar;85(2):570-80
pubmed: 26718017
Anim Behav. 2013 Oct;86(4):733-740
pubmed: 24109148
Sci Adv. 2017 Jan 04;3(1):e1601360
pubmed: 28070557
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Dec 10;93(25):14642-7
pubmed: 8962107
J Exp Biol. 1996;199(Pt 1):39-48
pubmed: 9317295
Ecol Lett. 2011 Dec;14(12):1183-90
pubmed: 22017534
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Jan 27;363(1490):247-66
pubmed: 17638692
Gen Comp Endocrinol. 2018 Jan 15;256:112-122
pubmed: 28756245
Am Nat. 2013 Jun;181(6):837-45
pubmed: 23669545
BMC Ecol. 2014 Mar 21;14:9
pubmed: 24650177
J Anim Ecol. 2013 Jul;82(4):863-71
pubmed: 23363245
Nat Commun. 2021 Aug 6;12(1):4780
pubmed: 34362899
Ecology. 2007 Apr;88(4):882-90
pubmed: 17536705
Mov Ecol. 2019 Aug 12;7:25
pubmed: 31417677
Am J Physiol. 1983 Dec;245(6):R755-67
pubmed: 6362436
Anim Behav. 2001 Jan;61(1):181-189
pubmed: 11170708
Glob Chang Biol. 2019 Dec;25(12):4064-4080
pubmed: 31273866
Trends Ecol Evol. 2013 Sep;28(9):552-60
pubmed: 23756104