Weather, sex and body condition affect post-fledging migration behaviour of the greater flamingo Phoenicopterus roseus.
Flight speed
Migration phenology
Movement ecology
Orientation and navigation
Partial migration
Wetland
Wind
Journal
Movement ecology
ISSN: 2051-3933
Titre abrégé: Mov Ecol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101635009
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 Aug 2023
23 Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
15
02
2023
accepted:
29
06
2023
medline:
24
8
2023
pubmed:
24
8
2023
entrez:
23
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Understanding which intrinsic and extrinsic factors dictate decision-making processes such as leaving the natal area or not (migratory vs resident strategy), departure time, and non-breeding destination are key-issues in movement ecology. This is particularly relevant for a partially migratory meta-population in which only some individuals migrate. We investigated these decision making-processes for 40 juvenile greater flamingos Phoenicopterus roseus fledged in three Mediterranean colonies and equipped with GPS-GSM devices. Contrary to the body size and the dominance hypotheses, juveniles in better body condition were more likely to migrate than those in worse conditions, which opted for a residence strategy. Flamingo probability of departure was not associated with an increase in local wind intensity, but rather with the presence of tailwinds with departure limited to night-time mostly when the wind direction aligned with the migratory destination. Moreover, a positive interaction between tailwind speed and migration distance suggested that juveniles opted for stronger winds when initiating long-distance journeys. In contrast to previous studies, the prevailing seasonal winds were only partially aligned with the migratory destination, suggesting that other factors (e.g., adults experience in mix-aged flocks, availability of suitable foraging areas en route, density-dependence processes) may be responsible for the distribution observed at the end of the first migratory movement. We found potential evidence of sex-biased timing of migration with females departing on average 10 days later and flying ca. 10 km/h faster than males. Female flight speed, but not male one, was positively influenced by tailwinds, a pattern most likely explained by sexual differences in mechanical power requirements for flight (males being ca. 20% larger than females). Furthermore, juveniles considerably reduced their flight speeds after 400 km from departure, highlighting a physiological threshold, potentially linked to mortality risks when performing long-distance non-stop movements. These results suggest that not only intrinsic factors such as individual conditions and sex, but also extrinsic factors like weather, play critical roles in triggering migratory behaviour in a partially migratory metapopulation. Furthermore, social factors, including conspecific experience, should be taken into consideration when evaluating the adaptive processes underlying migration phenology, flight performance, and final destination selection.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Understanding which intrinsic and extrinsic factors dictate decision-making processes such as leaving the natal area or not (migratory vs resident strategy), departure time, and non-breeding destination are key-issues in movement ecology. This is particularly relevant for a partially migratory meta-population in which only some individuals migrate.
METHODS
METHODS
We investigated these decision making-processes for 40 juvenile greater flamingos Phoenicopterus roseus fledged in three Mediterranean colonies and equipped with GPS-GSM devices.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Contrary to the body size and the dominance hypotheses, juveniles in better body condition were more likely to migrate than those in worse conditions, which opted for a residence strategy. Flamingo probability of departure was not associated with an increase in local wind intensity, but rather with the presence of tailwinds with departure limited to night-time mostly when the wind direction aligned with the migratory destination. Moreover, a positive interaction between tailwind speed and migration distance suggested that juveniles opted for stronger winds when initiating long-distance journeys. In contrast to previous studies, the prevailing seasonal winds were only partially aligned with the migratory destination, suggesting that other factors (e.g., adults experience in mix-aged flocks, availability of suitable foraging areas en route, density-dependence processes) may be responsible for the distribution observed at the end of the first migratory movement. We found potential evidence of sex-biased timing of migration with females departing on average 10 days later and flying ca. 10 km/h faster than males. Female flight speed, but not male one, was positively influenced by tailwinds, a pattern most likely explained by sexual differences in mechanical power requirements for flight (males being ca. 20% larger than females). Furthermore, juveniles considerably reduced their flight speeds after 400 km from departure, highlighting a physiological threshold, potentially linked to mortality risks when performing long-distance non-stop movements.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
These results suggest that not only intrinsic factors such as individual conditions and sex, but also extrinsic factors like weather, play critical roles in triggering migratory behaviour in a partially migratory metapopulation. Furthermore, social factors, including conspecific experience, should be taken into consideration when evaluating the adaptive processes underlying migration phenology, flight performance, and final destination selection.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37612593
doi: 10.1186/s40462-023-00409-x
pii: 10.1186/s40462-023-00409-x
pmc: PMC10464070
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
51Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
Trends Ecol Evol. 1993 Mar;8(3):91-5
pubmed: 21236117
J Exp Biol. 2019 Feb 6;222(Pt Suppl 1):
pubmed: 30728238
Proc Biol Sci. 2019 Feb 27;286(1897):20182821
pubmed: 30963841
Curr Biol. 2021 Aug 9;31(15):R955-R957
pubmed: 34375599
J Anim Ecol. 2012 Nov;81(6):1171-1182
pubmed: 22612528
J Anim Ecol. 2020 Mar;89(3):678-690
pubmed: 31777950
Biol Lett. 2013 Feb 27;9(2):20121178
pubmed: 23445943
Oecologia. 1996 Jul;107(2):204-211
pubmed: 28307306
Mov Ecol. 2013 Jul 03;1(1):3
pubmed: 25709817
J Anim Ecol. 2015 Sep;84(5):1202-12
pubmed: 25850460
Proc Biol Sci. 2018 Jun 27;285(1881):
pubmed: 30051848
Glob Chang Biol. 2019 Dec;25(12):4064-4080
pubmed: 31273866
Nat Commun. 2022 Mar 23;13(1):1566
pubmed: 35322030
Science. 2011 Sep 9;333(6048):1434-6
pubmed: 21903811
J Exp Biol. 2021 Feb 9;224(Pt 3):
pubmed: 33436368
Sci Adv. 2016 Jan 22;2(1):e1500931
pubmed: 26844294
J Anim Ecol. 2008 Nov;77(6):1122-8
pubmed: 18657208
PeerJ. 2021 May 25;9:e11414
pubmed: 34113487
Glob Chang Biol. 2023 Jan;29(2):341-354
pubmed: 36268831
Front Zool. 2013 May 12;10(1):26
pubmed: 23663358
Zoo Biol. 2018 Sep;37(5):290-299
pubmed: 30168187
J Anim Ecol. 2017 Sep;86(5):983-986
pubmed: 28797137
Mov Ecol. 2020 Feb 07;8:6
pubmed: 32047634
Trends Ecol Evol. 2015 Mar;30(3):169-76
pubmed: 25662784