Functional significance of sexual dimorphism in wandering albatrosses, Diomedea exulans

By S. Shaffer, Henri Weimerskirch, Daniel P. Costa. 2001

200 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/678b1fc80641a3f5219c369aa4e2cdafd03ea45b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

Citations in the corpus

Sexual segregation in a wide-ranging marine predator is a consequence of habitat selection (2015, background): “371 Factors underlying segregation 372 Sex-specific differences in foraging behaviour are usually ascribed to the influence of body 373 size on foraging efficiency and intra-specific competition (Shaffer et al. 2001, Wearmouth & 374 Sims 2008, Phillips et al. 2011).”
Lifetime foraging patterns of the wandering albatross: Life on the move! (2014, background): “The wing length of juveniles when they fledge is longer than that of adults (Weimerskirch et al., 2000a), which is probably as an adaptation to these calmer conditions, giving them better flight abilities in the calmer sub-tropical waters (Shaffer et al., 2001).”
Wind field and sex constrain the flight speeds of central‐place foraging albatrosses (2009, methodology): “For example, Wandering Albatrosses breeding in the Crozet Islands (468250 S, 518590 E) exploit large-scale semi-persistent wind patterns to make long, looping trips, avoiding headwind flight (Jouventin and Weimerskirch 1990, Weimerskirch et al. 2000b).”
Foraging and provisioning strategies of the light-mantled sooty albatross at South Georgia: competition and co-existence with sympatric pelagic predators (2005, background): “More recently, however, it was suggested that dimorphism in body mass and wing morphology plays a functional role in determining flight performance, and that the sexes might, therefore, have active preferences for more, or less, windy ocean habitats (Shaffer et al. 2001).”
North Atlantic climate variation influences survival in adult fulmars (2005, background): “The species is slightly sexually dimorphic (Wynne-Edwards 1952), and this could result in differences in foraging energetics that lead to sex differences in foraging areas, as observed in wandering albatross (Weimerskirch and Wilson 2000, Shaffer et al. 2001 ).”
Foraging effort in relation to the constraints of reproduction in free‐ranging albatrosses (2003, background): “Wandering Albatrosses are sexually dimorphic (Tickell 1968; Shaffer, Weimerskirch & Costa 2001c ) and the sexes typically segregate into different foraging locations while at sea (Prince et al . 1992; Weimerskirch et al . 1993; Weimerskirch 1995).”
Postnatal dispersal of wandering albatrosses Diomedea exulans: implications for the conservation of the species (2006, background): “While adults rely on strong, consistent winds in the sub-Antarctic waters for foraging (Weimerskirch et al. 2000a), the comparatively longer wings and lower wing loading of young birds should give them a better ability to exploit the lighter wind conditions of the subtropics (Fig. 2c, Weimerskirch e”
Foraging behaviour of four albatross species by night and day (2007, background): “Three of the species studied display sexual segregation at some stages of the breeding season, and males might be expected to land less frequently than females because of their higher wing-loading (Shaffer et al. 2001, Phillips et al. 2004).”
Sexually distinct foraging strategies in an omnivorous seabird (2015, background): “…studies of resource use and population dynamics often treat conspecific individuals as ecologically equivalent, individual specialisation has been shown in a large range of species distributed across a broad range of taxonomic groups (Clarke et al. 1998; Conradt et al. 1999; Shaffer et al. 2001).”
Species- and sex-specific differences in foraging behaviour and foraging zones in blue-footed and brown boobies in the Gulf of California (2009, methodology): “…studies have shown that larger females bring larger meals to chicks (Anderson & Ricklefs 1992, Weimerskirch et al. 2006, 2009), which can be attributed in part to greater food storage capac- ity (Pierotti 1981, Shaffer et al. 2001), but also to shorter time spent with the chick compared to males.”
Sexual segregation in distribution, diet and trophic level of seabirds: insights from stable isotope analysis (2011, background): “These between-sex diVerences in albatrosses may represent habitat specialisation, as females have lower wing loading and are better adapted for lighter wind conditions in subantarctic and subtropical waters ( ShaVer et al. 2001; Phillips et al. 2004).”
SUMMER DISTRIBUTION AND MIGRATION OF NONBREEDING ALBATROSSES: INDIVIDUAL CONSISTENCIES AND IMPLICATIONS FOR CONSERVATION (2005, background): “…resource partitioning to competitive exclusion or niche specialization arising from inequalities in body size, foraging efficiency, flight capability, manoeuvrability, or nutritional requirements (Weimerskirch and Lys 2000, Shaffer et al. 2001, Lewis et al. 2002, Phillips et al. 2004b, 2005).”
Quantifying habitat use and preferences of pelagic seabirds using individual movement data: a review (2009, background): “Flight performance is partly dependent on wing loading, leading to suggestions that birds with higher wing loadings are better adapted to windier areas (Shaffer et al. 2001, Suryan et al. 2008).”
Sex-specific foraging behaviour in tropical boobies: does size matter? (2005, background): “As such, we believe that our data support our second prediction, i.e. that males are able to fly further to exploit potentially more productive foraging grounds because of lower flight costs (Shaffer et al. 2001).”