Investigating the biases in the use of hard prey remains to identify diet composition using antarctic fur seals (Arctocephalus gazella) in captive feeding trials

83 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Regional, temporal and fine-scale spatial variation in Weddell seal diet at four coastal locations in east Antarctica (2003, background): “Feeding trials have shown that using scats to estimate prey composition yields biased results because prey remains are differentially digested (Pierce & Boyle 1991, Lake 1997, Staniland 2002).”
Antarctic fur seals foraging in the Polar Frontal Zone: inter-annual shifts in diet as shown from fecal and fatty acid analyses (2002, background): “In addition, hard parts actually retrieved from scats may only represent the ingestion of prey during the previous feeding bout (Helm 1984, Jobling & Breiby 1986, Staniland 2002).”
Evaluating quantitative fatty acid signature analysis (QFASA) using harbour seals Phoca vitulina richardsi in captive feeding studies (2008, methodology): “These methods are subject to well-documented biases, as prey may not be wholly consumed, identifiable structures may be lost or may degrade at species-specific rates and soft-bodied prey may be digested com- pletely (Jobling & Breiby 1986, Pierce & Boyle 1991, Staniland 2002).”
DIETARY ANALYSIS FROM FECAL SAMPLES: HOW MANY SCATS ARE ENOUGH? (2005, background): “…of prey items recovered in scats through captive feeding studies (e.g., Cottrell et al. 1996; Marcus et al. 1998; McInnis et al. 1983; Staniland 2002) and the development of analytical techniques to reconstruct diets (e.g., Laake et al. 2002; Olesiuk 1993) may change our estimates of…”