COMPARATIVE DIVING PATTERNS OF PINNIPEDS AND SEABIRDS

By J. F. Schreer, Kit M. Kovacs, R. Hines. 2001

185 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/81bc89b3d7a01c8e544b4f8411b0d59fb0b6fac5

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 Global and Planetary Change

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Satellite telemetry of marine megavertebrates: the coming of age of an experimental science (2009, methodology): “Thus, we refer the readers to other recent reviews of bio-logging and marine wildlife tracking (Schreer et al. 2001, RopertCoudert & Wilson 2005, Wilson & McMahon 2006, Hooker et al. 2007).”
In-depth studies of Magellanic penguin (Spheniscus magellanicus) foraging: can we estimate prey consumption by perturbations in the dive profile? (2003, background): “…over time is now commonly recorded by devices deployed on marine endotherms and used to classify dive types (usually V, U and W types) and, through these types, derive the proportion of searching and foraging dives (e.g. Wilson and Wilson 1990; LunaJorquera and Culik 1999; Schreer et al. 2001).”
Fine-scale three-dimensional spatial use by diving, lactating female Weddell seals Leptonychotes weddellii (2002, background): “The variables were chosen to discriminate between directional (as opposed to ‘looping’) dives, benthic and mid-water dives, sit-and-wait and continuous search dives and dives with many changes in direction (Simpkins et al. 2001).”
Seabird foraging behaviour indicates prey type (2008, methodology): “…avoidance (Schreer et al. 2001), travel in pinnipeds (Schreer et al. 2001) and penguins (Chappell et al. 1993, Wilson et al. 1996, Kirkwood & Robertson 1998), or exploration in pinnipeds (Schreer et al. 2001) and penguins (Kirkwood & Robertson 1998, RopertCoudert et al. 2002, Lescroël & Bost 2005).”
Mesoscale eddies as foraging area of a deep-diving predator, the southern elephant seal (2010, background): “On any dive, a seal was assumed to be at the bottom of the dive whenever depth exceeded 80% of the maximum depth (Lesage et al. 1999, Schreer et al. 2001).”
Southern elephant seals from Kerguelen Islands confronted by Antarctic Sea ice. Changes in movements and in diving behaviour (2007, methodology): “A dive’s bottom phase defined as the time spent at depths greater than or equal to 80% of the maximum depth was used to complete the analysis (Lesage et al., 1999; Schreer et al., 2001).”
Optimal foraging theory predicts diving and feeding strategies of the largest marine predator (2011, background): “Previous studies of rorquals and other pelagic feeders have reliedmostly on visual examination of time-depth profiles for the detection of feeding events, usually identified by the occurrence of vertical excursions greater than an arbitrary threshold, called ‘‘wiggles’’ (Croll et al. 2001; Schreer e”
Identifying foraging events in deep diving southern elephant seals, Mirounga leonina, using acceleration data loggers (2013, background): “In most species of pinnipeds and diving seabirds, dives with long bottom durations are thought to be associated with feeding (Schreer et al., 2001).”