Monitoring the Prey-Field of Marine Predators: Combining Digital Imaging With Datalogging Tags

By S. Hooker, I. Boyd, M. Jessopp, O. Cox, J. Blackwell, Peter L. Boveng, J. Bengtson. 2002

89 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.

Tractable models for testing theories about natural strategies: foraging behaviour and habitat selection of free‐ranging sharks (2003, background): “The advent of video-camera tags (Heithaus et al., 2001; Hooker et al., 2002) combined with conventional positional transmitters deployed on plankton-feeding sharks may provide the means to conduct a field test of competitive interference through quantification of changes in the prey fields through t”
Distribution of foraging by female Antarctic fur seals (2002, background): “This is based upon the observation that there is a close link between the amount of diving by an individual and energy gain when averaged over whole foraging trips (Arnould et al. 1996) and also by recent observations of krill encountered during dives (Hooker et al. 2002).”
A review of the adaptive significance and ecosystem consequences of zooplankton diel vertical migrations (2003, background): “…to the diel pattern of feeding for penguins, deployments of TDRs on fur seals (Arctocephalus spp.) suggest that most prey are captured during shallow night-time diving, with individuals not diving during the day when their prey have descended (Croxall et al., 1985; Horning & Trillmich, 1999).”