Loading…

Foraging Decisions, Patch Use, and Seasonality in Egrets (Aves: Ciconiiformes)

Feeding Snowy (Egretta thula) and Great (Casmerodius albus) egrets were observed during two breeding seasons in coastal New Jersey and two brief winter periods in northeast Florida. A number of tests based on assumptions of foraging models, predictions from foraging theory, and earlier empirical tes...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Ecology (Durham) 1985-06, Vol.66 (3), p.837-844
Main Author: Erwin, R. Michael
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3837-664f21335681246b5a4090aeac15a2fb7e1d04cb718af21ae7ce008710dfffd43
cites
container_end_page 844
container_issue 3
container_start_page 837
container_title Ecology (Durham)
container_volume 66
creator Erwin, R. Michael
description Feeding Snowy (Egretta thula) and Great (Casmerodius albus) egrets were observed during two breeding seasons in coastal New Jersey and two brief winter periods in northeast Florida. A number of tests based on assumptions of foraging models, predictions from foraging theory, and earlier empirical tests concerning time allocation and movement in foraging patches was made. Few of the expectations based on foraging theory and/or assumptions were supported by the empirical evidence. Snowy Egrets fed with greater intensity and efficiency during the breeding season (when young were being fed) than during winter. They also showed some tendency to leave patches when their capture rate declined, and they spent more time foraging in patches when other birds were present nearby. Great Egrets, in Contrast, showed few of these tendencies, although they did leave patches when their intercapture intervals increased. Satiation differences had some influence on feeding rates in Snowy Egrets, but only at the end of feeding bouts. Some individuals of both species revisited areas in patches that had recently been exploited, and success rates were usually higher after the second visit. Apparently, for predators of active prey, short-term changes in resource availability ("resource depression") may be more important than resource depletion, a common assumption in most OFT models.
doi_str_mv 10.2307/1940545
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_14254203</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>1940545</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>1940545</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3837-664f21335681246b5a4090aeac15a2fb7e1d04cb718af21ae7ce008710dfffd43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10E1rGzEQBmBRUqjjlv4FQUraQLbV10qr3oLjtAXTFtocelrGsuTIrFeOZt3ifx8FmxQCnstcHl5mXkLecvZRSGY-catYreoXZMSttJXlhp2QEWNcVFbXzStyirhiZbhqRuT7TcqwjP2SXnsXMaYeL-lPGNwdvUV_SaFf0F8eMPXQxWFHY0-ny-wHpB-u_nr8TCfRpT7GkPLa48Vr8jJAh_7NYY_J7c309-RrNfvx5dvkalY52UhTaa2C4FLWuuFC6XkNilkGHhyvQYS58XzBlJsb3kCB4I3zjDWGs0UIYaHkmJzvczc53W89Du06ovNdB71PW2y5ErUSTBZ49gyu0jaXZ4oRVithjLRFvd8rlxNi9qHd5LiGvGs5ax9bbQ-tFvnukAfooAsZ-lLbE7dCc1Y-GxOxZ_9i53fH0trp5A-3Ta31Yyv_s1c4pHz0hAevQoz7</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1296427739</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Foraging Decisions, Patch Use, and Seasonality in Egrets (Aves: Ciconiiformes)</title><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><source>Wiley-Blackwell Journals (Backfile Content)</source><creator>Erwin, R. Michael</creator><creatorcontrib>Erwin, R. Michael</creatorcontrib><description>Feeding Snowy (Egretta thula) and Great (Casmerodius albus) egrets were observed during two breeding seasons in coastal New Jersey and two brief winter periods in northeast Florida. A number of tests based on assumptions of foraging models, predictions from foraging theory, and earlier empirical tests concerning time allocation and movement in foraging patches was made. Few of the expectations based on foraging theory and/or assumptions were supported by the empirical evidence. Snowy Egrets fed with greater intensity and efficiency during the breeding season (when young were being fed) than during winter. They also showed some tendency to leave patches when their capture rate declined, and they spent more time foraging in patches when other birds were present nearby. Great Egrets, in Contrast, showed few of these tendencies, although they did leave patches when their intercapture intervals increased. Satiation differences had some influence on feeding rates in Snowy Egrets, but only at the end of feeding bouts. Some individuals of both species revisited areas in patches that had recently been exploited, and success rates were usually higher after the second visit. Apparently, for predators of active prey, short-term changes in resource availability ("resource depression") may be more important than resource depletion, a common assumption in most OFT models.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0012-9658</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-9170</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2307/1940545</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ECGYAQ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington, DC: The Ecological Society of America</publisher><subject>Animal and plant ecology ; Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Animals ; Autoecology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Bird nesting ; Birds ; Brackish ; Coastal ecology ; Ecology ; Egretta alba ; Egretta thula ; Fish ; Foraging ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Marine ; Predators ; Wildlife ecology ; Winter</subject><ispartof>Ecology (Durham), 1985-06, Vol.66 (3), p.837-844</ispartof><rights>Copyright 1985 The Ecological Society of America</rights><rights>1985 by the Ecological Society of America</rights><rights>1985 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3837-664f21335681246b5a4090aeac15a2fb7e1d04cb718af21ae7ce008710dfffd43</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1940545$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/1940545$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1416,27924,27925,46049,46473,58238,58471</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=9261021$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Erwin, R. Michael</creatorcontrib><title>Foraging Decisions, Patch Use, and Seasonality in Egrets (Aves: Ciconiiformes)</title><title>Ecology (Durham)</title><description>Feeding Snowy (Egretta thula) and Great (Casmerodius albus) egrets were observed during two breeding seasons in coastal New Jersey and two brief winter periods in northeast Florida. A number of tests based on assumptions of foraging models, predictions from foraging theory, and earlier empirical tests concerning time allocation and movement in foraging patches was made. Few of the expectations based on foraging theory and/or assumptions were supported by the empirical evidence. Snowy Egrets fed with greater intensity and efficiency during the breeding season (when young were being fed) than during winter. They also showed some tendency to leave patches when their capture rate declined, and they spent more time foraging in patches when other birds were present nearby. Great Egrets, in Contrast, showed few of these tendencies, although they did leave patches when their intercapture intervals increased. Satiation differences had some influence on feeding rates in Snowy Egrets, but only at the end of feeding bouts. Some individuals of both species revisited areas in patches that had recently been exploited, and success rates were usually higher after the second visit. Apparently, for predators of active prey, short-term changes in resource availability ("resource depression") may be more important than resource depletion, a common assumption in most OFT models.</description><subject>Animal and plant ecology</subject><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Autoecology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Bird nesting</subject><subject>Birds</subject><subject>Brackish</subject><subject>Coastal ecology</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Egretta alba</subject><subject>Egretta thula</subject><subject>Fish</subject><subject>Foraging</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Marine</subject><subject>Predators</subject><subject>Wildlife ecology</subject><subject>Winter</subject><issn>0012-9658</issn><issn>1939-9170</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1985</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp10E1rGzEQBmBRUqjjlv4FQUraQLbV10qr3oLjtAXTFtocelrGsuTIrFeOZt3ifx8FmxQCnstcHl5mXkLecvZRSGY-catYreoXZMSttJXlhp2QEWNcVFbXzStyirhiZbhqRuT7TcqwjP2SXnsXMaYeL-lPGNwdvUV_SaFf0F8eMPXQxWFHY0-ny-wHpB-u_nr8TCfRpT7GkPLa48Vr8jJAh_7NYY_J7c309-RrNfvx5dvkalY52UhTaa2C4FLWuuFC6XkNilkGHhyvQYS58XzBlJsb3kCB4I3zjDWGs0UIYaHkmJzvczc53W89Du06ovNdB71PW2y5ErUSTBZ49gyu0jaXZ4oRVithjLRFvd8rlxNi9qHd5LiGvGs5ax9bbQ-tFvnukAfooAsZ-lLbE7dCc1Y-GxOxZ_9i53fH0trp5A-3Ta31Yyv_s1c4pHz0hAevQoz7</recordid><startdate>198506</startdate><enddate>198506</enddate><creator>Erwin, R. Michael</creator><general>The Ecological Society of America</general><general>Ecological Society of America</general><general>Brooklyn Botanic Garden, etc</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>FIXVA</scope><scope>FKUCP</scope><scope>IOIBA</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>L.G</scope></search><sort><creationdate>198506</creationdate><title>Foraging Decisions, Patch Use, and Seasonality in Egrets (Aves: Ciconiiformes)</title><author>Erwin, R. Michael</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3837-664f21335681246b5a4090aeac15a2fb7e1d04cb718af21ae7ce008710dfffd43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1985</creationdate><topic>Animal and plant ecology</topic><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Autoecology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Bird nesting</topic><topic>Birds</topic><topic>Brackish</topic><topic>Coastal ecology</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Egretta alba</topic><topic>Egretta thula</topic><topic>Fish</topic><topic>Foraging</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Marine</topic><topic>Predators</topic><topic>Wildlife ecology</topic><topic>Winter</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Erwin, R. Michael</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 03</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 04</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 29</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences &amp; Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Ecology (Durham)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Erwin, R. Michael</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Foraging Decisions, Patch Use, and Seasonality in Egrets (Aves: Ciconiiformes)</atitle><jtitle>Ecology (Durham)</jtitle><date>1985-06</date><risdate>1985</risdate><volume>66</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>837</spage><epage>844</epage><pages>837-844</pages><issn>0012-9658</issn><eissn>1939-9170</eissn><coden>ECGYAQ</coden><abstract>Feeding Snowy (Egretta thula) and Great (Casmerodius albus) egrets were observed during two breeding seasons in coastal New Jersey and two brief winter periods in northeast Florida. A number of tests based on assumptions of foraging models, predictions from foraging theory, and earlier empirical tests concerning time allocation and movement in foraging patches was made. Few of the expectations based on foraging theory and/or assumptions were supported by the empirical evidence. Snowy Egrets fed with greater intensity and efficiency during the breeding season (when young were being fed) than during winter. They also showed some tendency to leave patches when their capture rate declined, and they spent more time foraging in patches when other birds were present nearby. Great Egrets, in Contrast, showed few of these tendencies, although they did leave patches when their intercapture intervals increased. Satiation differences had some influence on feeding rates in Snowy Egrets, but only at the end of feeding bouts. Some individuals of both species revisited areas in patches that had recently been exploited, and success rates were usually higher after the second visit. Apparently, for predators of active prey, short-term changes in resource availability ("resource depression") may be more important than resource depletion, a common assumption in most OFT models.</abstract><cop>Washington, DC</cop><pub>The Ecological Society of America</pub><doi>10.2307/1940545</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0012-9658
ispartof Ecology (Durham), 1985-06, Vol.66 (3), p.837-844
issn 0012-9658
1939-9170
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_14254203
source JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection; Wiley-Blackwell Journals (Backfile Content)
subjects Animal and plant ecology
Animal, plant and microbial ecology
Animals
Autoecology
Biological and medical sciences
Bird nesting
Birds
Brackish
Coastal ecology
Ecology
Egretta alba
Egretta thula
Fish
Foraging
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Marine
Predators
Wildlife ecology
Winter
title Foraging Decisions, Patch Use, and Seasonality in Egrets (Aves: Ciconiiformes)
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T14%3A12%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Foraging%20Decisions,%20Patch%20Use,%20and%20Seasonality%20in%20Egrets%20(Aves:%20Ciconiiformes)&rft.jtitle=Ecology%20(Durham)&rft.au=Erwin,%20R.%20Michael&rft.date=1985-06&rft.volume=66&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=837&rft.epage=844&rft.pages=837-844&rft.issn=0012-9658&rft.eissn=1939-9170&rft.coden=ECGYAQ&rft_id=info:doi/10.2307/1940545&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E1940545%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3837-664f21335681246b5a4090aeac15a2fb7e1d04cb718af21ae7ce008710dfffd43%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1296427739&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=1940545&rfr_iscdi=true