ArticleMovement ecology2019
Time and energy costs of different foraging choices in an avian generalist species.
Article in Movement ecology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Offshore wind farm avoidance by a discard-feeding seabird is independent of local fishing activity.The Journal of animal ecology · 2026Article
- Strategic development of a buffalo farming framework and optimization of the foraging behaviour using mathematical models.Tropical animal health and production · 2026Article
- Early Post-Release Movement Convergence in Reintroduced Giant Pandas.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Learning on the job? Foraging strategies of juvenile versus adult Lesser black-backed gulls at their first migratory stopover.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- Movement patterns of foraging common terns (Sterna hirundo) breeding in an urban environment in coastal Virginia.PloS one · 2024Article
- Nutrient intake and its possible drivers in free-ranging European brown bears (Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Effects of agricultural practices on foraging habitats of a seabird species in the Baltic Sea.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Tri-axial accelerometry shows differences in energy expenditure and parental effort throughout the breeding season in long-lived raptors.Current zoology · 2022Article
- Simultaneous GPS-tracking of parents reveals a similar parental investment within pairs, but no immediate co-adjustment on a trip-to-trip basis.Movement ecology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnimals can obtain a higher foraging yield by optimizing energy expenditure or minimizing time costs. In this study, we assessed how individual variation in the relative use of marine and terrestrial foraging habitats relates to differences in the energy and time investments of an avian generalistic feeder (the Lesser Black-backed Gull,
methodsWe analyzed 5 years of GPS tracking data collected at the colony of Zeebrugge (Belgium). Cost proxies for energy expenditure (overall dynamic body acceleration) and time costs (trip durations and time spent away from the colony), together with trip frequency, were analyzed against the relative use of the marine and terrestrial habitats.
resultsThe marine habitat was most often used by males and outside weekends, when fisheries are active. Marine trips implied higher energetic costs and lower time investments. As chicks became older, terrestrial trips became more prevalent, and trip frequency reached a peak towards 20 days after hatching of the first egg. Over a full chick rearing period, energy costs varied widely between individuals, but no trends were found across the marine foraging gradient. Conversely, a higher use of marine foraging implied lower overall amounts of time spent away from the colony.
conclusionsForaging habitat choice was related to overall time costs incurred by gulls, but not to energy costs. The effect of chick age on foraging habitat choice and effort may be driven by energy expenditure constraints on the amount of marine foraging that can be performed. If time is less constraining to them, Lesser Black-backed Gulls may meet the increasing chick demand for food by switching from high to low energy demanding foraging strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.