2018
DOI: 10.1007/s00227-018-3328-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of the rookery connectivity and migratory connectivity: insight into movement and colonization of the green turtle (Chelonia mydas) in Pacific–Southeast Asia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Research on migratory connectivity has commonly focused on avian species (Bridge et al 2011, Hobson et al 2014, Ruegg et al 2014, Rushing et al 2014, Thorup et al 2014, Taylor et al 2017) but is equally relevant for migratory species of any taxonomic group (Sullivan et al 2012, Morrison and Bolger 2014, Quillfeldt et al 2015, Vander Zanden et al 2015, Acevedo et al 2017, Nishizawa et al 2018). Research on migratory connectivity has commonly focused on avian species (Bridge et al 2011, Hobson et al 2014, Ruegg et al 2014, Rushing et al 2014, Thorup et al 2014, Taylor et al 2017) but is equally relevant for migratory species of any taxonomic group (Sullivan et al 2012, Morrison and Bolger 2014, Quillfeldt et al 2015, Vander Zanden et al 2015, Acevedo et al 2017, Nishizawa et al 2018).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Research on migratory connectivity has commonly focused on avian species (Bridge et al 2011, Hobson et al 2014, Ruegg et al 2014, Rushing et al 2014, Thorup et al 2014, Taylor et al 2017) but is equally relevant for migratory species of any taxonomic group (Sullivan et al 2012, Morrison and Bolger 2014, Quillfeldt et al 2015, Vander Zanden et al 2015, Acevedo et al 2017, Nishizawa et al 2018). Research on migratory connectivity has commonly focused on avian species (Bridge et al 2011, Hobson et al 2014, Ruegg et al 2014, Rushing et al 2014, Thorup et al 2014, Taylor et al 2017) but is equally relevant for migratory species of any taxonomic group (Sullivan et al 2012, Morrison and Bolger 2014, Quillfeldt et al 2015, Vander Zanden et al 2015, Acevedo et al 2017, Nishizawa et al 2018).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Technology to study the movements of migratory animals throughout the year is improving our understanding of migratory connectivity, though year-round patterns remain poorly understood for most species. Research on migratory connectivity has commonly focused on avian species (Bridge et al 2011, Hobson et al 2014, Ruegg et al 2014, Rushing et al 2014, Thorup et al 2014, Taylor et al 2017 but is equally relevant for migratory species of any taxonomic group (Sullivan et al 2012, Morrison and Bolger 2014, Quillfeldt et al 2015, Vander Zanden et al 2015, Acevedo et al 2017, Nishizawa et al 2018). Among the well-studied Nearctic-Neotropical songbirds, most species have strong breeding-wintering migratory connectivity: western breeding populations winter further west in Central America while eastern breeding populations winter further east in Mexico and the Caribbean (i.e.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regarding the nesting population samples included from outside of Japan, 22 were from foraging turtles that were probably born in Southeast Asia (SE Asia) (n = 4), Taiwan (n = 3), the FSM/RMI (n = 10), or the Central/Eastern Pacific (C/E Pacific) (n = 5). The natal origins of these 22 turtles were identified from regionally unique mtDNA haplotypes according to previous studies (Dutton et al, 2014a,b;Nishizawa et al, 2014Nishizawa et al, , 2018Jensen et al, 2016b;Joseph et al, 2016). These turtles were captured in set nets around the Yaeyama or Okinawa Islands, or on the Sanriku coast (Figure 1).…”
Section: Samples For Nesting Population Structurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…As some widespread haplotypes are detected from multiple geographically remote nesting populations, there is a limitation in the accuracy of MSA (reviewed in Jensen et al, 2013 andKomoroske et al, 2017). This is an especially serious problem in estimation of the origins of foraging green turtles in Japanese waters, not only because either widespread haplotypes of CmP20.1 and CmP49.1 have been detected in almost all areas of the population in the Western Pacific (Dutton et al, 2014b;Jensen et al, 2016a;Nishizawa et al, 2018), but also because several common haplotypes were shared within the Japanese nesting populations. Our genome-wide population analysis demonstrated that the distinctiveness of the Ogasawara population from other Western Pacific populations was highly practical for narrowing down the natal origins of foraging turtles with widespread or common Japanese haplotypes.…”
Section: Identification Of Natal Originmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Foraging ground is where sea turtles reside during the nonbreeding season and migration as the movement between foraging areas (if more than one foraging area is used), or between foraging area and nesting area (Ceriani et al 2012). Recent works have reported that each foraging ground seems to support multiple breeding populations (Dethmers et al 2010;Nishizawa et al 2018). Thus, habitat destruction at foraging ground may have an adverse effect on remote rookeries.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%