Mismatch‐induced growth reductions in a clade of Arctic‐breeding shorebirds are rarely mitigated by increasing temperatures

Lameris, Thomas K.; Tomkovich, Pavel S.; Johnson, James A.; Morrison, R. I. G.; Tulp, Ingrid; Lisovski, Simeon; DeCicco, Lucas H.; Dementyev, Maksim N.; Gill, Robert E.; Horn, Job ten; Piersma, Theunis; Pohlen, Zachary M.; Schekkerman, H.; Soloviev, Mikhail; Syroechkovsky, Evgeny E.; Zhemchuzhnikov, Mikhail K.; Gils, Jan A. van

doi:10.1111/gcb.16025

Cited by 14 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 98 publications

(178 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This variation may in part be explained by morphometric differences between bird species and their chicks. Compared with little stints, red knot chicks are up to 4 times as large at the age of 10 days (Tjørve et al 2007; Lameris et al 2022) which may explain why they consumed relatively more of the larger Tipulidae and less of the smaller Chironomidae. Larger Tipulidae may be more profitable and lead to higher intake rates (Stephens and Krebs 1986), but only for shorebird chicks with bills and digestive system large enough to handle such large prey.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Chicks growing up after the overall biomass peak generally experience reduced growth rates (Lameris et al 2022) and survival chances (Meyer et al 2021), yet other studies do not find fitness reductions for late-hatching chicks (Corkery, Nol, and Mckinnon 2019;Reneerkens et al . CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license available under a (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Growth and survival of chicks are considered to depend on the biomass of all available arthropod species. Chicks growing up after the overall biomass peak generally experience reduced growth rates (Lameris et al 2022) and survival chances (Meyer et al 2021), yet other studies do not find fitness reductions for late-hatching chicks (Corkery, Nol, and Mckinnon 2019; Reneerkens et al 2016). Before we can conclude that not all populations are equally sensitive to mismatches, it is essential to know which part of the total arthropod biomass is relevant to a certain bird species, as chicks of different shorebird species may not all rely on the same type of prey (Baker 1977; Gerik 2018; Holmes and Pitelka 1968).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Disentangling the diet composition of chicks of Arctic shorebirds provides a new perspective on trophic mismatches

Zhemchuzhnikov

Zhemchuzhnikova

Lameris

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With rapid climatic changes over the past decades, organisms living in seasonal environments are suggested to increasingly face trophic mismatches: the disruption of synchrony between different trophic levels due to a different phenological response to increasing temperatures. Strong effects of mismatches are especially expected in the Arctic region, where climatic changes are most rapid. Nevertheless, relatively few studies have found strong evidence for trophic mismatches between the breeding period of Arctic-breeding shorebirds and the arthropod prey on which they rely. Here we argue that this is potentially caused by a generalisation of trophic interactions. While many studies have measured the mismatch relative to the peak in abundance of all available arthropod species, we use metabarcoding of prey items in faeces to show that chicks of four different shorebird species (red knot, curlew sandpiper, little stint, and red phalarope) strongly differ in their arthropod diet. Three out of the four species feed on arthropods peaking in availability five-ten days before the overall arthropod peak which had implications for the calculations of trophic mismatches. We conclude that ignoring diet selectivity hampers our understanding of phenological mismatches.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Disentangling the diet composition of chicks of Arctic shorebirds provides a new perspective on trophic mismatches

Zhemchuzhnikov

Zhemchuzhnikova

Lameris

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Altered species interactions during reproduction may be more impactful than abiotic effects (Ockendon et al, 2014). While it remains contested if trophic mismatches can have population-level consequences (Both et al, 2006;Franks et al, 2018;Johansson et al, 2015;Miller-Rushing et al, 2010;Reed et al, 2013;Saino et al, 2011), inadequate food resources can cause reduced growth rates and may lead to reduced survival or fitness (Gaston et al, 2009;Lameris et al, 2018Lameris et al, , 2022Ross et al, 2018;Sedinger et al, 1995). A greater mechanistic understanding is needed as well as identification of baselines for defining optimal food resource characteristics.…”

Section: Match-mismatch Dynamics In the Case Of The Adélie Penguinmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long‐term patterns in ecosystem phenology near Palmer Station, Antarctica, from the perspective of the Adélie penguin

Cimino

Conroy²,

Connors

et al. 2023

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change is leading to phenological shifts across a wide range of species globally. Polar oceans are hotspots of rapid climate change where sea ice dynamics structure ecosystems and organismal life cycles are attuned to ice seasonality. To anticipate climate change impacts on populations and ecosystem services, it is critical to understand ecosystem phenology to determine species activity patterns, optimal environmental windows for processes like reproduction, and the ramifications of ecological mismatches. Since 1991, the

show abstract

“…With global concern over declining trends in many shorebird populations (e.g., Rosenberg et al 2019;Smith et al 2020), identifying and evaluating threats to shorebird individuals and their habitats are a first step towards developing plans for conservation. Efforts to assess other threats, such as habitat loss (Piersma et al 2016), harvest (Reed et al 2018Gallo-Cajiao et al 2020;McDuffie et al 2021), and climate change (van Gils et al 2016;Saalfeld and Lanctot 2017;Wauchope et al 2017;Saalfeld et al 2021;Lameris et al 2022), have taken place, but relatively little attention has been given to the threat of plastics pollution on shorebird populations. Our review suggests that there is already evidence that foraging mode, foraging habitat, and flyway location may be major drivers in shorebird plastics exposure and ingestion.…”

Section: Future Areas Of Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shorebirds ingest plastics too: what we know, what we do not know, and what we should do next

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concerns about the impact of plastics pollution on the environment have been growing since the 1970s. Marine debris has reportedly entangled and/or been ingested by 914 marine species ranging from microinvertebrates to large marine mammals. Shorebirds could have a high potential to be exposed to and ingest plastics pollution, as many species migrate long distances and periodically concentrate around shorelines, coastal areas, and estuaries that can have elevated levels of plastics pollution. Currently, little is understood about plastics exposure, frequency of occurrence, and potential impacts relating to shorebirds. In this study, we catalogued and reviewed available studies across the globe that examined plastics pollution in shorebirds. We then quantified relevant traits of species and their environments to explore how shorebirds may be exposed to plastics pollution. Of 1106 samples from 26 shorebird species described within 16 studies that examined plastics ingestion, 53% of individuals contained some form of plastics pollution. Overall, Haematopodidae (oystercatchers) had the highest frequency of occurrence (FO) of plastics, followed by Recurvirostridae (avocets), Scolopacidae (sandpipers, phalaropes, godwits, curlews), and Charadriidae (plovers). Plastics FO was much greater among species that migrated across marine areas (either oceanic or coastal) than those species that used continental flyways. Species that foraged at sea, on mudflats, or on beaches, had higher average FO of plastics ingestion than species than foraged in upland, or freshwater environments. Finally, species that used a sweeping foraging mode showed higher levels of ingested plastics and contained a far greater number of plastic pieces than all other techniques. These conclusions are based on a limited number of species and samples, with the distribution of samples skewed taxonomically and geographically. Using the combined knowledge of known shorebirds-plastics interactions and shorebird ecology, we present a hierarchical approach to identifying shorebirds that may be more vulnerable and susceptible to plastics ingestion. We provide recommendations on sampling protocols and future areas of research.

show abstract

Mismatch‐induced growth reductions in a clade of Arctic‐breeding shorebirds are rarely mitigated by increasing temperatures

Cited by 14 publications

References 98 publications

Disentangling the diet composition of chicks of Arctic shorebirds provides a new perspective on trophic mismatches

Disentangling the diet composition of chicks of Arctic shorebirds provides a new perspective on trophic mismatches

Long‐term patterns in ecosystem phenology near Palmer Station, Antarctica, from the perspective of the Adélie penguin

Shorebirds ingest plastics too: what we know, what we do not know, and what we should do next

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About