Cited by 18Avian ecology and behaviorAnimal Behavior and ReproductionMarine animal studies overview

Patterns of Egg Laying and Breeding Success in Humboldt Penguins (Spheniscus Humboldti) at Punta San Juan, Peru

Paredes, Rosana, Zavalaga, Carlos B., Boness, Daryl J.·2002·The Auk

Abstract

We analyzed patterns of egg laying and breeding frequency of Humboldt Penguins (Spheniscus humboldti) between 1993 and 1997 at Punta San Juan, Peru. Egg-laying extended from mid-March to the first week of December, showing two well-defined peaks in April and August–September. The extended breeding period of these birds was the result of individuals having a second clutch. About half of the females (n =189) had two clutches per year, most of which were double broods (73%). The date of completion and outcome of reproduction, or whether a change of mates occurred from the previous year, did not affect timing of egg laying. The majority of first clutches (62%) were laid in April each year. Two-clutch breeders that started laying eggs early in April had a higher breeding success than those starting in late April, and double brooders had greater success than single brooders. Two-clutch breeders started to lay eggs earlier than single-clutch breeders. Taking into account that a penguin breeding cycle (from egg laying to fledging) lasts ∼4 months, laying eggs early in April increases the chance of rearing two successful broods per year. During three consecutive years, females tended to have two clutches instead of only one clutch and an average breeding success of 4.54 fledglings over 3 years. Having as many clutches as possible when conditions are favorable appears to be a strategy used by Humboldt Penguins to maximize their lifetime reproductive success within a productive but unpr…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/auk/119.1.244

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In comparison to observed mean chick productivity of 0.39 yearlings pair-1 year-1, the fledging success of wild S. humboldti has ranged 0.13-1.51 fledglings pair-1 year-1 in Chile and Peru, depending on levels of disturbance.

    “In comparison to our observed mean chick productivity of 0.39 yearlings pair-1 year-1 (0.18-0.62), the fledging success of wild S. humboldti has ranged 0.13-1.51 fledglings pair-1 year-1 in Chile and Peru, depending on levels of disturbance (Ellenberg et al., 2006; Paredes et al., 2002).”

    From Husbandry and enclosure influences on penguin behavior and conservation breeding (2016) · cites this paper as Paredes et al., 2002

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Paredes, R., Zavalaga, C. B., & Boness, D. J.
Affiliations
  • Wildlife Conservation Society (US)
  • Av. Guardia Chalaca 1333 Callao, Peru
  • Smithsonian Institution (US)
Corresponding author
  • Paredes, Rosana
  • Boness, Daryl J.
Venue
The Auk
Published
2002-01-01
Volume
119
Issue
1
Pages
244-250
ISSN
  • 0004-8038 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-4254
OpenAlex
W4246837361
Cited by
18
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Auk (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Marine animal studies overview
Keywords
Humboldt penguin, laying date, breeding frequency, clutch size, double brooding, breeding success, fledging success, reproductive strategies, breeding phenology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review