Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 320

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Individual specialization in diet by a generalist marine predator reflects specialization in foraging behaviour

Open access
Woo, Kerry J., Elliott, Kyle Hamish, Davidson, Melissa, Gaston, Anthony J., Davoren, Gail K.·2008·Journal of Animal Ecology

Abstract

1. We studied chick diet in a known-age, sexed population of a long-lived seabird, the Brünnich's guillemot (Uria lomvia), over 15 years (N = 136; 1993-2007) and attached time-depth-temperature recorders to examine foraging behaviour in multiple years (N = 36; 2004-07). 2. Adults showed specialization in prey fed to offspring, described by multiple indices calculated over 15 years: 27% of diet diversity was attributable to among-individual variation (within-individual component of total niche width = 0.73); average similarity of an individual's diet to the overall diet was 65% (mean proportional similarity between individuals and population = 0.65); diet was significantly more specialized than expected for 70% of individuals (mean likelihood = 0.53). These indices suggest higher specialization than the average for an across-taxa comparison of 49 taxa. 3. Foraging behaviour varied along three axes: flight time, dive depth and dive shape. Individuals showed specialized individual foraging behaviour along each axis. These foraging strategies were reflected in the prey type delivered to their offspring and were maintained over scales of hours to years. 4. Specialization in foraging behaviour and diet was greater over short time spans (hours, days) than over long time spans (years). Regardless of sex or age, the main component of variation in foraging behaviour and chick diet was between individuals. 5. Plasma stable isotope values were similar across years, within a given individual, and variance was low relative to that expected from prey isotope values, suggesting adult diet specialized across years. Stable isotope values were similar among individuals that fed their nestlings similar prey items and there was no difference in trophic level between adults and chicks. We suggest that guillemots specialize on a single foraging strategy regardless of whether chick-provisioning and self-feeding. With little individual difference in body mass and physiology, specialization likely represents learning and memorizing optimal feeding locations and behaviours. 6. There was no difference in survival or reproductive success between specialists and generalists, suggesting these are largely equivalent strategies in terms of evolutionary fitness, presumably because different strategies were advantageous at different levels of prey abundance or predictability. The development of individual specialization may be an important precursor to diversification among seabirds.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01429.x

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 58 references

Research works printed but not linked: 40

  1. 10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[0288:LTROIW]2.0.CO;2 · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[0288:ltroiw]2.0.co;2
  2. 10.3354/meps311157 · doi:10.3354/meps311157
  3. 10.1242/jeb.203.15.2323 · doi:10.1242/jeb.203.15.2323
  4. 10.1650/0010-5422(2007)109[451:DSINAC]2.0.CO;2 · doi:10.1650/0010-5422(2007)109[451:dsinac]2.0.co;2
  5. 10.2307/4089111 · doi:10.2307/4089111
  6. Benvenuti S., 2002, Diving behaviour differs between incubating and brooding Brunnich's guillemots, Uria lomvia, Polar Biology, 25, 474, 10.1007/s00300-002-0372-0 · doi:10.1007/s00300-002-0372-0
  7. 10.1139/z87-253 · doi:10.1139/z87-253
  8. 10.1006/anbe.1999.1209 · doi:10.1006/anbe.1999.1209
  9. 10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.10.026 · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.10.026
  10. Elliott K.H., Mass‐length relationships for fishes delivered to nestling thick‐billed murres (Uria Lomvia) at Coats Island, 1981–2006, Marine Ornithology
  11. 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2000.tb07687.x · doi:10.1111/j.1474-919x.2000.tb07687.x
  12. 10.3354/meps231293 · doi:10.3354/meps231293
  13. 10.1007/s00227-006-0417-y · doi:10.1007/s00227-006-0417-y
  14. 10.14430/arctic618 · doi:10.14430/arctic618
  15. 10.1642/0004-8038(2000)117[0082:APCACG]2.0.CO;2 · doi:10.1642/0004-8038(2000)117[0082:apcacg]2.0.co;2
  16. 10.2307/5065 · doi:10.2307/5065
  17. 10.1642/0004-8038(2004)121[1161:EOTOBP]2.0.CO;2 · doi:10.1642/0004-8038(2004)121[1161:eotobp]2.0.co;2
  18. 10.3354/meps224283 · doi:10.3354/meps224283
  19. 10.1642/0004-8038(2002)119[1064:DPOPED]2.0.CO;2 · doi:10.1642/0004-8038(2002)119[1064:dpoped]2.0.co;2
  20. 10.2307/4088270 · doi:10.2307/4088270
  21. 10.1098/rspb.2002.2083 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.2083
  22. 10.1007/s00227-007-0642-z · doi:10.1007/s00227-007-0642-z
  23. 10.1111/j.1474-919X.1982.tb03777.x · doi:10.1111/j.1474-919x.1982.tb03777.x
  24. 10.1111/j.1744-7429.2007.00319.x · doi:10.1111/j.1744-7429.2007.00319.x
  25. 10.1017/S0952836901001509 · doi:10.1017/s0952836901001509
  26. 10.1139/Z07-081 · doi:10.1139/z07-081
  27. 10.1163/156853906776240641 · doi:10.1163/156853906776240641
  28. 10.2307/1311297 · doi:10.2307/1311297
  29. 10.1642/0004-8038(2007)124[916:MRODNI]2.0.CO;2 · doi:10.1642/0004-8038(2007)124[916:mrodni]2.0.co;2
  30. 10.1650/0010-5422(2000)102[0561:NAFROM]2.0.CO;2 · doi:10.1650/0010-5422(2000)102[0561:nafrom]2.0.co;2
  31. 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2007.15833.x · doi:10.1111/j.0030-1299.2007.15833.x
  32. 10.2307/1942594 · doi:10.2307/1942594
  33. 10.1093/beheco/ari035 · doi:10.1093/beheco/ari035
  34. 10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00652.x · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00652.x
  35. 10.3354/meps208265 · doi:10.3354/meps208265
  36. 10.1016/j.dsr2.2006.11.012 · doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2006.11.012
  37. Voslamber B., 1995, Solitary foraging in sand pits by breeding cormorants Phalacrocorax carbo sinensis –does specialized knowledge about fishing sites and fish behavior pay off?, Ardea, 83, 213
  38. 10.1650/7261 · doi:10.1650/7261
  39. 10.1007/BF00238872 · doi:10.1007/bf00238872
  40. 10.1034/j.1600-048X.2001.320214.x · doi:10.1034/j.1600-048x.2001.320214.x

Cited by

See all 320

Metadata

Authors
Woo, K. J., Elliott, K. H., Davidson, M., Gaston, A. J., & Davoren, G. K.
Venue
Journal of Animal Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-10-14
Volume
77
Issue
6
Pages
1082-1091
ISSN
  • 0021-8790 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2656
OpenAlex
W2123444908
Cited by
320
References
58
FWCI
12.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Individual specialization in diet by a generalist marine predator reflects specialization in foraging behaviour. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01429.x
The paper
Woo, K. J., Elliott, K. H., Davidson, M., Gaston, A. J., & Davoren, G. K. (2008). Individual specialization in diet by a generalist marine predator reflects specialization in foraging behaviour. Journal of Animal Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01429.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.