Part II
. The changes in the world numbers of the gannet in a century. J. Anim. Ecol. 13:49-62.
Flegg, J. J. M. 1972. The puffin on St. Kilda 1969-71. Bird Study 19:7-17.
Forbush, E. H. 1929. Birds of Massachusetts and other New England States. Vol. I. Massachusetts Department of Agriculture, Boston. 481 pp.
Fordham, R. A. 1968. Dispersion and dispersal of the Dominican gull in Wellington, New Zealand. Proc. New Zeal. Ecol. Soc. 15:40-50.
Fordham, R. A. 1970. Mortality and population change of Dominican gulls in Wellington, New Zealand, with a statistical appendix by R. M. Cormack. J. Anim. Ecol. 39(1):13-27.
Frazer-Darling, F. 1938. Bird flocks and the breeding cycle. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, England. 124 pp.
Gilpin, M. E. 1975. Limit cycles in competition communities. Am. Nat. 109:51-60.
Gromme, O. J. 1927. Some highlights on the faunal life of the Alaskan Peninsula. Milw. Public Mus. Yearb. 7:30-45.
Hansen, H. A., and U. C. Nelson. 1957. Brant of the Bering Sea--migration and mortality. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Nat. Resour. Conf. 22:237-256.
Harrington, B. A. 1974. Colony visitation behavior and breeding ages of sooty terns _(Sterna fuscata)_. Bird-Banding 45(2):115-144.
Harris, M. P. 1964. Aspects of the breeding biology of the gulls _Larus argentatus_, _L. fuscus_ and _L. marinus_. Ibis 106(4):432-456.
Harris, M. P. 1976. The present status of the puffin in Britain and Ireland. Brit. Birds 69(7):239-264.
Harris, M. P., and W. J. Plumb. 1965. Experiments on the ability of herring gulls _Larus argentatus_ and lesser black-backed gulls _L. fuscus_ to raise larger than normal broods. Ibis 107(2):256-257.
Hickey, J. J., editor. 1969. Peregrine falcon populations--their biology and decline. Univ. Wisconsin Press, Madison. 596 pp.
Hildén, O. 1965. Habitat selection in birds: a review. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 2(1):53-75.
Holdgate, M. W., editor. 1971. The sea bird wreck in the Irish Sea, autumn 1969. Nat. Environ. Res. Council Publ. Ser. C, No. 4. 17 pp.
Hultén, E. 1937. Outline of the history of arctic and boreal biota during the Quaternary period. Bokforlags Aktiebolaget Thule, Stockholm. 168 pp.
Hunt, G. L. 1972. Influence of food distribution and human disturbance on the reproductive success of herring gulls. Ecology 53(6):1051-1061.
Jones, R. D. 1970. Reproductive success and age distribution of black brant. J. Wildl. Manage. 34(2):328-333.
Kadlec, J. A. 1971. Effects of introducing foxes and raccoons on herring gull colonies. J. Wildl. Manage. 35(4):625-636.
Kadlec, J. A., and W. H. Drury. 1968. Structure of the New England herring gull population. Ecology 49(4):644-676.
Kenyon, K. W., and R. E. Phillips. 1965. Birds from the Pribilof Islands and vicinity. Auk 82(4):624-635.
Klein, D. R. 1959. Saint Matthew Island reindeer-range study. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv., Spec. Sci. Rep.--Wildl. 43. 48 pp.
Kluyver, H. N. 1951. The population ecology of the great tit, _Parus major_ L. Ardea 39:1-135.
Kluyver, H. N. 1966. Regulation of a bird population. Ostrich 38 (Suppl. 6):389-396.
Kluyver, H. N., and L. Tinbergen. 1953. Territory and the regulation of density in titmice. Arch. Neér. Zool. 10:265-289.
Lack, D. 1948. Natural selection and family size in the starling. Evolution 2:95-110.
Lack, D. 1954. The natural regulation of animal numbers. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 343 pp.
Lack, D. 1964. A long-term study of the great tit _(Parus major)_. J. Anim. Ecol. 33(Suppl.):159-173.
Lack, D. 1966. Population studies of birds. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 341 pp.
Mackay, G. H. 1893. Observations on the breeding habits of _Larus atricilla_ in Massachusetts. Auk 10(4):333-336.
Manuwal, D. A. 1974. Effects of territoriality on breeding in a population of Cassin's auklet. Ecology 55(6):1399-1406.
May, R. M., and W. J. Leonard. 1975. Nonlinear aspects of competition between species. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 29(2):243-253.
Mills, J. A. 1973. The influence of age and pair bond on the breeding biology of the red-billed gull _Larus novaehollandiae scopulinus_. J. Anim. Ecol. 42:147-162.
Murphy, R. C. 1936. Oceanic birds of South America, Vols. I and II. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York. 1245 pp.
Murray, M. D., and R. Carrick. 1964. Seasonal movements and habitats of the silver gull _Larus novaehollandiae_ Stephens in southeastern Australia. CSIRO Wildl. Res. 9:160-188.
Nelson, J. B. 1966. Population dynamics of the gannet at Bass Rock, with comparative information for other Sulidae. J. Anim. Ecol. 35:443-470.
Nettleship, D. 1972. Breeding success of the common puffin (_Fratercula arctica_ L.) on different habitats at Great Island, Newfoundland. Ecol. Monogr. 42:239-268.
Nicholson, A. J. 1933. The balance of animal populations. J. Anim. Ecol. 2:132-178.
Nisbet, I. C. T. 1972. Disaster year for terns. Man and Nature, Dec. 1972:16-21.
Nisbet, I. C. T. 1973. Courtship-feeding, egg-size and breeding success in common terns. Nature 241:141-142.
Nisbet, I. C. T., and W. H. Drury. 1972. Post-fledging survival in herring gulls in relation to brood-size and date of hatching. Bird-Banding 43(3):161-172.
Noble, G. K., and M. Würm. 1943. The social behavior of the laughing gull. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 45:179-200.
Norton, A. H. 1921. Report of the field agent for Maine. Bird-Lore 23:355-356.
Norton, A. H. 1924. Notes on birds of the Knox County region. Maine Nat. 4:35-39.
Palmer, R. S. 1949. Marine birds. Harvard Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. 102. 656 pp.
Perrins, C. 1965. Population fluctuations and clutch-size in the great tit, _Parus major_ L. J. Anim. Ecol. 34:601-647.
Pitelka, F. A., P. Q. Tomich, and G. W. Treichel. 1955. Ecological relations of jaegers and owls as lemming predators near Barrow, Alaska. Ecol. Monogr. 25:85-117.
Preble, E. A., and W. L. McAtee. 1923. A biological survey of the Pribilof Islands, Alaska. U.S. Fish. Wildl. Serv., N. Am. Fauna 46:1-255.
Reed, A., and J. G. Cousineau. 1967. Epidemics involving the common eider _(Somateria mollissima)_ at Ile Blanche, Quebec. Nat. Can. (Que.) 94:327-334.
Sealy, S. G., F. H. Fay, J. Bédard, and M. D. F. Udvardy. 1971. New records and zoogeographical notes on the birds of St. Lawrence Island, Bering Sea. Condor 73(3):322-336.
Serventy, D. L. 1967. Aspects of the population ecology of the short-tailed shearwater _Puffinus tenuirostris_. Proc. Int. Ornithol. Congr. xiv:165-190.
Sladen, W. J. L. 1966. Additions to the avifauna of the Pribilof Islands, Alaska, including five species new to North America. Auk 83:130-135.
Soots, R. F., Jr., and J. F. Parnell. 1975. Ecological succession of breeding birds in relation to plant succession on dredge islands in North Carolina estuaries. N.C. Sea Grant Publ. UNC-SG-75-27, Raleigh.
Thompson, M. C., and R. L. DeLong. 1969. Birds new to North America and the Pribilof Islands, Alaska. Auk 86(4):747-749.
Tickell, W. L. N. 1968. The biology of the great albatrosses, _Diomedea exulans_ and _Diomedea epomorpha_. Antarct. Res. Ser. 12:1-55.
Tuck, L. M. 1960. The murres: their distribution, populations and biology. Can. Wildl. Serv., Rep. Ser. No. 1. 260 pp.
Uspenski, A. M. 1956. The bird bazaars of Novaya Zemlya. U.S.S.R. Acad. Sci., Moscow. (Translated from Russian.) Canad. Wildl. Serv. Transl. Russian Game Rep. 4. 159 pp.
Vermeer, K. 1963. The breeding ecology of the glaucous-winged gull _(Larus glaucescens)_ on Mandarte Island, B.C. Occas. Pap. B. C. Prov. Mus. 13:1-104.
Wynne-Edwards, V. C. 1959. The control of population-density through social behaviour: a hypothesis. Ibis 101:436-441.
Time-Energy Use and Life History Strategies of Northern Seabirds
by
Erica H. Dunn
Long Point Bird Observatory
Point Rowan, Ontario, Canada
Abstract
Time and energy budgets can be compared among species of birds with very different ecology as a way of summarizing differences and as an approach to determining selective pressures on each species. This paper reviews time-energy use of northern seabirds. Energetic cost of maintenance (basal metabolism, thermoregulation, and procurement and processing of food) depends largely on the following factors: (1) small birds have higher metabolic costs per unit size than do larger ones; (2) body structure affects the cost of locomotion as well as of food procurement; (3) climate affects metabolic costs; and (4) food availability and nutrition vary among food types, and throughout the year within a food type. Little is known of maintenance energetics in seabirds. Time and energy allocations to items beyond basic maintenance are also compared. Patterns and costs of molt and migration are known only in a general way, and the variety of possible patterns suggests that more research would be of value. Almost nothing is known of location and daily activities of seabirds outside the breeding season. The review of breeding season activities is more comprehensive, and stresses the variety of factors known to affect timing, and the total time devoted to and the energetic costs of various aspects of reproduction. Some of these factors are weather, year, geographic location, feeding conditions, age, sex, and distance of food source from the breeding colony. Species characteristics such as clutch size, egg and yolk size, developmental type, growth rate, food type, and behavior combine with environmental variables to make seabirds a very diverse group in time and energy budgeting. Time-energy studies and determination of productive energy (energy remaining after maintenance needs have been met) can be useful in pinpointing those groups of birds and the times of year when birds are most vulnerable to environmental stress. Life history considerations suggest that most seabirds are adapted to low population turnover and would not be able to recover quickly from sudden increases in mortality.
Effective management of a population requires manipulation of the factors most critical in causing population increase or decrease. Deciding what these factors are and which are most suitable for effective manipulation is very difficult due to the complexity of life cycles and possible factors affecting demography. It takes a thorough knowledge of a species and of its relationships with the biotic and abiotic environment to make effective management decisions. The following review of seabird time and energy use is meant to emphasize the wide variation of species ecology within this avian group.
Time and energy patterning is being used as the basis of ecological comparison for the following reason. Any activity of an animal requires time and energy use; therefore, the patterning of use makes a common thread to which allocation to all activities in a bird's life cycle can be related. Time-energy patterns can be compared among birds with diverse food types, habitats, life cycles, and life expectancy, and therefore offer an opportunity for comparison not available through other kinds of analysis (King 1974).
The amounts of time and energy allocated by an organism to different aspects of survival and reproduction should be regarded as being molded by natural selection to optimize (not necessarily to maximize) lifetime reproductive output (Fisher 1958; Williams 1966; Schoener 1971). Thus, differences in time and energy use between species should reflect adaptation to different biotic and abiotic environments. By comparing time and energy use, one can gain insight into the selective pressures on each species and have a basis on which to compare complex ecology more meaningfully than if one listed other types of differences.
This review of time-energy use in northern seabirds cannot be comprehensive, largely because many of the necessary data are lacking. It stresses major areas of difference, however, and points out aspects about which little is yet known.
Cost of Living
Every animal must expend a basic amount of energy on normal maintenance, excluding activities normally allocated to a relatively narrow time span, such as reproduction. This "existence energy" expenditure consists of basal metabolism, thermoregulation, and the costs of gathering and processing food, and could also be referred to as the animal's basic "cost of living." In discussing the components of the cost of living, energy use is emphasized and time largely ignored--partly because metabolism occurs irrespective of time (it is not something the animal can turn off for a period) and partly because time use in normal maintenance and foraging has been little studied.
_Metabolism_
Basal metabolic rate (BMR) depends greatly on body size (Lasiewski and Dawson 1967; Zar 1968), and the costs per unit size are higher for a small bird than for a large one (Fig. 1). The BMR is somewhat lower in seabirds and other nonpasserines than in passerines of similar size (Dawson and Hudson 1970).
[Illustration: Fig. 1. Energy cost of various metabolic functions in relation to body size in birds. "0° Existence" refers to total metabolic costs of caged birds held at 0°C. From Calder (1974).]
The relationship between BMR and body size is paralleled by that between size and other metabolic costs, such as for thermoregulation at a given temperature and for activity (Fig. 1; Kendeigh 1970; Tucker 1970; Schmidt-Nielsen 1972; Berger and Hart 1974; Calder 1974). Basal metabolic rate can therefore be used as an index of the overall cost of living as far as metabolic functions are concerned. Small birds must allocate a greater proportion of their energy resources than larger ones to merely staying alive, and have a higher cost of living.
The suggestion in Fig. 1 that it is easy to measure activity costs in a straightforward manner is misleading, because the figure represents measures taken under standard conditions. Factors known to affect the cost of flight, for example, include anatomical adaptations (such as wing loading and wing shape), the type of flight (ascending, descending, gliding), and the speed of flight (Fig. 2; Tucker 1969, 1974; Hainsworth and Wolf 1975). The cost of a series of short flights may be higher than that for a long one because of the extra energy required for takeoff and landing. A few estimates have been made for the cost of flight, mostly in birds moving almost constantly (Lasiewski 1963; Nisbet 1963; Tucker 1972, 1974; Utter and LeFebvre 1970; Berger and Hart 1974), but the methods may be inadequate for birds that fly short distances frequently.
[Illustration: Fig. 2. Energy cost of flying at different speeds and angles as compared with basal metabolic rate (BMR). Solid lines and solid circle refer to flight cost and BMR for budgerigar _(Melopsitticus undulatus)_. Dashed line and open circle refer to flight cost and BMR of the laughing gull. From Tucker (1969).]
Little work has been done on the cost of locomotion in seabirds: that of Eliassen (1963) on great black-backed gulls _(Larus marinus)_, Berger et al. (1970) on ring-billed gulls _(L. delawarensis)_, and Tucker (1972) on the laughing gull _(L. atricilla)_, and indirect calculations of soaring flight characteristics in albatrosses, _Diomedea_ spp. (Cone 1964), and the fulmar, _Fulmarus glacialis_ (Pennycuick 1960). Swimming has been shown to be more costly than flying in ducks (Schmidt-Nielsen 1972) and may be for seabirds as well. More energy is also probably used in underwater swimming than in flying.
The energetic costs of thermoregulation under natural conditions are not easy to estimate. Thermal energy is gained from and lost to the environment, and the degree of exchange depends not only on air temperature but also on metabolic rate, insulation, body temperature, posture, humidity, convection, and radiation. Radiation, in turn, depends on cloud cover, shade, and reflective and absorptive characteristics of the organism and of the environment (Porter and Gates 1969; Calder and King 1974). Most of these quantities are changing constantly, and insulation and metabolic rate may vary on a seasonal basis with acclimation (Dawson and Hudson 1970).
At present, no direct measurement technique exists for determining natural thermoregulatory costs, although a few estimates have been made (King 1974), including several for seabird nestlings (Dunn 1976_a_, 1976_b_ for double-crested cormorants, _Phalacrocorax auritus_, and for herring gulls, _Larus argentatus_). For most birds, the temperature environment actually faced over a year's time has never been measured, and for no bird has a full description of the complete thermal environment been made. It is clear that climate and degree of exposure are important elements in the basic cost of living, and that thermoregulatory costs average higher in small birds than in larger ones, but beyond that little information is available. Work on thermoregulatory costs of free-living chicks of two species of seabirds suggests that insulative properties can lead to marked differences in the metabolic costs of different species in an essentially identical environment (Dunn 1976_a_, 1976_b_).
_Food Procurement and Processing_
Gathering and processing food is another major component of the cost of living. Both the nutritional value of food and its availability (a rather vague term covering both abundance and ease of capture) are extremely diverse and variable, making estimations of foraging cost and benefit difficult (Ashmole 1971; Fisher 1972; Sealy 1975_a_).
Availability of food varies throughout the year, particularly in marine invertebrates that form the diet of many seabirds (e.g., Spaans 1971; Bédard 1969_a_). High arctic oceans have a very high peak of productivity in the summer, whereas the low arctic has a lower, but longer-lasting, peak (Ashmole 1971). Fish stocks increase in summer as well (Snow 1960; Pearson 1968; Sealy 1975_a_), and decline or disperse in autumn (Potts 1968). Catch-ability may also differ widely from year to year (e.g., E. K. Dunn 1973).
Marine foods are likely to have a patchy distribution, which may make food stocks difficult to locate, even in times of abundance (Ashmole 1971; Sealy 1975_a_). Birds in localities with low food abundance frequently show alterations in time and pattern of foraging, sometimes even changing diets (Cramp 1972; Henderson 1972; Hunt 1972; Lemmetyinen 1972). The time and energy expended in finding and capturing food by different seabird species must vary widely according to the form of foraging used: plunge-diving, beach scavenging, aerial robbing, underwater pursuit, and so on. Even when different species have traveled the same distance to an identical food stock, therefore, the costs of procurement differ.
Time and energy spent foraging depends not only on abundance and ease of capture, but also on nutritional return, and on the age and size of the bird. Fig. 3 shows that the smaller species in a seabird community may spend the most time foraging. Even though this illustration is taken from the breeding season when food demands of the young must be taken into account, it suggests a difference based on cost of living according to size.
[Illustration: Fig. 3. Time spent foraging in the breeding season as a function of body size. From Pearson (1968). AT = arctic tern _(Sterna paradisaea)_, CT = common tern _(S. hirundo)_, ST = sandwich tern _(Thalasseus sandvicensis)_, K = black-legged kittiwake, P = common puffin, M = common murre, LBB = lesser black-backed gull, S = shag.]
Age of the bird affects time and energy commitment to foraging because younger birds are often less skilled at capturing food. This has been noted particularly in long-lived seabird species (Orians 1969; Dunn 1972; LeCroy 1972; Buckley and Buckley 1974; Barash et al. 1975). Older juveniles may be excluded from feeding areas by more experienced, territorial adults (Moyle 1966), whereas immatures are not (Drury and Smith 1968; Ingolfsson 1969).
Nutritional and energetic return obtained from food is a very important factor in foraging strategy that has not received the attention it deserves. Table 1 lists the caloric value of various foodstuffs and illustrates how little is known about foods eaten by seabirds. Although caloric content and abundance of food have often been accepted as the most important determinants of foraging strategies (Bookhout 1958; Emlen 1966; West 1967; Bryant 1973), they may frequently be less important than nutritional value and digestibility, also shown in Table 1 (Pulliam 1974).
Since fish seem to be highly digestible, most of the energy contained in them is available to the consumer. There are, unfortunately, no data on the digestibility of marine invertebrates, but those for insects suggest that digestibility, at least of crustaceans with exoskeletons, is somewhat lower than that for fish. A bird would therefore have to eat a larger biomass of invertebrates than of fish to satisfy the same energetic needs (although cost of procurement might not be as high as for fish).
Table 1. _Nutritional value of foods eaten by birds._ After data in Hunt (1972) and E. H. Dunn (1973).
A: Kcal/g fresh wt. B: Digestive efficiency C: Kcal metabolizable energy/g fresh wt.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Percent fresh wt. composed of: ---------------------- Food type A H₂O Fat Protein B C ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Vegetable 1.2-5.2 59-86 0.4-3 3-5 30-32 0.3-2.3 Tropical fruits 1.2 75 8 1 Various seeds 4.0-7.3 3-13 1-40 10-29 76-80 3.0-5.2 Various insects 1.4-5.2 65-75 1-3 9-18 66-69 0.9-3.5 Whiting (fish) 1.1 81 79 0.9 Various freshwater fishes 1.2 75 5 18 81 Mix of fish eaten by double-crested cormorants 1.1 74 1 16 82 0.9 on NE coast Fresh herring and mackerel 1.9 67 13 19 Garbage ("average" mix) 1.5 67 8 19 Crab with eggs 1.0 68 5 1 Euphausid shrimp 0.8 80 2 1 Clam (edible part only) 0.8 80 1 13 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A bird must satisfy not only energetic needs, but also nutritional requirements. Fish are high in protein (Table 1), but what little is known of marine invertebrates suggests a low proportion of protein in relation to total bulk. Protein is vital to growth of nestlings (Fisher 1972; Lemmetyinen 1972), and 4-8% protein in the diet seems to be required for minimal maintenance of adults (Martin 1968; Fisher 1972). Some seabirds (such as puffins, _Fratercula_) that eat a varied diet raise their young exclusively on fish (Bédard 1969_b_; Nettleship 1972; Sealy 1973_a_).
Other aspects of nutrition, such as vitamins and minerals, are also important to avian health (Brisbin 1965; Fisher 1972). To further complicate matters, nutritional values vary with season, as do birds' requirements for them (Myton and Ficken 1967; Moss 1972). Adults must adjust their time and energy allocation to foraging to optimize not only energetic, but also nutritional return.
Optimal time and energy allocation has been studied in theory (Orians 1971; Schoener 1971; Pulliam 1974; Katz 1974) and some direct observations have been carried out, largely on seedeaters (Bookhout 1958; Myton and Ficken 1967; Royama 1970; Moss 1972; Willson 1971; Willson and Harmeson 1973). The direct studies, in particular, point out the basic importance of studying cost-benefit ratios by interrelating complex factors of food availability, searching patterns, and type, size, and caloric and nutritional value of foods.
Time-energy Use Beyond the Cost of Living
This section concerns variation in time and energy allocated by seabirds to activities above and beyond the cost of living--particularly to migration, molt, and reproduction. Allocation to such items as avoidance of predation and competition is not considered here, because they are not readily analyzed as activities to which time and energy are devoted in a specific part of the annual cycle.
The previous discussion dwelt on energy considerations and could have referred to almost any group of birds. The following treatment centers on time use of northern seabirds. Little is known of energetics beyond the cost of living, although estimates have been made for certain aspects of migration, molt, and reproduction (Nisbet 1963; Hussell 1969; Hart and Berger 1972; Payne 1972; Ricklefs 1974). Essentially nothing is known, however, of the relationship of such costs to the amount of energy available to the bird once basic maintenance costs have been met (productive energy). Because such complete data are not available, the following account dwells largely on variation in timing and total time devoted to activities beyond basic maintenance.
[Illustration: Fig. 4. Typical patterns of generalized annual cycles in reproduction, migration, and wing molt in northern seabirds. Solid line shows reproductive season, dotted line the period of migration or dispersion, and dashed line the period of annual primary molt. Data from Dorst (1961), Stresemann and Stresemann (1966), and Ashmole (1971).]
_Migration_
Among northwestern North American seabirds, most coastal feeders, such as gulls, cormorants, and many alcids and petrels, have only a short southward migratory movement, and many others are more or less resident (Dorst 1961; Ashmole 1971). Terns, on the other hand, migrate long distances in a short time to places where small fish are available near shore in the winter. Other long-distance migrants--Sabine's gull _(Xema sabini)_, jaegers (_Stercorarius_ spp.), pelagic phalaropes (_Phalaropus_, _Lobipes_), and kittiwakes (_Rissa_ spp.)--tend to scatter widely over the southern ocean, concentrating near areas of upwelling (Dorst 1961; Ashmole 1971). Groups such as murres (_Uria_ spp.), eiders (_Somateria_ spp.), and grebes (_Podiceps_ spp.) may move considerable distances by swimming (Dorst 1961; Tuck 1960). True migration tends to take place directly before and after reproduction, whereas dispersal or nomadism takes place over a long period of the winter (Fig. 4).
Among species remaining in the northern hemisphere, younger birds frequently disperse greater distances than do breeding adults (Coulson 1961; Kadlec and Drury 1968; Southern 1967), and the degree of dispersal can vary among colonies of the same species (Coulson and Brazendale 1968).
Energy costs of migration must vary according to distances covered and amount of time allocated to migration. Aside from the references to cost of flight mentioned earlier, however, migratory costs have scarcely been studied. Dolnik (1971) has estimated that chaffinches _(Fringilla coelebs)_ expend about as much energy migrating south as they would on thermoregulation if they overwintered on their breeding grounds. Long-distance migration is presumably selected because the birds are able to collect food more efficiently, because the risks of death or injury in migrating are less than in residency, and so on. Interspecific and intraspecific competition may also be involved (Cox 1968). In other words, migratory patterns are selected to optimize survival and reproduction in alternating environments (Cohen 1967; Drury and Nisbet 1972).
Table 2. _Wing molt in alcids._ After Stresemann and Stresemann (1966).
--------------------------------------------------------------------- Rapidity of wing molt Timing of start of molt Species and (indented) flight capability in molt
Slow Retained During care of young Cassin's auklet, parakeet auklet _(Cyclorhynchus psittacula)_, whiskered auklet _(Aethia pygmaea)_
Retained After young become Least auklet independent _(A. pusilla)_, crested auklet _(A. cristatella)_
Rapid Poor After arrival in Marbled murrelet, winter quarters Kittlitz's murrelet _(Brachyramphus brevirostris)_
Almost synchronous None After end of breeding Xantus' murrelet _(Endomychura hypoleuca)_
Synchronous None As soon as young go to Guillemots (_Cepphus_ sea spp.), murres, razorbill _(Alca torda)_, dovekie _(Alle alle)_
None In winter, after body Puffins molt ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Although one may suspect that location of winter food supply is the main environmental factor affecting migratory patterns, there is little direct evidence on the reasons for, or the benefits accruing from, the different patterns seen in seabirds. Study of cost-benefit ratios of foraging in different stages of migration might help clarify the question.
_Molt_
Patterns of molt vary widely among seabirds. The commonest pattern is for a prenuptial body molt to occur in spring, and for an extended wing molt to begin after the breeding season and continue well into the winter (Fig. 4). In short-distance migrants, molt may overlap slightly with the end of breeding and can last up to 6 months, as in most gulls, terns, alcids, nonmigratory jaegers, and cormorants (Stresemann and Stresemann 1966).
Long-distance migrants frequently delay molt until in the winter quarters (lesser black-backed gull, _Larus fuscus_; Sabine's gull; jaegers; arctic tern, _Sterna paradisaea_; and marbled murrelet, _Brachyramphus marmoratus_) and molt there may occur rapidly (3.5 months in the arctic tern). Certain other long-distance migrants begin molt before leaving the breeding grounds (herring gull; skua, _Catharacta skua_; Leach's petrel, _Oceanodroma leucorhoa_; and fulmar), although molt may be interrupted during migration, as in _Larus argentatus heuglini_ (Stresemann and Stresemann 1966). Duration, timing, and rapidity of molt are particularly varied among the alcids (Table 2).
A few unusual molt patterns are found in northern seabirds. The ivory gull _(Pagophila eburnea)_ has its major annual wing and body molt immediately before it breeds. In several other species such as the glaucous gull _(Larus hyperboreus)_ and Cassin's auklet _(Ptychoramphus aleuticus)_ the molt almost completely overlaps the reproductive cycle (Johnston 1961; Payne 1965). Potts (1971) documented a molt pattern in shags _(Phalacrocorax aristotelis)_ which is more typical of tropical seabirds. Several cycles of wing molt take place simultaneously, each lasting more than a year, and molt ceases in winter. By the time breeding age is reached, each flight feather is replaced once a year.
Within these broad categories of molt pattern there are sometimes variations according to age, sex, and even subspecies (Stresemann and Stresemann 1966). Male common eiders _(Somateria mollissima)_ molt directly after mating, when their reproductive role is completed, whereas females molt only after they have taken their young to sea. Nonbreeders and failed breeders frequently begin molt while other adults are still raising young and not molting--e.g., many alcids, gulls, storm-petrels, and fulmars (Stresemann and Stresemann 1966; Ingolfsson 1970; Harris 1971; Harris 1974; Sealy 1975_b_). In ivory gulls, which molt just before reproduction, and in Sabine's gulls, which complete molt just before breeding, nonbreeders may extend wing feather growth into the breeding season (Stresemann and Stresemann 1966).
There is little information on the energetic cost of molt, although there are indications of at least some expense. Belopol'skii (1961) showed that nonmolting seabird species tended to gain weight after reproduction, whereas those that immediately started molt tended to lose weight. Among other birds, however, it is common for individuals to gain weight just before, and even during molt (Payne 1972). The BMR is known to rise in molting birds (Blackmore 1969; Lustick 1970; Payne 1972), from as little as 5% to as much as 34% above nonmolting levels. In one study, about 35-40% of the increased BMR represented extra thermoregulatory costs incurred by lessening of insulation and increase in heat loss from well-vascularized new feathers; the rest of the increase represented the energetic cost of growing feathers (Gavrilov 1974). The fact that molt rarely overlaps with breeding suggests that the energetic cost, even if slight, may be incompatible with the already high costs of reproduction (Payne 1972). Cassin's auklets, which do molt while breeding, may cease molt while feeding large young (Payne 1965), and certain species interrupt molt during migration (Stresemann and Stresemann 1966). Doubtless a rapid simultaneous molt is more costly than a long gradual one.
Rapid molt appears to occur at a time in the annual cycle when food resources are abundant (spring or late summer), whereas extended molt generally occurs over winter (e.g., Bédard 1969_a_). If one speculates that energy availability is the main determinant of molt patterns, one can also speculate on the cause behind some of the more unusual patterns. Possibly birds in which molt and breeding overlap either have extraordinary available energy at that time or else face shortages in other periods. For example, ivory gulls, which breed in the high Arctic, molt when food resources have become abundant in the low Arctic but before the high Arctic breeding grounds have thawed sufficiently for reoccupation.
Speed of molt may also reflect availability of energy resources or of nutrients needed for feather growth (Payne 1972), but must also be influenced by the need for full flight capabilities to obtain food. The eider duck and many alcids that shed wing feathers almost simultaneously do not need their wings for flight after the young have left the breeding colony. Hydrodynamic considerations suggest that their fishing capabilities may even be improved (Storer 1960). This is not true for the smaller species--e.g., _Aethia_ molts only one feather at a time and retains full flight capabilities (Table 2). Climate may also influence simultaneity of molt if heat loss in rapid molt is
## particularly severe.
_Reproduction_
Time use of seabirds is best known for the reproductive period, when the birds are on relatively accessible breeding grounds, the weather is most suitable for observation, and academic researchers are freed from their jobs. Even so, the details of timing are known for only a few of the species and localities on the northwest North American coast (e.g., Drent and Guiguet 1961; Drent et al. 1964; Cody 1973; Sealy 1973_a_, 1975_b_, 1975_c_). The following discussion emphasizes the multitude of environmental factors known to influence timing and total length of time devoted to various aspects of the reproductive cycle.
Timing of the Season
Each species of seabird returns to the colony site when weather conditions have ameliorated sufficiently to meet its particular needs. For example, the early arrivals to islands in the Barents Sea are murres, kittiwakes, and herring gulls, which need only small cracks in the sea ice to meet their feeding requirements (Belopol'skii 1961). Eiders in North America also return early, when a few ice leads have formed (Schamel 1974). Common puffins _(Fratercula arctica)_ and mew gulls _(Larus canus)_ are somewhat later arrivals, and terns and a few parasitic jaegers _(Stercorarius parasiticus)_ are the latecomers to Barents Sea colonies (Belopol'skii 1961).
The timing of the season (as illustrated in Fig. 5) varies widely among localities, and because of local weather patterns and ocean currents, this variation can be unrelated to latitude (Belopol'skii 1961). Examples of such variation are also known in North America: for instance, Leach's storm-petrels in Alaska lay eggs 2 to 3 weeks later than do those in California (Harris 1974); however, the details of timing are largely unknown for many species in this region. Progression of thaw, which also varies from year to year, causes variation in the timing of the breeding season (Belopol'skii 1961; Evans and McNicholl 1972). Fig. 6 shows the diversity in start of the breeding season for different species on the same island in the Barents Sea as well as variation in time devoted to various components of the reproductive cycle.
[Illustration: Fig. 5. Differential average arrival on breeding grounds and average duration of prenesting period of thick-billed murres _(Uria lomvia)_ and black-legged kittiwakes on various colonies in the Barents Sea. From Belopol'skii (1961). Length of prenesting period in days (shaded bars) indicated on right. Letters represent locations as follows: A = Novaya Zemlya, Kara Straits; B = Novaya Zemlya, Karmakuly Bay; C = Franz Josef Land; and D = East Murman.]
Prenesting Activities
Some species are apparently able to delay maturity of sexual organs until environmental conditions are suitable for nesting--e.g., burrow and crevice nesters in the Barents Sea do not become sexually mature until snowmelt (Belopol'skii 1961). Many others, however, reach sexual maturity soon after arrival on the breeding grounds, and a few (such as jaegers and kittiwakes) mature in migration or on the wintering grounds (Belopol'skii 1961). Northern phalaropes _(Lobipes lobatus)_ sometimes lay eggs as early as 1 week after arrival (Hilden and Vuolanto 1972). This factor, in combination with timing of arrival, affects the amount of time spent in prenesting activities (Fig. 6). Most species gain weight during this period (Belopol'skii 1961), and the time required for each species to reach full breeding condition must also depend on feeding conditions and the state of the bird on its arrival at the nesting site. These factors help explain why early arriving species are not necessarily early nesters (Fig. 6).
[Illustration: Fig. 6. Variation in timing of events in the reproductive cycle of Barents Sea seabirds nesting on the same island. Data from Belopol'skii (1961). Shaded bars at left indicate the prelaying periods, open bars the incubation periods, and shaded bars at right the portion of the growth period in which the chick remains at the nest site. Total length of time indicated is about 6 months.]
Aside from nest building, most prenesting activity consists of courtship and territorial behavior. These activities have been well described for representative seabird species, but because assessments of time and energy devoted to them have been almost completely neglected, they are not discussed further here. For examples, see accounts in Gross (1935) for Leach's storm-petrel; Tinbergen (1935), Bengtson (1968), Höhn (1971), and Howe (1975) for phalaropes; Storer (1952) for common murre, _Uria aalge_, and black guillemot, _Cepphus grylle_; Tschanz (1959) for common murre; Brown et al. (1967) for Sabine's gull; Tinbergen (1960) for herring gull; McKinney (1961) for eiders; Snow (1963) for shag; Thoresen (1964) for Cassin's auklet; Vermeer (1963) and James-Veitch and Booth (1974) for glaucous-winged gull _(Larus glaucescens)_; and Andersson (1973) for jaegers.
Nest Building
Although many northern seabirds have essentially no nest, they may spend considerable time working or displaying at the site (Belopol'skii 1961). Black-legged kittiwakes _(Rissa tridactyla)_ have substantial nests, but they are built in a comparatively short time (about a week) soon after the birds arrive (Fig. 6). Shags also have substantial nests, but they are not completed until about 1 or 2 weeks before the first egg is laid (Snow 1963). Herring gulls build smaller nests, 5 to 10 days before laying, although in the Far North they and glaucous gulls may not start building the nest until the first egg is laid (Belopol'skii 1961). The eider always begins preparing the nest when the first egg is laid (Belopol'skii 1961; Schamel 1974), and terns and skuas, which build no nests, choose their sites at that time. Murres, which frequently lay their eggs directly on snow, choose a site somewhat earlier and spend considerable time protecting it (Belopol'skii 1961). Burrows may be dug within a period as short as 3 days for Leach's storm-petrel (Gross 1935) to one as long as several weeks in Cassin's auklets (Manuwal 1974_a_). Overall, the prelaying period is longer for burrow nesters than for those using crevices (Sealy 1973_a_).
The amount of time and energy spent by the male and female in nest building differs among species. In Leach's storm-petrel, the male digs the burrow (Gross 1935), whereas in eiders, the nest is built entirely by the female. In most seabird species, the sexes share in nest construction, but roles may still be separated. For example, in shags the male collects the nest material and the female builds the nest (Snow 1963).
Egg Laying
Timing of egg laying is influenced not only by weather (Erskine 1972; Sealy 1975_c_), but also by numerous biotic factors. Smith (1966) showed that where glaucous gulls, herring gulls, and Thayer's gulls _(Larus thayeri)_ breed in mixed colonies, the peak of sexual activity and egg laying in Thayer's gull is about midway between the peaks for the other two species (Fig. 7). In nearby colonies where herring gulls are absent, however, the peak of sexual activity in Thayer's gulls is delayed about a week, and activity continues for a significantly longer period (Fig. 7).
[Illustration: Fig. 7. Timing of peak sexual activity (a combined measure of egg laying and testes size) in colonies of arctic gulls of different species composition. From Smith (1966).]
Annual variations in food supply also will affect the start of the egg-laying season. Belopol'skii (1961) cited an example from the Barents Sea in 1940 when a series of storms made it difficult for certain seabirds to find food. Murres and kittiwakes, which were able to catch fish, started reproductive activities on schedule. Gull breeding was delayed, however, and egg laying began in force only after fishing boats arrived and started discarding offal. Onset of egg laying in great cormorants _(Phalacrocorax carbo)_ is correlated to April air temperatures (Erskine 1972), and this may also be related to variations in spring increase of food availability. In certain birds the breeding season has been shown to start particularly early when food supplies are unusually abundant (Högstedt 1974; Källender 1974), but this has not yet been demonstrated in seabirds.
Lastly, age and sex of seabirds are known to affect the timing of egg laying (e.g., Coulson and White 1960; Lack 1966); older, more experienced birds tend to lay earlier than do younger ones. In shags, males tend to breed progressively earlier as they increase in age, but females do not (Snow 1963).
Contrary to the situation in passerines, seabirds tend to lay their clutches with relatively large time intervals between eggs. Eggs may be laid every 2nd or 3rd day in alcids, larids, sternids, stercorariids, and phalacrocoracids (Lack 1968), but every day in phalaropes (Howe 1975). Inasmuch as clutch size in northern seabirds varies from one to five or six, the length of the laying period varies widely among species.
Energetic costs of egg laying depend on the actual caloric content of the egg and the speed with which the ova are developed (Ricklefs 1974). The energy in the egg is contained mainly in the yolk, and yolk size depends largely on the developmental pattern shown by the young after hatching (Table 3). Precocial chicks are hatched at a relatively advanced stage, are covered with down, and have open eyes, can maintain reasonably homeothermic body temperature, and leave the nest site to feed themselves after a few hours or days. At hatching, semiprecocial chicks appear similar to precocial chicks, although they are slightly less well developed (Ricklefs 1974; Dunn 1975_a_). In contrast to precocial chicks, they remain at the nest site for some time, are fed by their parents, and tend to grow rather rapidly (Ricklefs 1968). Altricial nestlings hatch at a much less advanced stage of development. They are naked, blind, helpless, essentially poikilothermic, and depend completely on their parents for food and shelter. They usually remain at the nest until full grown. Semialtricial chicks show somewhat intermediate characteristics (Nice 1962).
Table 3. _Amount of yolk in eggs of different types of birds._ After Ricklefs (1974). ------------------------------------------------ Developmental Percent yolk type (by weight) ------------------------------------------------ Precocial 30-60 Semiprecocial 25-30 Altricial 15-25 +----------------------------------------------+
The amount of yolk (and therefore energy) in an egg is positively correlated to the degree of development at hatching (Table 3). The same is true for egg size: altricial and semialtricial birds have smaller eggs relative to adult body weight than do semiprecocial and precocial birds (Fig. 8). Clutch size, however, is unrelated to energy content of the eggs. For example, shags (which are altricial) and eiders (precocial) have among the largest clutches of northern seabirds (four to six eggs).
[Illustration: Fig. 8. Egg weight as a function of body weight in various northern seabirds. Solid symbols represent precocial and semiprecocial species, and open symbols altricial and semialtricial species: solid circles, alcids; solid triangles, gulls, terns, and jaegers; solid squares, eiders; open squares, cormorants and _Morus bassanus_; and open circles, petrels. Data from Belopol'skii (1961); Drent (1965); Schönwetter (1967); Lack (1968); Bédard (1969_a_); Cody (1973); Sealy (1973_b_); Harris (1974); and Manuwal (1974_a_).]
The energetic cost of egg laying depends not only on caloric content of the egg and clutch size, but also on speed of development. Ricklefs (1974) has shown that the energetic cost per day of egg laying can be calculated from the energy content of the yolk and white, clutch size, the amount of follicular growth per day, and the laying interval between eggs. The energy content of a single egg (expressed as percentage of BMR) has been estimated as follows: 45 (altricial passerines), 103 (semialtricial raptors), 126 (precocial galliformes), 180 (precocial ducks), 226 (precocial shorebirds), and 320 (semiprecocial gulls and terns). Gulls and terns thus have very costly eggs, as well as a moderately high clutch size (three). However, the development time for a single ovum in the herring gull is unusually long--9 to 10 days (King 1973). Ricklefs (1974), who calculated the energetic cost per day (expressed as percentage BMR), estimated the cost of a clutch in gulls and terns (120% BMR per day) to be similar to that for various groups of precocial birds (about 125-180% BMR per day). Unfortunately, the data required for calculation of the average energetic cost of a clutch are not available for other northern seabirds.
For no species have all the additional factors influencing the energetic cost of a clutch been taken into account. For example, eggs in a clutch may vary in size (and caloric content) according to sequence in the clutch (Preston and Preston 1953; Snow 1960; Coulson 1963; Coulson et al. 1969). Age has a definite effect on laying energetics, as older birds lay larger eggs (Coulson and White 1958; Snow 1960; Coulson 1963; Coulson et al. 1969) and lay larger clutches (Coulson and White 1960; Snow 1960). They also lay, on average, earlier in the season (Coulson and White 1958; Snow 1960; Coulson et al. 1969), and eggs laid late in the season (whether by young birds or older ones in re-nesting attempts) tend to be smaller and contain less energy. In addition, egg quality can vary with food supply: Snow (1960) found eggs to have more yolk in years when food was abundant than in years when food was scarce.
Egg-laying costs are, of course, borne entirely by the female, although males may contribute some time and energy toward egg laying through courtship feeding (Ashmole 1971; Henderson 1972; Nisbet 1973). Courtship feeding takes place in most lariforms but not in eiders, phalaropes, or cormorants.
The time and energy expended on egg laying can be profoundly influenced by the degree of nest destruction, since females usually lay a replacement clutch if the loss of the first does not occur too late in the season. Factors causing egg destruction are numerous, but among the most important in the north is predation. As is shown in Table 4, the degree of egg predation in common murres is correlated to degree of exposure of the nest--so even such an unlikely sounding factor as physical characteristics of the nest site can affect the average time and energy expended on egg laying by a given species or population. Genuine second clutches are occasionally laid by phalaropes (Hilden and Vuolanto 1972) and Cassin's auklets (Manuwal 1974_a_).
Table 4. _Predation on nests of common murres according to degree of exposure._ From Belopol'skii (1961).
-------------------------------------------- Nests destroyed by Nest exposure predators (%) ------------------------------------------- Completely hidden 3.2
## Partly exposed 5.8
Largely exposed 13.6 Completely exposed 18.2 --------------------------------------------
In short, time and energy devoted to egg laying depend not only on the species, but also on a multitude of other biotic and abiotic factors, such as age, sex, degree of nest destruction, weather, other species present, and feeding conditions.
Incubation
The total time devoted to incubation does not depend directly on developmental type or egg size but differs markedly among families (Lack 1968). Since incubation period seems to be closely linked to fledging period, factors affecting growth rate (discussed later) apparently affect incubation period as well.
Each species has a different incubation rhythm. In birds in which the sexes share in incubation, the sexes exchange places at intervals that differ widely among different birds: several hours in lariforms and some alcids (Drent 1965; Lack 1968; Preston 1968; Drent 1970); about 4 h in shags (Snow 1963); up to 11 h in the ivory gull (Bateson and Plowright 1959); up to 24 h in certain other alcids (Manuwal 1974_a_; Sealy 1975_a_); 33 h (on the average) in common puffins (Myrberget 1962); 72 h in ancient murrelets, _Synthliboramphus antiquus_ (Sealy 1975_a_); and 96 h in Leach's storm-petrel (Gross 1935). Degree of attentiveness once a bird is on the nest also varies. Petrels may leave the egg for several days (Gross 1935), whereas herring gulls cover their eggs 98% of the time (Drent 1970).
The sexes share in incubation in most seabirds (Snow 1960; Drent 1965, 1970; Bédard 1969_a_), although females frequently take on the greater role (Belopol'skii 1961). Only male phalaropes incubate the eggs, and only female eiders. Eider hens do not feed during the entire incubation period (25 days) and leave the nest only for short periods of about 10 min (Belopol'skii 1961; Schamel 1974).
Several methods exist for calculating the amount of heat input necessary for normal development of a clutch of eggs (Ricklefs 1974). There is controversy, however, as to whether an adult can provide this warmth from excess body heat lost during the course of normal metabolism or whether the adult must raise its metabolic level to produce extra heat (Kendeigh 1973; King 1973; Ricklefs 1974). Several studies of incubating birds suggest that, in at least some situations, adults need not raise metabolic levels, but in others (large clutch, severe weather), they probably do (Ricklefs 1974). Drent (1972) estimated that herring gulls raise metabolic levels to a significant degree during incubation.
In spite of the lack of quantitative data, one can surmise that the cost of incubation varies among seabirds. Precocial and semiprecocial birds tend to have a larger clutch weight relative to body weight than do altricial birds (Fig. 8; Lack 1968), and therefore require greater heat input to the eggs. These costs may be reduced by heavily insulating the nest (e.g., eiders), or by nesting in burrows, which have much more moderate and even climates than do external nests (Richardson 1961; Manuwal 1974_a_). Other semiprecocial species, however, such as the murre, may sometimes lay eggs directly on snow or ice (Belopol'skii 1961)--presumably at increased incubation costs. Lastly, certain species incubate eggs with their feet (e.g., cormorants), rather than develop featherless brood patches. There are no measurements of comparative heat flow from feet versus brood patches.
Raising Nestlings
The length of the nestling period (hatching until departure from the nest) varies greatly among northern seabirds (Fig. 6). Nestling period depends on the stage of growth at which the young leave the nest and the rate at which they attain that stage. Growth rate in turn depends largely on body size and developmental type.
The stage of growth attained when birds leave the nest varies considerably (Fig. 9). Precocial eiders leave the nest within a day of hatching, whereas altricial shags remain until completely grown. The young of semiprecocial species, on the other hand, leave the nest at all stages between these extremes. Larids normally remain at the nest until 75-90% grown, but certain alcids leave much sooner--well before the young can fly.
[Illustration: Fig. 9. Percentage of total growth completed in the egg (shaded bar at left), at the nest site (open bar), and after nest-leaving (shaded bar at right) in various northern seabirds. From Belopol'skii (1961).]
Growth rate depends both on body size and developmental type (Fig. 10). The length of stay at the nest for precocial young is unaffected by growth rate (which is typically very slow), since they leave soon after hatching. The nestling period of semiprecocial and altricial seabirds is, however, affected by the rate at which the young grow to the nest-leaving stage. This depends mainly on body size (Fig. 10) and to a certain degree on developmental type, as some semiprecocial species grow rather slowly. Certain seabirds with clutches of one egg grow particularly slowly (petrels, some alcids, sulids). Several other alcids with single-egg clutches, however, grow at rates normal for semiprecocial chicks (Fig. 10). Very slow growth may be related to food stress (Lack 1968; Ricklefs 1968) or to reduction of reproductive effort in the adults (discussed later). Contrary to Cody (1973), slow growth in alcids does not correlate to the distance adults must commute for food. (Cody tried to directly compare growth in birds of different sizes.) Chicks in nocturnal species, however, tend to have slow growth rates (Sealy 1973_b_).
[Illustration: =Fig. 10.= Growth rate as a function of body weight. Growth rate ᵗ10-90 represents the number of days to grow from 10% to 90% of asymptotic weight (Ricklefs 1968). Data from Ricklefs (1968, 1973), E. H. Dunn (1973), and Sealy (1973_b_). Solid circles and regression line, altricial birds; solid triangles, semiprecocial birds except for seabirds with one-egg clutches; open circles, precocial shorebirds; open triangles, precocial ducks, rails, and gallinaceous birds; solid squares, alcids with one-egg clutches; and open squares, northern petrels, gannet, and Manx shearwater _(Puffinus puffinus)_.]
Daily time budgets of adults raising nestlings also vary widely, depending on the amount of brooding required, food requirements of the young, and foraging costs (which differ in the breeding season from those at other times of the year).
Nestlings have imperfect control of body temperature at hatching (Fig. 11) and develop this capacity only gradually. Altricial birds are hatched at a particularly undeveloped stage; e.g., double-crested cormorants attain reasonable control of body temperature in moderate ambient temperatures only after about 14 days (Fig. 11; Table 5). Semiprecocial seabirds, which are more fully developed physically at hatching, attain control of body temperature much sooner, in a matter of several days, and precocial eiders can thermoregulate within a few hours after hatching (Table 5).
Until the age of temperature control, nestlings must be brooded almost constantly, and occasional brooding takes place for some time afterward, especially in severe weather, in all species studied (Tinbergen 1960; Belopol'skii 1961; Weaver 1970; Dunn 1976_a_, 1976_b_). Thermoregulatory capabilities in cold weather are better in ducklings of species nesting at high latitudes than at lower ones (Koskimies and Lahti 1964), and the same may be true of gull species (Dawson et al. 1972). The cooling mechanisms of double-crested cormorants are better than in the more northerly distributed pelagic cormorant, _Phalacrocorax pelagicus_ (Lasiewski and Snyder 1969). Thus, variation in cost of thermoregulation due to different environments may be reduced through adaptation.
Food requirements of the chick depend on growth rate, amount of fat deposition, cost of thermoregulation, degree of activity and other factors (E. H. Dunn 1973). Estimated energy budgets for nestling double-crested cormorants and herring gulls in the same year and locality (Fig. 12) indicate that these factors vary according to developmental type, and comparison with budgets for nonseabird species suggests wide variation within developmental types according to the
## particular adaptations of each species to its own environment (E. H.
Dunn 1973).
[Illustration: Fig. 11. Development of thermoregulatory capabilities in nestling double-crested cormorants. From Dunn (1976_a_). Ages at right refer also to corresponding oxygen consumption data on the left. Thin diagonal lines show equality between body and air temperature. All data taken after 2 h of exposure.]
Thus, the energy demands of nestlings are not easy to predict. Brood size differences multiply variation in food demand on adults (except in precocial birds whose young feed themselves). Energy demands are labile, however, particularly in requirements for activity and growth, and adults can frequently raise young successfully without providing optimum amounts of food (Spaans 1971; Kadlec et al. 1969; LeCroy and Collins 1972; Lemmetyinen 1972; Cody 1973; E. H. Dunn and I. L. Brisbin, manuscript in preparation). Studies of double-crested cormorants by Dunn (1975_b_) and pigeon guillemots _(Cepphus columba)_ by Koelink (1972) have suggested that each adult providing optimum amounts of food to a normal-sized brood would have to approximately double the amount of food gathered each day over the amount gathered by nonbreeders. This relation does not imply, however, that the time and energy allocation of the adults would be the same for the two species.
[Illustration: Fig. 12. Energy budgets of nestling double-crested cormorants and herring gulls. Data from E. H. Dunn (1973) and Brisbin (1965).]
Cost-benefit ratios of food gathering in the nestling period differ from those at other times. Besides facing increased food demands, costs of delivery to the nest, and changes in food availability, the parents' choice of foods is constrained by the need to forage within reasonable commuting distance of the nest and perhaps by concentrated competition with conspecifics and other seabird species. In addition, small nestlings are frequently unable to eat foods normally eaten by adults (Drent 1965; personal observation). In the face of these constraints, adults often shift food preferences while raising nestlings (Belopol'skii 1961). For example, female mew gulls in the Barents Sea forage in the tidal zone, eating more small invertebrates than at other times of the year, while males continue to forage at sea and consume larger quantities of fish (Fig. 13).
Table 5. _Age of thermoregulatory control in various species of northern seabirds._
Species Age when Source moderate temperature control is attained (days)
Common eider 0.1-0.3[41] V. V. Rolnik, in Belopol'skii (1961)
Herring gull 1.5-2 V. V. Rolnik, in Belopol'skii (1961)
2-3 E. H. Dunn (1976_b_)
Leach's storm-petrel [2] Ricklefs (1974)
Mew gull 2-3 V. V. Rolnik, in Belopol'skii (1961)
Lesser black-backed gull 2-3 E. K. Barth (in Farner and Serventy 1959)
Greater black-backed gull 2-3 E. K. Barth (in Farner and Serventy 1959)
Pigeon guillemot 2-4 Drent (1965)
Common tern 3 LeCroy and Collins (1972)
Roseate tern _(Sterna 3 LeCroy and Collins (1972) dougallii)_
Common murre 3 V. V. Rolnik and Yu. M. Kaftonowski (in Sealy 1973_b_)
Razorbill _(Alca torda)_ 3 V. V. Rolnik and Yu. M. Kaftonowski (in Sealy 1973_b_)
Black guillemot 3-4 V. V. Rolnik, in Belopol'skii (1961)
Tufted puffin 3.5[42] Cody (1973)
Northern phalarope 4-5[43] Hilden and Vuolanto (1972)
Cassin's auklet 5-6 Manuwal (1974_a_)
Horned puffin _(Fratercula 2-6 Sealy (1973_a_) corniculata)_
Common puffin 6-7 V. V. Rolnik and Yu. M. Kaftonowski (in Sealy 1973_b_)
Black-legged kittiwake 6-7 V. V. Rolnik, in Belopol'skii (1961)
Double-crested cormorant 14 Dunn (1976_a_)
Shag 12-15 V. V. Rolnik, in Belopol'skii (1961)
Commuting distances vary tremendously among species (Fig. 14), but the number of feeding trips to the nest per day does not correlate with foraging distance (Cody 1973; Sealy 1973_a_, 1973_b_). There is not, therefore, a simple relationship between time and energy expenditures of the adults and foraging distances. Nocturnality, on the other hand, correlates with reduced feeding rates (usually one visit to the nest each night). Seabirds feeding far from the colony tend to show adaptations for bringing larger amounts of food per visit, such as carrying more than one fish at a time, as in tufted puffins, _Lunda cirrhata_, and rhinoceros auklets, _Cerorhinca monocerata_, vs. guillemots and murres (Richardson 1961; Cody 1973; Sealy 1973_a_, 1973_b_); developing a sublingual storage pouch, as in Cassin's auklets (Speich and Manuwal 1974); or concentration of food into stomach oil, as in petrels and albatrosses (Ashmole 1971). Commuting costs are largely eliminated when the young leave the nest, but only in the alcids does nest leaving occur long before attainment of full growth. Early nest leaving may allow adults and young to disperse to better feeding areas than are exploitable from the colony site (Sealy 1973_b_) and probably involves a major change in optimal food size and type as well (Lind 1965).
Patterning of adult time budgets may differ between geographical regions. For example, rhinoceros auklets are nocturnal in the far north (where the summer night is particularly short), crepuscular in the Olympic Peninsula, and mainly diurnal in the Farallon Islands (Manuwal 1974_a_).
[Illustration: Fig. 13. Foraging ranges of a pair of mew gulls during the breeding season, on a Barents Sea colony. From Belopol'skii (1961).]
Food demands of nestlings have a great influence on the time and energy allocation of breeding over nonbreeding seabirds. Because food is
## particularly abundant in the reproductive season, however, one cannot
ascertain whether the vulnerability of breeding birds to time or energy crises is far different from that at other times of the year.
Post-fledging Care
Little is known about the amount of care provided by adults to young after they are fully grown. At least some species, such as gannets and procellariiformes (Ashmole 1971), are known to desert their young, whereas others are known to feed their young, at least occasionally, for some weeks or months after they can fly--e.g., terns and gulls, many alcids, and shags (Snow 1963; Vermeer 1963; Drury and Smith 1968; Ashmole and Tovar S. 1968; Potts 1968; Ashmole 1971; LeCroy 1972).
[Illustration: Fig. 14. Percentage observations of foraging seabirds at different distances from the nest site. After Cody (1973). Each vertical bar represents 5% of total observations. Note nonlinear horizontal scale.]
Annual Time and Energy Budgets
The discussion of time and energy allocation during reproduction was complex and detailed because so much more is known about the influences altering budgeting during this period than during other times of the year. It is likely that influences on molt and migration will prove to be equally complicated, once more is learned about them.
If all data on time and energy allocation for a single species were known, it would be possible to make up detailed budgets for birds of different age, sex, and experience throughout the year. However, such detailed data have not been collected for any species. An annual time budget for male and female yellow-billed magpie, _Pica nuttalli_ (Verbeek 1972), points out the great amount of difference between the sexes (Fig. 15). A time and energy budget for the reproductive season only (Fig. 16) shows large differences between two closely related species, as well as between sexes; it also indicates the wide difference between the budgeting of energy as opposed to budgeting of time. All other time-energy budgets to date are for nonseabird species and for only a portion of the annual cycle (Verbeek 1964; Verner 1965; Schartz and Zimmerman 1971; Stiles 1971; Wolf and Hainsworth 1971; Smith 1973; Utter and LeFebvre 1973).
[Illustration: Fig. 15. Time budget of male (upper panel) and female (lower panel) yellow-billed magpies throughout the year. From Verbeek (1972). Non-labeled portions in each graph correspond to labeled sections in the other.]
Time-energy budget analysis can be useful in determining the leeway a bird has in surviving unusual stress at different times of the year. For example, a study by Feare et al. (1974) showed that rooks _(Corvus frugilegus)_ in the dry part of the summer spent 90% of 15 h of daylight to collect 150 kcal of food energy. In winter, foraging in snow, the same birds were able to collect 240 kcal of food in only 30% of a 10-h day. This suggests that rooks would be far more vulnerable to unexpected periods of stress in late summer than in winter. Such information would clearly be useful in making management decisions.
A more precise measure of vulnerability, although much more difficult to determine, is that of productive energy--the amount of caloric intake left over after the birds' cost of living (metabolic functions and procurement and processing of food) have been accounted for. Costs are highest when temperatures are extremely hot or cold or when food is most difficult to obtain. Productive energy is highest in summer (Kendeigh 1972), and that is presumably why reproduction normally takes place then. It is unknown whether birds are more vulnerable to time and energy shortages in the harder nonbreeding season or in the breeding season after the extra demands of reproduction have been accounted for. Vulnerability may also differ between sexes and among age groups.
Time-energy studies, although useful in comparing ecology, determining vulnerability, and cataloging location of birds, do have limitations. Careful studies are time-consuming and are not the best approach to determining key factors influencing population increase or decrease. Even when different kinds of data are being sought, however, it is worthwhile keeping the time-energy framework in mind as a "big picture" into which other facts can be fitted and their significance considered.
Life History Strategies
The study of life history strategies is largely theoretical, and in the following discussion I do not comment on current theoretical arguments. On the other hand, life history strategies can be regarded as time and energy allocation on a grand scale, and it therefore seems appropriate to look briefly at their implications for seabird management.
Annual reproduction evidently has a negative effect on resources remaining for other functions, and may reduce the chances for an organism to reproduce again in a later season (Cody 1966, 1971; Williams 1966; Gadgil and Bossert 1970; Gadgil and Solbrig 1972; Hussell 1972; Trivers 1972; Calow 1973). If the chances of survival to another breeding season are small, the selective advantage lies with the bird putting the most effort into early reproduction, in spite of its negative effects on survival, because future chances of reproduction are small. If chances of survival are good, however, it may be more advantageous to reduce annual reproductive effort and allocate resources to other functions.
[Illustration: Fig. 16. Time and energy budgets of male and female red-winged _(Agelaius phoeniceus)_ and tricolored _(A. tricolor)_ blackbirds in the breeding season. From Orians (1961). Dotted lines show male (M) activity, dashed lines show female (F) activity, and solid lines show shared activities.]
Seabirds are generally long-lived, have small clutches, and generally delay first breeding until at least the 2nd year, and usually longer (Table 6). Phalaropes seem to differ from this pattern (Hilden and Vuolanto 1972; Howe 1975). Several ecological factors (not entirely independent) are believed to contribute to the evolution of the long life and low reproductive effort pattern favored by seabirds.
First, if population size is determined largely by density-dependent mortality, individuals may be favored that allocate resources to attaining longer life (and more chances to reproduce) or insuring greater chances of survival of their offspring (Murphy 1968; Hairston et al. 1970). Density-independent mortality, on the other hand, is so unpredictable that there is no advantage in allocating resources toward protection against it (Gadgil and Solbrig 1972).
Two factors closely linked with density-dependence are high levels of competition, and perennial difficulties in obtaining food. In adapting to these difficulties, a bird may be selected which develops more efficient foraging techniques, wider dispersal, or better abilities to defend nesting territory--all of which may reduce resources available for reproduction. As mentioned earlier, marine foods tend to be patchily distributed, and a long learning period seems to be necessary before seabirds become proficient at foraging. In addition, there is evidence that food availability is low, at least in the tropics, and perhaps in the winter in other regions (Ashmole 1971). If nesting places are in short supply, long life may be favored so that the bird can live long enough for a place to become vacant. Several authors feel that competition is a serious factor in the life of seabirds, both for food (Lack 1966; Cody 1973) and for nesting space (Snow 1960; Belopol'skii 1961; Lack 1966; Manuwal 1974_b_). Others, however, disagree, at least for the breeding season (e.g., Pearson 1968).
Table 6. _Life history data for certain northern seabirds._[44]
Annual adult Age at first survival breeding Clutch Species (%) (years) size
Fulmar 94 7+ 1 Gannet _(Morus bassanus)_ 94 (4)-5+ 1 Manx shearwater 93-96 (4)-5+ 1 Shag 85 (♂) (2)-3 3-4 80 (♀) Herring gull 91-96 3.5 (♂) (2)-3 5 (♀) Black-legged kittiwake 88 4-5 (♂) 3 3-4 (♀) Arctic tern 89-91 (2)-3+ 2 75 82[45] Common murre 87 3+? 1 Black guillemot 88+[46] 3?[46] 2[46] Cassin's auklet 83[47] 3[47] 1
There is some evidence of density-dependent population size control in seabirds, although much of it is circumstantial. For example, there are large nonbreeding populations in such diverse species as shags, herring gulls, and Cassin's auklets, which move into a breeding area when established adults are removed or colonize new breeding areas (J. C. Coulson, personal communication; Kadlec and Drury 1968; Drury and Nisbet 1972; Manuwal 1974_b_). Lack (1966) and Ashmole (1971) presented other arguments for density-dependence. Density-dependent mortality is difficult to demonstrate, at best, and may be obscured by interpopulation movements (Drury and Nisbet 1972).
If long life is a life history option, a low annual reproductive effort could be favored in several ways. First, it may be necessary for insuring long life, if breeding has a serious negative feedback on life expectancy (Calow 1973). Second, if survival of offspring is more unpredictable than that of adults, low annual effort may be selected so that reproductive effort will not be wasted in years when young have poor chances of survival. Unpredictable and variable first-year survival in seabirds has been documented (Potts 1968; Drury and Nisbet 1972). In addition, some seabirds show adaptations that allow high reproductive success in any given year but which do not drain off resources if the season turns out to be poor (e.g., small last eggs in the clutch or asynchronous hatching, both of which lead to elimination of the smallest chicks when conditions are poor [Parsons 1970; E. H. Dunn 1973]).
It should be emphasized that the factors involved in the evolution of life histories are complex and poorly understood, and simple formulas should not be expected to apply to all situations (Wilbur et al. 1974).
In the framework of life-history strategies, small clutch sizes and slow growth rates exhibited by some seabirds can be explained as adaptive reductions in annual reproductive effort, rather than as responses to immediate food shortages. Arguments for this view are presented on theoretical grounds (Dunn 1973) and by the fact that many seabirds are able to raise larger than normal broods in certain situations (Vermeer 1963; Nelson 1964; Harris 1970; Hussell 1972; Ward 1972; Corkhill 1973). In addition, seabirds with particularly slow growth rates all grow at about the same rate, regardless of body size (contrary to the situation in other birds). This suggests that low growth rates do not reflect variations in feeding abilities among species (Ricklefs 1968).
Several conclusions relating to management of seabird populations can be drawn from the above discussion. First, if population size is determined largely by density-dependent factors, the birds are not adapted to precipitous and unexpected declines in population levels. Because there is low annual reproductive effort geared to a world in which there is slow turnover in population, seabirds are not able to rebound quickly from disasters. Provision of excess food should not be expected to improve breeding performance, at least in experienced birds.
Second, because seabirds are able to reproduce in many different seasons and are adapted to a low reproductive effort within a given season, one should expect them to be easily disturbed and to fail to complete the reproductive cycle during any given breeding attempt. A few indications of such failures have already been observed (Erskine 1972; Manuwal 1974_a_; Nettleship 1975).
Again, the tentative nature of this discussion should be emphasized, and conclusions drawn from it may not apply equally to all seabird species.
Conclusions
In this discussion I have tried to emphasize the variety of factors affecting seabird life cycles and the diverse responses among different species to their environment. The main conclusion I stress is that each species (and age group and sex within that species) has a different vulnerability to stress, which may be most severe at different times of the year for each group. To determine these periods of stress, researchers may find a time-energy approach to be useful.
As for northwestern North American seabirds in particular, ignorance is vast. Twelve years ago, Bourne (1963:846) noted the following needs in seabird research (among others): "The investigation of seabird biology has been reduced to a routine, but there is a great need for more study of some other aspects of the life or annual cycle, including events in the period immediately after fledging, and behaviour and survival in the immature period and outside the breeding season. Much more accurate information is needed about breeding distribution and seasons in many parts of the world, about molting seasons and ranges in most parts, and the distribution of birds of different age groups during these periods in practically all areas."
Since the time of Bourne's remarks, a number of excellent studies have provided data on the breeding biology of certain northwestern seabird species. Scientists remain largely ignorant, however, about where birds of different age groups are located throughout the year. Such knowledge is necessary for effective protection and is basic to understanding population dynamics, even if it does not elucidate causes. Studies of timing of annual cycles and movements should be carried out hand in hand with resource analysis--not just finding what birds eat, but discovering where the food is at what times, how hard it is to catch, and what the nutritional return is. Much careful field work must be done before effective management of most of our northwestern seabirds can become a reality.
References
Andersson, M. 1973. Behaviour of the pomarine skua _Stercorarius pomarinus_ Temm. with comparative remarks on Stercorariinae. Ornis Scand. 4:1-16.
Ashmole, N. P. 1971. Seabird ecology and the marine environment. Pages 223-286 _in_ D. S. Farner and J. R. King, eds. Avian biology. Vol. I. Academic Press, New York.
Ashmole, N. P., and H. Tovar S. 1968. Prolonged parental care in royal terns and other birds. Auk 85:90-100.
Barash, D. P., P. Donovan, and R. Myrick. 1975. Clam dropping behavior of the glaucous-winged gull _(Larus glaucescens)_. Wilson Bull. 87:60-64.
Bateson, P. P. G., and R. C. Plowright. 1959. The breeding biology of the ivory gull in Spitsbergen. Br. Birds 52:105-114.
Bédard, J. 1969_a_. Feeding of the least, crested and parakeet auklets around St. Lawrence Island, Alaska. Can. J. Zool. 47:1025-1050.
Bédard, J. 1969_b_. Adaptive radiation in alcidae. Ibis 111:189-198.
Belopol'skii, L. O. 1961. Ecology of sea colony birds of the Barents Sea. (Transl. from Russian.) Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Jerusalem. 346 pp.
Bengtson, S. 1968. Breeding behavior of the grey phalarope in west Spitzbergen. Var Fågelvärld 27:1-13.
Berger, M., and J. S. Hart. 1974. Physiology and energetics of flight. Pages 415-477 _in_ D. S. Farner and J. R. King, eds. Avian biology. Vol. IV. Academic Press, New York.
Berger, M., J. S. Hart, and O. Z. Roy. 1970. Respiration, oxygen consumption and heart rate in some birds during rest and flight. Z. Vgl. Physiol. 66:201-214.
Birkhead, T. R. 1974. Movement and mortality rates of British guillemots. Bird Study 21:241-254.
Blackmore, F. H., Jr. 1969. The effect of the temperature, photoperiod and molt on the energy requirements of the house sparrow, _Passer domesticus_. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 30:433-444.
Bookhout, T. A. 1958. The availability of plant seeds to bobwhite quail in southern Illinois. Ecology 39:671-681.
Bourne, W. R. P. 1963. A review of oceanic studies of the biology of seabirds. Proc. Int. Ornithol. Congr. 13:831-854.
Brisbin, I. L., Jr. 1965. A quantitative analysis of ecological growth efficiency in the herring gull. M.S. Thesis. Univ. of Georgia, Athens. 28 pp.
Brown, R. G. B., N. G. Blurton-Jones, and D. J. T. Hussell. 1967. The breeding behaviour of Sabine's gull, _Xema sabini_. Behaviour 28:110-140.
Bryant, D. M. 1973. The factors influencing the selection of food by the house martin (_Delichon urbica_ (L.)). J. Anim. Ecol. 42:539-564.
Buckley, F. G., and P. A. Buckley. 1974. Comparative feeding ecology of wintering adult and juvenile royal terns (Aves: Laridae, Sterninae). Ecology 55:1053-1063.
Calder, W. A. 1974. Consequences of body size for avian energetics. Pages 86-144 _in_ R. A. Paynter, ed. Avian energetics. Publ. Nuttall Ornithol. Club 15.
Calder, W. A., and J. R. King. 1974. Thermal and caloric relations of birds. Pages 259-413 _in_ D. S. Farner and J. R. King, eds. Avian biology. Vol. IV. Academic Press, New York.
Calow, P. 1973. The relationship between fecundity, phenology, and longevity: a systems approach. Am. Nat. 107:559-574.
Cody, M. L. 1966. A general theory of clutch size. Evolution 20:174-184.
Cody, M. L. 1971. Ecological aspects of reproduction. Pages 461-512 _in_ D. S. Farner and J. R. King, eds. Avian biology. Vol. I. Academic Press, New York.
Cody, M. L. 1973. Coexistence, coevolution and convergent evolution in seabird communities. Ecology 54:31-44.
Cohen, D. 1967. Optimization of seasonal migratory behavior. Am. Nat. 101:5-17.
Cone, C. D., Jr. 1964. A mathematical analysis of the dynamic soaring flight of the albatross with ecological interpretations. Va. Inst. Mar. Sci., Spec. Sci. Rep. 50:1-104.
Corkhill, P. 1973. Food and feeding ecology of puffins. Bird Study 20:207-220.
Coulson, J. C. 1961. Movements and seasonal variation in mortality of shags and cormorants ringed on the Farne Islands, Northumberland. Br. Birds 54:225-235.
Coulson, J. C. 1963. Egg size and shape in the kittiwake _(Rissa tridactyla)_ and their use in estimating age composition in populations. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 140(2):211-227.
Coulson, J. C., and M. G. Brazendale. 1968. Movements of cormorants ringed in the British Isles and evidence of colony-specific dispersal. Br. Birds 61:1-21.
Coulson, J. C., G. R. Potts, and J. Horobin. 1969. Variation in the eggs of the shag _(Phalacrocorax aristotelis)_. Auk 86:232-245.
Coulson, J. C., and E. White. 1958. The effect of age on the breeding biology of the kittiwake, _Rissa tridactyla_. Ibis 100:40-51.
Coulson, J. C., and E. White. 1960. The effect of age and density of breeding birds on the time of breeding of the kittiwake, _Rissa tridactyla_. Ibis 102:71-80.
Cox, G. W. 1968. The role of competition in the evolution of migration. Evolution 22:180-192.
Cramp, S. 1972. The breeding of urban wood pigeons. Ibis 114:163-171.
Cullen, J. M. 1957. Plumage, age and mortality in the arctic tern. Bird Study 4:197-207.
Dawson, W. R., and J. W. Hudson. 1970. Birds. Pages 223-310 _in_ G. C. Whittow, ed. Comparative physiology of thermoregulation. Vol. I. Academic Press, New York.
Dawson, W. R., J. W. Hudson, and R. W. Hill. 1972. Temperature regulation in newly hatched laughing gulls _(Larus atricilla)_. Condor 74:177-184.
Dolnik, V. R. 1971. Comparative energy expenditure in migration and wintering birds. Ekologiya 2(3):88-89. In Russian.
Dorst, J. 1961. The migrations of birds. William Heinimann Ltd., London.
Drent, R. H. 1965. Breeding biology of the pigeon guillemot _Cepphus columba_. Ardea 53:99-160.
Drent, R. H. 1970. Functional aspects of incubation in the herring gull (_Larus argentatus_ Pont.). Behaviour Suppl. 17:1-132.
Drent, R. 1972. Adaptive aspects of the physiology of incubation. Proc. Int. Ornithol. Congr. 15:255-280.
Drent, R. H., and C. J. Guiguet. 1961. A catalogue of British Columbia seabird colonies. B. C. Prov. Mus., Occas. Pap. 12:1-173.
Drent, R., G. F. van Tets, F. Tompa, and K. Vermeer. 1964. The breeding birds of Mandarte Island, British Columbia. Can. Field-Nat. 78:208-263.
Drury, W. H., and I. C. T. Nisbet. 1972. The importance of movements in the biology of herring gulls in New England. Pages 173-212 _in_ Population ecology of migratory birds: a symposium. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv., Wildl. Res. Rep. 2.
Drury, W. H., Jr., and W. J. Smith. 1968. Defense of feeding areas by adult herring gulls and intrusion by young. Evolution 22:193-201.
Dunn, E. H. 1973. Energy allocation of nestling double-crested cormorants. Ph.D. Thesis. Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 153 pp.
Dunn, E. H. 1975_a_. Growth, body components and caloric value of nestling double-crested cormorants. Condor 77:431-438.
Dunn, E. H. 1975_b_. Caloric intake of nestling double-crested cormorants. Auk 92:553-565.
Dunn, E. H. 1976_a_. Development of endothermy and existence energy expenditure of nestling double-crested cormorants. Condor 78:350-356.
Dunn, E. H. 1976_b_. Development of endothermy and existence energy expenditure in herring gull chicks. Condor 78:493-498.
Dunn, E. K. 1972. Effect of age on the fishing ability of sandwich terns _Sterna sandvicensis_. Ibis 114:360-366.
Dunn, E. K. 1973. Changes in fishing ability of terns associated with wind speed and sea surface conditions. Nature (Lond.) 244:520-521.
Eliassen, E. 1963. Preliminary results from new methods of investigating the physiology of birds during flight. Ibis 105:234-237.
Emlen, J. M. 1966. The role of time and energy in food preference. Am. Nat. 100:611-617.
Erskine, A. J. 1972. The great cormorants of eastern Canada. Can. Wildl. Serv. Occas. Pap. 14:1-23.
Evans, R. M., and M. K. McNicholl. 1972. Variations in reproductive
## activities of arctic terns at Churchill, Manitoba. Arctic
25:131-141.
Farner, D. S., and D. L. Serventy. 1959. Body temperature and the ontogeny of thermoregulation in the slender-billed shearwater. Condor 61:426-433.
Feare, C. J., G. M. Dunnet, and I. J. Patterson. 1974. Ecological studies of the rook (_Corvus frugilegus_ L.) in north-east Scotland: food intake and feeding behaviour. J. Appl. Ecol. 11:867-896.
Fisher, H. 1972. The nutrition of birds. Pages 431-469 _in_ D. S. Farner and J. R. King, eds. Avian biology. Vol. II. Academic Press, New York.
Fisher, R. A. 1958. The genetical theory of natural selection. 2nd rev. ed. Dover Publishers, Inc., New York.
Gadgil, M., and W. H. Bossert. 1970. Life historical consequences of natural selection. Am. Nat. 104:1-24.
Gadgil, M., and O. T. Solbrig. 1972. The concept of r-and K-selection: evidence from wild flowers and some theoretical considerations. Am. Nat. 106:14-31.
Gavrilov, V. 1974. Metabolism of molting birds. Zool. Zh. 53(9):1363-1374. In Russian, English summary.
Gross, A. O. 1935. The life history cycle of Leach's petrel _(Oceanodroma leucorhoa leucorhoa)_ on the outer sea islands of the Bay of Fundy. Auk 52:382-399.
Hainsworth, F. R., and L. L. Wolf. 1975. Wing disc loading: implications and importance for hummingbird energetics. Am. Nat. 109:229-233.
Hairston, N. G., D. W. Tinkle, and H. M. Wilbur. 1970. Natural selection and the parameters of population growth. J. Wildl. Manage. 34:681-690.
Harris, M. P. 1970. Breeding ecology of the swallow-tailed gull, _Creagus furcatus_. Auk 87:215-243.
Harris, M. P. 1971. Ecological adaptations of moult in some British gulls. Bird Study 18:113-118.
Harris, S. W. 1974. Status, chronology, and ecology of nesting storm petrels in northwestern California. Condor 76:249-261.
Hart, J. S., and M. Berger. 1972. Energetics, water economy and temperature regulation during flight. Proc. Int. Ornithol. Congr. 15:189-199.
Henderson, B. A. 1972. The control and organization of parental feeding and its relationships to the food supply for the glaucous-winged gull, _Larus glaucescens_. M.S. Thesis. Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver.
Hilden, O., and S. Vuolanto. 1972. Breeding biology of the red-necked phalarope _Phalaropus lobatus_ in Finland. Ornis Fenn. 49:57-81.
Högstedt, G. 1974. Length of the pre-laying period in the lapwing _Vanellus vanellus_ L. in relation to its food resources. Ornis Scand. 5:1-4.
Höhn, E. O. 1971. Observation on the breeding behavior of grey and red-necked phalaropes. Ibis 113:335-348.
Howe, M. A. 1975. Behavioral aspects of the pair bond in Wilson's phalarope. Wilson Bull. 87:248-270.
Hunt, G. L., Jr. 1972. Influence of food distribution and human disturbance on the reproductive success of herring gulls. Ecology 53:1051-1061.
Hussell, D. J. T. 1969. Weight loss of birds during nocturnal migration. Auk 86:75-83.
Hussell, D. J. T. 1972. Factors affecting clutch size in arctic passerines. Ecol. Monogr. 42:317-364.
Ingolfsson, A. 1969. Behaviour of gulls robbing eiders. Bird Study 16:45-52.
Ingolfsson, A. 1970. The moult of remiges and rectrices in great black-backed gulls _Larus marinus_ and glaucous gulls _L. hyperboreus_ in Iceland. Ibis 112:83-92.
James-Veitch, E., and E. S. Booth. 1974. Behavior and life history of the glaucous-winged gull. Walla Walla Coll. Publ. 12:1-39.
Johnston, D. W. 1961. Timing of annual molt in the glaucous gulls of northern Alaska. Condor 63:474-478.
Kadlec, J. A., and W. H. Drury. 1968. Structure of the New England herring gull population. Ecology 49:644-676.
Kadlec, J. A., W. H. Drury, Jr., and D. K. Onion. 1969. Growth and mortality of herring gull chicks. Bird-Banding 40:222-233.
Källender, H. 1974. Advancement of laying of great tits by the provision of food. Ibis 116:365-367.
Katz, P. L. 1974. A long-term approach to foraging optimization. Am. Nat. 108:758-782.
Kendeigh, S. C. 1970. Energy requirements for existence in relation to size of bird. Condor 72:60-65.
Kendeigh, S. C. 1972. Monthly variations in the energy budget of the house sparrow throughout the year. Pages 17-43 _in_ S. C. Kendeigh and J. Pinowski, eds. Productivity, population dynamics and systematics of granivorous birds. Institute of Ecology, Polish Academy of Science, Warsaw.
Kendeigh, S. C. 1973. [Discussion.] Pages 311-320 _in_ D. S. Farner, ed. Breeding biology of birds. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C.
King, J. R. 1973. Energetics of reproduction in birds. Pages 78-107 _in_ D. S. Farner, ed. Breeding biology of birds. National Academy of Science, Washington, D.C.
King, J. R. 1974. Seasonal allocation of time and energy resources in birds. Pages 4-70 _in_ R. A. Paynter, ed. Avian energetics. Publ. Nuttall Ornithol. Club 15.
Koelink, A. F. 1972. Bioenergetics of growth in the pigeon guillemot, _Cepphus columba_. M.S. Thesis. Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver.
Koskimies, J., and L. Lahti. 1964. Cold-hardiness of the newly hatched young in relation to ecology and distribution in ten species of European ducks. Auk 81:281-307.
Lack, D. 1966. Population studies of birds. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Lack, D. 1968. Ecological adaptations for breeding in birds. Methuen, London.
Lasiewski, R. C. 1963. Oxygen consumption of torpid, resting,
## active and flying hummingbirds. Physiol. Zool. 36:122-140.
Lasiewski, R. C., and W. R. Dawson. 1967. A reexamination of the relation between standard metabolic rate and body weight in birds. Condor 69:13-23.
Lasiewski, R. C., and G. K. Snyder. 1969. Responses to high temperature in nestling double-crested cormorants and pelagic cormorants. Auk 86:529-540.
LeCroy, M. 1972. Young common and roseate terns learning to fish. Wilson Bull. 84:201-202.
LeCroy, M., and C. T. Collins. 1972. Growth and survival of roseate and common tern chicks. Auk 89:595-611.
Lemmetyinen, R. 1972. Growth and mortality in the chicks of arctic terns in the Kongsfjord area, Spitzbergen in 1970. Ornis Fenn. 49:45-53.
Lind, H. 1965. Parental feeding in the oystercatcher _Haematopus o. ostralegus_ (L.). Dan. Ornithol. Foren. Tidsskr. 59:1-31.
Lustick, S. 1970. Energy requirements of molt in cowbirds. Auk 87:742-746.
Manuwal, D. A. 1974_a_. The natural history of Cassin's auklet _(Ptychoramphus aleuticus)_. Condor 76:421-431.
Manuwal, D. A. 1974_b_. Effects of territoriality on breeding in a population of Cassin's auklet. Ecology 55:1399-1406.
Martin, E. W. 1968. The effects of dietary protein on the energy and nitrogen balance of the tree sparrow _(Spizella a. arborea)_. Physiol. Zool. 41:313-331.
McKinney, F. 1961. An analysis of the displays of the European eider _Somateria mollissima mollissima_ (Linnaeus) and the Pacific eider _Somateria mollissima v. nigra_ Bonaparte. Behaviour Suppl. 7:1-124.
Moss, R. 1972. Food selection by red grouse (_Logopus logopus scoticus_ (Lath.)) in relation to chemical composition. J. Anim. Ecol. 4:411-428.
Moyle, P. 1966. Feeding behavior of the glaucous-winged gull on the Alaskan salmon stream. Wilson Bull. 78:175-190.
Murphy, G. I. 1968. Patterns in life history and the environment. Am. Nat. 102:391-403.
Myrberget, S. 1962. Contribution to the breeding biology of the puffin _Fratercula arctica_ (L.). Eggs, incubation and young. Pap. Norw. State Game Res. Inst. Ser. 2, 11:1-49.
Myton, B. A., and R. W. Ficken. 1967. Seed size preference in chickadees and tits in relation to ambient temperatures. Wilson Bull. 79:319-321.
Nelson, J. B. 1964. Factors influencing clutch-size and chick growth in the North Atlantic gannet _Sula bassana_. Ibis 106:63-77.
Nettleship, D. N. 1972. Breeding success of the common puffin (_Fratercula arctica_ L.) on different habitats at Great Island, Newfoundland. Ecol. Monogr. 42:239-268.
Nettleship, D. N. 1975. A recent decline of gannets, _Morus bassanus_, on Bonaventure Island, Quebec. Can. Field-Nat. 89:125-133.
Nice, M. M. 1962. Development of behavior in precocial birds. Trans. Linn. Soc. N. Y. 8:1-211.
Nisbet, I. C. T. 1963. Weight-loss during migration.