Abstract

In long-lived monogamous animals, pair bond strength and durability are usually associated with higher fitness. However, whether pairs maximise fitness during the non-breeding season by maintaining contact during the winter or, instead, prioritise individual condition is unclear. Using geolocators recording spatial (light) and behavioural (immersion) data, we tracked pairs of the long-term monogamous Atlantic puffin Fratercula arctica during the non-breeding season to determine whether and how migratory strategies were related to future pair breeding performance and whether within-pair similarity in migratory movements or individual behaviour best predicted future fitness. While pair members migrated separately, their routes were similar in the first part of the non-breeding season but diverged later on; nonetheless, pairs showed synchrony in their return to the breeding colony in spring. Pairs following more similar routes bred earlier and had a higher breeding success the following spring. However, female (but not male) winter foraging effort was also a strong predictor of subsequent fitness, being associated with future timing of breeding and reproductive success. Overall, females had higher daily energy expenditure than males, especially in the late winter when their route diverged from their partner's and they foraged more than males. Our study reveals that female winter foraging, probably linked to pre-breeding condition, may be more critical for fitness than maintaining the pair bond outside of the breeding season. However, even without contact between mates, pairs can benefit from following similar migration routes and synchronise their returns, but the mechanisms linking these processes remain unclear.

Highlights

  • Many long-lived animals, birds in particular, form monogamous, long-term pair bonds (Emlen & Oring 1977, Clutton-Brock 1989, Black 1996)

  • We found a significant interaction between group and month when looking at the temporal patterns of N N D throughout the non-breeding season (LMM, χ27 = 20.4, p = 0.005), indicating that the difference between pair and non-pair route similarity varied depending on the time of the winter (Fig. 1d, Table S1 in the Supplement)

  • Despite this high within-pair route similarity in the first part of migration, pair members did not show synchrony in departure date from the colony and migrated separately, ruling out that within-pair route similarity is driven by similarity in departure date from the colony; other non-paired birds left at similar times and followed very different routes

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Many long-lived animals, birds in particular, form monogamous, long-term pair bonds (Emlen & Oring 1977, Clutton-Brock 1989, Black 1996). Wintering in similar areas, thereby experiencing and reacting to similar environmental conditions, may enable partners to synchronise their returns to the breeding grounds and avoid mate infidelity (Handel & Gill 2000) or divorce (González-Solís et al 1999) without maintaining contact outside of the breeding season. A good body condition at the start of the breeding season may be important to maximise breeding success (Chastel et al 1995, Wendeln & Becker 1999) but may necessitate partners to forage in different niches or places if their requirements differ. Ensuring pair bond continuity while foraging for one’s own individual requirements may not be compatible. Whether and how pairs of monogamous birds prioritise one over the other or combine both are unknown

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call