Sex Ratio is Variable and Increasingly Male Biased at Two Colonies of Magellanic Penguins

Sex ratios are commonly skewed and variable in wild populations, but few studies track temporal trends in this demographic parameter. We examined variation in the operational sex ratio at two protected and declining breeding colonies of Magellanic Penguins (Spheniscus magellanicus) in Chubut, Argentina. Penguins from the two colonies, separated by 105 km, migrate north in the non‐breeding season and have overlapping distributions at sea. Conditions during the non‐breeding season can impact long‐term trends in operational sex ratio (i.e., through sex‐specific survival) and interannual variation in operational sex ratio (i.e., through sex‐specific breeding decisions). We found an increasingly male‐biased operational sex ratio at the two disparate colonies of Magellanic Penguins, which may contribute to continued population decline. We also found that the two colonies showed synchronous interannual variation in operational sex ratio, driven by variation in the number of females present each year. This pattern may be linked to sex‐specific overwintering effects that cause females to skip breeding, i.e., to remain at sea rather than returning to the colony to breed, more often than males. Contrary to our predictions, colony‐wide reproductive success was not lower in years with a more male‐biased operational sex ratio. We did find that males showed more evidence of fighting and were less likely to pair when the operational sex ratio was more male biased. Our results highlight an indirect mechanism through which variation in the operational sex ratio can influence populations, through a higher incidence of fighting among the less abundant sex. Because biased sex ratios can reduce the size of the breeding population and influence rates of conflict, tracking operational sex ratio is critical for conservation

Lateralization (handedness) in Magellanic penguins

Lateralization, or asymmetry in form and/or function, is found in many animal species. Brain lateralization is considered adaptive for an individual, and often results in “handedness,” “footedness,” or a side preference, manifest in behavior and morphology. We tested for lateralization in several behaviors in a wild population of Magellanic penguins Spheniscus magellanicus breeding at Punta Tombo, Argentina. We found no preferred foot in the population (each penguin observed once) in stepping up onto an obstacle: 53% stepped up with the right foot, 47% with the left foot (n = 300, binomial test p = 0.27). We found mixed evidence for a dominant foot when a penguin extended a foot for thermoregulation, possibly depending on the ambient temperature (each penguin observed once). Penguins extended the right foot twice as often as the left foot (n = 121, p < 0.0005) in 2 years when we concentrated our effort during the heat of the day. In a third year when we observed penguins early and late in the day, there was no preference (n = 232, p = 0.59). Penguins use their flippers for swimming, including searching for and chasing prey. We found morphological evidence of a dominant flipper in individual adults: 60.5% of sternum keels curved one direction or the other (n = 76 sterna from carcasses), and 11% of penguins had more feather wear on one flipper than the other (n = 1217). Right-flippered and left-flippered penguins were equally likely in both samples (keels: p = 0.88, feather wear: p = 0.26), indicating individual but not population lateralization. In fights, aggressive penguins used their left eyes preferentially, consistent with the right side of the brain controlling aggression. Penguins that recently fought (each penguin observed once) were twice as likely to have blood only on the right side of the face (69%) as only on the left side (31%, n = 175, p < 0.001). The proportion of penguins with blood only on the right side increased with the amount of blood. In most fights, the more aggressive penguin used its left eye and attacked the other penguin’s right side. Lateralization depended on the behavior tested and, in thermoregulation, likely on the temperature. We found no lateralization or mixed results in the population of Magellanic penguins in three individual behaviors, stepping up, swimming, and thermoregulation. We found lateralization in the population in the social behavior fighting

Applying science to pressing conservation needs for penguins

More than half of the world's 18 penguin species are declining. We, the Steering Committee of the International Union for Conservation of Nature Species Survival Commission Penguin Specialist Group, determined that the penguin species in most critical need of conservation action are African penguin (Spheniscus demersus), Galápagos penguin (Spheniscus mendiculus), and Yellow-eyed penguin (Megadyptes antipodes). Due to small or rapidly declining populations, these species require immediate scientific collaboration and policy intervention. We also used a pairwise-ranking approach to prioritize research and conservation needs for all penguins. Among the 12 cross-taxa research areas we identified, we ranked quantifying population trends, estimating demographic rates, forecasting environmental patterns of change, and improving the knowledge of fisheries interactions as the highest priorities. The highest ranked conservation needs were to enhance marine spatial planning, improve stakeholder engagement, and develop disaster-management and species-specific action plans. We concurred that, to improve the translation of science into effective conservation for penguins, the scientific community and funding bodies must recognize the importance of and support long-term research; research on and conservation of penguins must expand its focus to include the nonbreeding season and juvenile stage; marine reserves must be designed at ecologically appropriate spatial and temporal scales; and communication between scientists and decision makers must be improved with the help of individual scientists and interdisciplinary working groups

Happy Feet in a Hostile World? The Future of Penguins Depends on Proactive Management of Current and Expected Threats

This is the final version. Available on open access from Frontiers Media via the DOI in this recordPenguins face a wide range of threats. Most observed population changes have been negative and have happened over the last 60 years. Today, populations of 11 penguin species are decreasing. Here we present a review that synthesizes details of threats faced by the world's 18 species of penguins. We discuss alterations to their environment at both breeding sites on land and at sea where they forage. The major drivers of change appear to be climate, and food web alterations by marine fisheries. In addition, we also consider other critical and/or emerging threats, namely human disturbance near nesting sites, pollution due to oil, plastics and chemicals such as mercury and persistent organic compounds. Finally, we assess the importance of emerging pathogens and diseases on the health of penguins. We suggest that in the context of climate change, habitat degradation, introduced exotic species and resource competition with fisheries, successful conservation outcomes will require new and unprecedented levels of science and advocacy. Successful conservation stories of penguin species across their geographical range have occurred where there has been concerted effort across local, national and international boundaries to implement effective conservation planning.WWF-UKPEW FoundationNational Science Foundation (NSF

Addressing Criticisms of Large-Scale Marine Protected Areas

Designated large-scale marine protected areas (LSMPAs, 100,000 or more square kilometers) constitute over two-thirds of the approximately 6.6% of the ocean and approximately 14.5% of the exclusive economic zones within marine protected areas. Although LSMPAs have received support among scientists and conservation bodies for wilderness protection, regional ecological connectivity, and improving resilience to climate change, there are also concerns. We identified 10 common criticisms of LSMPAs along three themes: (1) placement, governance, and management; (2) political expediency; and (3) social–ecological value and cost. Through critical evaluation of scientific evidence, we discuss the value, achievements, challenges, and potential of LSMPAs in these arenas. We conclude that although some criticisms are valid and need addressing, none pertain exclusively to LSMPAs, and many involve challenges ubiquitous in management. We argue that LSMPAs are an important component of a diversified management portfolio that tempers potential losses, hedges against uncertainty, and enhances the probability of achieving sustainably managed oceans

Happy feet in a hostile world? The future of penguins depends on proactive management of current and expected threats

Penguins face a wide range of threats. Most observed population changes have been negative and have happened over the last 60 years. Today, populations of 11 of the 18 penguin species are decreasing. Here we present a review that synthesizes details of threats faced by the world’s 18 species of penguins. We discuss alterations to their environment at both breeding sites on land and at sea where they forage. The major drivers of change appear to be climate, and food web alterations by marine fisheries. In addition, we also consider other critical and/or emerging threats, namely human disturbance near nesting sites, pollution due to oil, plastics and chemicals such as mercury and persistent organic compounds. Finally, we assess the importance of emerging pathogens and diseases on the health of penguins. We suggest that in the context of climate change, habitat degradation, introduced exotic species and resource competition with fisheries, successful conservation outcomes will require new and unprecedented levels of science and advocacy. Successful conservation stories of penguin species across their geographical range have occurred where there has been concerted effort across local, national and international boundaries to implement effective conservation planning

Petroleum Pollution and

SUMMARY Petroleum is one of the most common toxic substances released into the marine environment. Accidental pollution is spectacular and receives a lot of attention when the negative effect to the environment is dramatic. The impact of chronic petroleum pollution or small oil spills is often not sensational and hence has received less attention than it deserves. Seabirds are one of the most vulnerable groups of marine animals 1 affected by petroleum. Penguins are particularly vulnerable to petroleum spills because they swim low in the water, must surface regularly to breathe, do not fly, are less able to detect and avoid petroleum than other seabirds, and often encounter discharges of petroleum when they are at sea. Mortality of penguins from petroleum is a long term and large scale problem. Petroleum pollution has killed thousands of penguins in Africa, Australia and New Zealand, South America, and even Antarctica. The Southwest Atlantic, although not well known for petroleum pollution problems, is a chronic source of petroleum discharge. Magellanic penguins (Spheniscus magellanicus) are killed during their winter migration between Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil, when they encounter petroleu