8 research outputs found
The retrospective analysis of Antarctic tracking data project
The Retrospective Analysis of Antarctic Tracking Data (RAATD) is a Scientific Committee for Antarctic Research project led jointly by the Expert Groups on Birds and Marine Mammals and Antarctic Biodiversity Informatics, and endorsed by the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. RAATD consolidated tracking data for multiple species of Antarctic meso- and top-predators to identify Areas of Ecological Significance. These datasets and accompanying syntheses provide a greater understanding of fundamental ecosystem processes in the Southern Ocean, support modelling of predator distributions under future climate scenarios and create inputs that can be incorporated into decision making processes by management authorities. In this data paper, we present the compiled tracking data from research groups that have worked in the Antarctic since the 1990s. The data are publicly available through biodiversity.aq and the Ocean Biogeographic Information
System. The archive includes tracking data from over 70 contributors across 12 national Antarctic programs, and includes data from 17 predator species, 4060 individual animals, and over 2.9 million observed locations
The retrospective analysis of Antarctic tracking data project
The Retrospective Analysis of Antarctic Tracking Data (RAATD) is a Scientific Committee for
Antarctic Research project led jointly by the Expert Groups on Birds and Marine Mammals and
Antarctic Biodiversity Informatics, and endorsed by the Commission for the Conservation of
Antarctic Marine Living Resources. RAATD consolidated tracking data for multiple species
of Antarctic meso- and top-predators to identify Areas of Ecological Significance. These
datasets and accompanying syntheses provide a greater understanding of fundamental
ecosystem processes in the Southern Ocean, support modelling of predator distributions
under future climate scenarios and create inputs that can be incorporated into decision
making processes by management authorities. In this data paper, we present the compiled
tracking data from research groups that have worked in the Antarctic since the 1990s. The
data are publicly available through biodiversity.aq and the Ocean Biogeographic Information
System. The archive includes tracking data from over 70 contributors across 12 national
Antarctic programs, and includes data from 17 predator species, 4060 individual animals, and
over 2.9 million observed locations.Supplementary Figure S1: Filtered location data (black) and tag deployment locations (red) for each species.
Maps are Lambert Azimuthal projections extending from 90° S to 20° S.Supplementary Table S1: Names and coordinates of the major study sites in the Southern Ocean and on the Antarctic Continent where tracking devices were deployed on the selected species (indicated by their 4-letter codes in the last column).Online Table 1: Description of fields (column names) in the metadata and data files.Supranational committees and organisations including the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research Life Science Group and BirdLife International. National institutions and foundations, including but not limited to Argentina (Dirección Nacional del Antártico), Australia (Australian Antarctic program; Australian Research Council; Sea World Research and Rescue Foundation Inc., IMOS is a national collaborative research infrastructure, supported by the Australian Government and operated by a consortium of institutions as an unincorporated joint venture, with the University of Tasmania as Lead Agent), Belgium (Belgian Science Policy Office, EU Lifewatch ERIC), Brazil (Brazilian Antarctic Programme; Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq/MCTI) and CAPES), France (Agence Nationale de la Recherche; Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales; Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB; www.fondationbiodiversite.fr) in the context of the CESAB project “RAATD”; Fondation Total; Institut Paul-Emile Victor; Programme Zone Atelier de Recherches sur l’Environnement Antarctique et Subantarctique; Terres Australes et Antarctiques Françaises), Germany (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Hanse-Wissenschaftskolleg - Institute for Advanced Study), Italy (Italian National Antarctic Research Program; Ministry for Education University and Research), Japan (Japanese Antarctic Research Expedition; JSPS Kakenhi grant), Monaco (Fondation Prince Albert II de Monaco), New Zealand (Ministry for Primary Industries - BRAG; Pew Charitable Trusts), Norway (Norwegian Antarctic Research Expeditions; Norwegian Research Council), Portugal (Foundation for Science and Technology), South Africa (Department of Environmental Affairs; National Research Foundation; South African National Antarctic Programme), UK (Darwin Plus; Ecosystems Programme at the British Antarctic Survey; Natural Environment Research Council; WWF), and USA (U.S. AMLR Program of NOAA Fisheries; US Office of Polar Programs).http://www.nature.com/sdataam2021Mammal Research Institut
Age at first breeding and fitness in goshawk Accipiter gentilis
Krüger O. Age at first breeding and fitness in goshawk Accipiter gentilis. J. Anim. Ecol. 2005;74(2):266-273
Instrumentation and handling effects on Antarctic fur seals ( Arctocephalus gazella
The use of biologging instruments has greatly improved our understanding of the behaviour, physiology and ecology of free-ranging marine mammals. However, handling wild animals and attaching instruments to streamlined bodies can cause stress and potentially influence behaviour and swimming/diving energetics. The goals of this study, undertaken on Bouvetøya, were (1) to determine if the first trip to sea after instrumentation is representative of subsequent trips in lactating Antarctic fur seals, to explore potential handling effects and assess possible biases in having multiple short-duration deployments (inflating N, using a limited number of tags) and (2) to evaluate potential effects of two different instrument combinations (SMRU satellite data relay loggers and very high frequency radio transmitters versus Wildlife Computers time–depth recorders and very high frequency radio transmitters) on trip durations, dive parameters, female body condition and pup growth. Handling did not appear to have any effects on the parameters studied; data from the first and second trips did not differ significantly. This implies that multiple short-term deployments are unlikely to result in biased data in this species. Instrument type did have measurable effects; time-at-sea was greater and pup growth was lower for pairs in which mothers carried bulkier instruments. This suggests that instrument streamlining is important to avoid negative impacts and that bulkier equipment should be deployed on lactating females with caution and only for short periods. The study highlights that instrument effects should be taken into account when comparing data from experiments collected using different equipment packages