How much to carry? Implications of maximum load carrying capacity for prey use of urban and rural Northern Goshawks Accipiter gentilis

ABSTRACT Capsule: Compared to their rural counterparts, urban Northern Goshawks Accipiter gentilis potentially maximize their energy delivery to the nest by exploiting heavier prey species close to their maximum carrying capacity. Aims: We aimed to assess prey use of a raptor species with distinct reversed sexual size dimorphism from a perspective of physical limitations during foraging and the transportation of prey. Methods: We estimated the theoretical maximum load carrying capacity (MLCC) of fully developed Northern Goshawks based on their flight muscle mass. Additionally, we collected data on the breeding season diet of Northern Goshawks in urban and rural habitats in Germany. By linking MLCC estimates to the diet we explained the relevance of prey size from a viewpoint of load carrying capacity. Results: Estimates for the mean (± sd) additional portable loads were 684 g (± 237) for males and 971 g (± 235) for females, accounting for 96% and 84% of their body mass, respectively. Overall prey weight averaged higher for urban areas compared to rural ones, while the majority of prey items were between 200 and 500 g and below the estimated MLCC of both sexes, with the exception of single heavy species. Results suggest that prey use of Northern Goshawks during the breeding season is barely limited by prey transportability, since both sexes are physically capable of carrying the majority of prey species to their nest. Conclusions: Urban Northern Goshawks can exploit heavier, available prey species compared to their rural counterparts, allowing them to hunt larger prey closer to their MLCC. Ultimately, by maximizing their energy delivery to the nest, this presumably constitutes one key factor why Goshawks successfully colonized European cities. This study is the first to link estimates of physical limitations in prey transportation for a free-living raptor species to its prey composition in the light of colonizing urban environments.

[1]  C. Rutz,et al.  Phantom of the forest or successful citizen? Analysing how Northern Goshawks (Accipiter gentilis) cope with the urban environment , 2020, Royal Society Open Science.

[2]  L. Pérez‐Camacho,et al.  Prey preferences and recent changes in diet of a breeding population of the Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis in Southwestern Europe , 2017 .

[3]  L. Pérez‐Camacho,et al.  Higher reproductive success of small males and greater recruitment of large females may explain strong reversed sexual dimorphism (RSD) in the northern goshawk , 2015, Oecologia.

[4]  L. Pérez‐Camacho,et al.  Higher reproductive success of small males and greater recruitment of large females may explain strong reversed sexual dimorphism (RSD) in the northern goshawk , 2014, Oecologia.

[5]  J. D. Hoyo,et al.  Handbook of the Birds of the World , 2010 .

[6]  C. Rutz.  The establishment of an urban bird population. , 2008, The Journal of animal ecology.

[7]  E. P. Toyne.  Breeding season diet of the Goshawk Accipiter gentilis in Wales , 2008 .

[8]  O. Krüger.  The Evolution of Reversed Sexual Size Dimorphism in Hawks, Falcons and Owls: A Comparative Study , 2005, Evolutionary Ecology.

[9]  C. Rutz.  Assessing the breeding season diet of goshawks Accipiter gentilis: biases of plucking analysis quantified by means of continuous radio‐monitoring , 2003 .

[10]  P. Pedrini,et al.  Regional conservation priorities for a large predator: golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) in the Alpine range , 2002 .

[11]  Andrew Sih,et al.  Optimal diet theory: when does it work, and when and why does it fail? , 2001, Animal Behaviour.

[12]  T. Nygård,et al.  Using time-lapse video monitoring to study prey selection by breeding Goshawks Accipiter gentilis in Central Norway , 2000 .

[13]  J. Valkama,et al.  Functional Responses and Load-Size Effect in Central Place Foragers: Data from the Kestrel and Some General Comments , 1994 .

[14]  G. Sonerud.  Functional responses of birds of prey : biases due to the load-size effect in central place foragers , 1992 .

[15]  J. Marden.  Short Communication: Maximum Load-Lifting and Induced Power Output of Harris' Hawks are General Functions of Flight Muscle Mass , 1990 .

[16]  M. R. Fuller,et al.  Climbing performance of Harris' hawks ( Parabuteo unicinctus ) with added load: implications for muscle mechanics and for radiotracking , 1989 .

[17]  J. Marden.  Maximum Lift Production During Takeoff in Flying Animals , 1987 .

[18]  A. Kacelnik.  CENTRAL PLACE FORAGING IN STARLINGS (STURNUS-VULGARIS) .1. PATCH RESIDENCE TIME , 1984 .

[19]  M. Marquiss,et al.  Food, predation and breeding season in Sparrowhawks (Accipiter nisus) , 1982 .

[20]  I. Newton.  Population Ecology of Raptors , 1981 .

[21]  R. Norberg,et al.  Evolution of reversed sexual size dimorphism and role partitioning among predatory birds, with a size scaling of flight performance , 1981 .

[22]  C. Pennycuick.  A wind tunnel study of gliding flight in the pigeon Columba livia , 1968 .

[23]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[24]  PATRICIA L. KENNEDY,et al.  The Goshawk , 2008 .

[25]  R. Kenward,et al.  Population limitation in the Northern Goshawk in Europe: A review with case studies , 2006 .

[26]  C. Rutz.  Home range size, habitat use, activity patterns and hunting behaviour of urban-breeding Northern Goshawks Accipiter gentilis , 2006 .

[27]  C. Rutz.  Breeding season diet of Northern Goshawks Accipiter gentilis in the city of Hamburg, Germany , 2004 .

[28]  T. Fagerström,et al.  Load size and energy delivery in birds feeding nestlings: Constraints on and alternative strategies to energy-maximization , 2004, Oecologia.

[29]  G. Pyke.  Optimal Foraging Theory: A Critical Review , 1984 .

[30]  P. Opdam.  Feeding ecology and niche differentiation in goshawk (Accipiter gentilis L.) and sparrowhawk (Accipiter nisus L.) , 1980 .

[31]  C. H. Blake,et al.  Locomotor Mechanisms of Birds , 1962 .