Incompletely Informed Shorebirds That Face a Digestive Constraint Maximize Net Energy Gain When Exploiting Patches

Foragers that feed on hidden prey are uncertain about the intake rate they can achieve as they enter a patch. However, foraging success can inform them, especially if they have prior knowledge about the patch quality distribution in their environment. We experimentally tested whether and how red knots (Calidris canutus) use such information and whether their patch‐leaving decisions maximized their long‐term net energy intake rate. The results suggest that the birds combined patch sample information with prior knowledge by making use of the potential value assessment rule. We reject five alternative leaving rules. The potential encounter rate that the birds choose as their critical departure threshold maximized their foraging gain ratio (a modified form of efficiency) while foraging. The high experimental intake rates were constrained by rate of digestion. Under such conditions, maximization of the foraging gain ratio during foraging maximizes net intake rate during total time (foraging time plus digestive breaks). We conclude that molluscivore red knots, in the face of a digestive constraint, are able to combine prior environmental knowledge about patch quality with patch sample information to obtain the highest possible net intake over total time.

[1]  G. Visser,et al.  Cost-benefit analysis of mollusc eating in a shorebird I. Foraging and processing costs estimated by the doubly labelled water method , 2003, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[2]  A. Kacelnik,et al.  Optimal foraging and arbitrary food distributions: Patch models gain a lease of life , 1988 .

[3]  C. S. Holling.  Some Characteristics of Simple Types of Predation and Parasitism , 1959, The Canadian Entomologist.

[4]  B. Nolet.  Efficiency as a foraging currency in animals attaining a gain below the energetic ceiling , 2002 .

[5]  Richard F. Green,et al.  Stochastic Models of Optimal Foraging , 1987 .

[6]  Jonathan M. Jeschke,et al.  PREDATOR FUNCTIONAL RESPONSES: DISCRIMINATING BETWEEN HANDLING AND DIGESTING PREY , 2002 .

[7]  Theunis Piersma,et al.  Scale and intensity of intertidal habitat use by knots Calidris canutus in the Western Wadden Sea in relation to food, friends and foes , 1993 .

[8]  J. McNamara.  Optimal patch use in a stochastic environment , 1982 .

[9]  M. Rodríguez-Gironés,et al.  Density-Dependent Patch Exploitation and Acquisition of Environmental Information , 1997, Theoretical population biology.

[10]  Joel s. Brown,et al.  Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competition , 2004, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[11]  Ola Olsson,et al.  The survival-rate-maximizing policy for Bayesian foragers: wait for good news , 1998 .

[12]  L. Zwarts,et al.  Annual and seasonal-variation in the food-supply harvestable by knot Calidris-canutus staging in the Wadden Sea in late summer , 1992 .

[13]  S. Daan,et al.  Seasonality in basal metabolic rate and thermal conductance in a long-distance migrant shorebird, the knot (Calidris canutus) , 1995, Journal of Comparative Physiology B.

[14]  Samuel Karlin,et al.  A First Course on Stochastic Processes , 1968 .

[15]  P. Chesson,et al.  Foraging in a patchy environment: prey-encounter rate and residence time distributions , 1989, Animal Behaviour.

[16]  Larry B. Crowder,et al.  Bluegills continuously update patch giving-up times based on foraging experience , 1994, Animal Behaviour.

[17]  James N. McNair,et al.  Optimal Giving-Up Times and the Marginal Value Theorem , 1982, The American Naturalist.

[18]  T. Piersma,et al.  An evaluation of intertidal feeding habitats from a shorebird perspective: Towards relevant comparisons between temperate and tropical mudflats , 1993 .

[19]  Ola Olsson,et al.  A Three-Neuron Model of Information Processing During Bayesian Foraging , 2000, ANNIMAB.

[20]  R. Ydenberg,et al.  Simple models of feeding with time and enery contstraints , 1998 .

[21]  Joel s. Brown,et al.  Patch Assessment in Fox Squirrels: The Role of Resource Density, Patch Size, and Patch Boundaries , 1996, The American Naturalist.

[22]  O. Olsson,et al.  Optimal Bayesian foraging policies and prey population dynamics-some comments on Rodriguez-Girones and Vasquez. , 2000, Theoretical population biology.

[23]  A. Kacelnik,et al.  Optimal Foraging and Beyond: How Starlings Cope with Changes in Food Availability , 1998, The American Naturalist.

[24]  G. Chelazzi,et al.  When time is of the essence: choosing a currency for prey-handling costs , 2000 .

[25]  A. Hedenström,et al.  OPTIMAL FLIGHT SPEED OF BIRDS , 1995 .

[26]  Thomas J. Valone,et al.  Bayesian and prescient assessment: foraging with pre-harvest information , 1991, Animal Behaviour.

[27]  L. Zwarts,et al.  Why knot Calidris canutus take medium-sized Macoma balthica when six prey species are available , 1992 .

[28]  Flavia Chiarotti,et al.  Statistical analysis of behavioral data. , 2005, Current protocols in toxicology.

[29]  Bernard Dacorogna,et al.  Optimal Foraging on Arbitrary Food Distributions and the Definition of Habitat Patches , 1988, The American Naturalist.

[30]  Richard F. Green,et al.  Bayesian birds: A simple example of Oaten's stochastic model of optimal foraging , 1980 .

[31]  Roberts Wm,et al.  The Problem of Temporal Scale in Optimization: Three Contrasting Views of Hummingbird Visits to Flowers , 1992 .

[32]  P. Haccou,et al.  The Influence of Larval Dispersal in the Cinnabar Moth (Tyria jacobaeae) on Predation by the Red Wood Ant (Formica polyctena): An Analysis Based on the Proportional Hazards Model , 1985 .

[33]  Theunis Piersma,et al.  Effects of Microhabitat, Flocking, Climate and Migratory Goal on Energy Expenditure in the Annual Cycle of Red Knots , 1994 .

[34]  Leo R. M. Maas,et al.  A new pressure sensory mechanism for prey detection in birds: the use of principles of seabed dynamics? , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[35]  A I Houston,et al.  Currencies For Foraging Based on Energetic Gain , 1997, The American Naturalist.

[36]  N. B. Kotliar,et al.  Multiple scales of patchiness and patch structure: a hierarchical framework for the study of heterogeneity , 1990 .

[37]  C. Clark,et al.  Dynamic State Variable Models in Ecology , 2000 .

[38]  S. Fretwell,et al.  On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds , 1969 .

[39]  S R Hursh,et al.  Economic concepts for the analysis of behavior. , 1980, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[40]  A. Kacelnik,et al.  To walk or to fly? How birds choose among foraging modes. , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[41]  A. Oaten,et al.  Optimal foraging in patches: a case for stochasticity. , 1977, Theoretical population biology.

[42]  T. Piersma.  Energetic Bottlenecks and Other Design Constraints in Avian Annual Cycles1 , 2002, Integrative and comparative biology.

[43]  Ola Olsson,et al.  Gaining ecological information about Bayesian foragers through their behaviour. II. A field test with woodpeckers , 1999 .

[44]  C. L. Gass,et al.  The Problem of Temporal Scale in Optimization: Three Contrasting Views of Hummingbird Visits to Flowers , 1992, The American Naturalist.

[45]  S. Fretwell,et al.  On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds , 1969 .

[46]  J. V. van Gils,et al.  Cost-benefit analysis of mollusc-eating in a shorebird II. Optimizing gizzard size in the face of seasonal demands , 2003, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[47]  J. Gils,et al.  Holling's functional response model as a tool to link the food-finding mechanism of a probing shorebird with its spatial distribution , 1995 .

[48]  J. Krebs,et al.  Hunting by expectation or optimal foraging: A study of patch use by chickadees , 1974 .

[49]  A. Houston.  Energetic constraints and foraging efficiency , 1995 .

[50]  E. Charnov.  Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. , 1976, Theoretical population biology.

[51]  Theunis Piersma,et al.  Carrying large fuel loads during sustained bird flight is cheaper than expected , 2001, Nature.

[52]  S. L. Lima,et al.  Downy Woodpecker Foraging Behavior: Efficient Sampling in Simple Stochastic Environments , 1984 .

[53]  T. Piersma,et al.  Resources for long-distance migration of knots Calidris canutus islandica and C. c. canutus : How broad is the temporal exploitation window of benthic prey in the western and eastern Wadden Sea? , 1994 .

[54]  Ola Olsson,et al.  Gain curves in depletable food patches: A test of five models with European starlings , 2001 .

[55]  Theunis Piersma,et al.  Close to the edge: Energetic bottlenecks and the evolution of migratory pathways in knots , 1994 .

[56]  Thomas J. Valone,et al.  Measuring Patch Assessment Abilities of Desert Granivores , 1989 .

[57]  Y. Iwasa,et al.  Prey Distribution as a Factor Determining the Choice of Optimal Foraging Strategy , 1981, The American Naturalist.