Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T15:11:33.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Responses of common diving petrel chicks (Pelecanoides urinatrix) to burrow and colony specific odours in a simple wind tunnel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2012

Gregory B. Cunningham ,
Richard W. Van Buskirk ,
Mark J. Hodges  and
Gabrielle A. Nevitt
Gregory B. Cunningham*
Affiliation:
Department of Neurobiology, Physiology and Behavior, One Shields Avenue, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA
Richard W. Van Buskirk
Affiliation:
Department of Neurobiology, Physiology and Behavior, One Shields Avenue, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA
Mark J. Hodges
Affiliation:
Department of Neurobiology, Physiology and Behavior, One Shields Avenue, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA
Gabrielle A. Nevitt
Affiliation:
Department of Neurobiology, Physiology and Behavior, One Shields Avenue, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA
*
gcunningham@sjfc.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Researchers have previously assumed that common diving petrels (Pelecanoides urinatrix) have a limited sense of smell since they have relatively small olfactory bulbs. A recent study, however, showed that adult diving petrels prefer the scent of their own burrow compared to burrows of other diving petrels, implying that personal scents contribute to the burrow's odour signature. Because diving petrels appear to be adapted to use olfaction in social contexts, they could be a useful model for investigating how chemically mediated social recognition develops in birds. A first step is to determine whether diving petrel chicks can detect familiar and unfamiliar odours. We compared behavioural responses of chicks to three natural stimuli in a wind tunnel: soil collected from their burrow or colony, and a blank control. During portions of the experiment, chicks turned the least and walked the shortest distances in response to odours from the nest, which is consistent with their sedentary behaviour within the burrow. By contrast, behaviours linked to olfactory search increased when chicks were exposed to blank controls. These results suggest that common diving petrel chicks can detect natural olfactory stimuli before fledging, and lay the foundation for future studies on the role of olfaction in social contexts for this species.

Keywords

Kerguelenkin recognitionolfactionprocellariiform
Type
Biological Sciences
Information
Antarctic Science , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , 17 July 2012 , pp. 337 - 341
Copyright
Copyright © Antarctic Science Ltd 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bang, B.G.Cobb, S. 1968. The size of the olfactory bulb in 108 species of birds. The Auk, 85, 55–61.Google Scholar
Bocher, P., Cherel, Y.Hobson, K.A. 2000a. Complete trophic segregation between South Georgian and common diving petrels during breeding at Iles Kerguelen. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 208, 249–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bocher, P., Labidoire, B.Cherel, Y. 2000b. Maximum dive depths of common diving petrels (Pelecanoides urinatrix) during the annual cycle at Mayes Island, Kerguelen. Journal of Zoology, 251, 517–524.Google Scholar
Bonadonna, F.Nevitt, G.A. 2004. Partner-specific odour recognition in an Antarctic seabird. Science, 306, 835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonadonna, F., Cunningham, G.B., Jouventin, P., Hesters, F.Nevitt, G.A. 2003. Evidence for nest-odour recognition in two species of diving petrel. Journal of Experimental Biology, 206, 3719–3722.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chastel, O. 1994. Maximum diving depths of common diving petrels Pelecanoides urinatrix at Iles Kerguelens. Polar Biology, 14, 211–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunningham, G.B., van Buskirk, R.W., Bonadonna, F., Weimerskirch, H.Nevitt, G.A. 2003. A comparison of the olfactory abilities of three species of procellariiform chicks. Journal of Experimental Biology, 206, 1615–1620.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cunningham, G.B., van Buskirk, R.W., Hodges, M.J., Weimerskirch, H.Nevitt, G.A. 2006. Behavioural responses of blue petrel chicks (Halobaena caerulea) to food-related and novel odours in a simple wind tunnel. Antarctic Science, 18, 345–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erskine, P.D., Bergstrom, D.M., Schmidt, S., Stewart, G.R., Tweedie, C.E.Shaw, J.D. 1998. Sub-Antarctic Macquarie Island: a model ecosystem for studying animal-derived nitrogen sources using 15N natural abundance. Oecologia, 117, 187–193.Google Scholar
Jones, R.B.Gentle, M.J. 1985. Olfaction and behavioral modification in domestic chicks (Gallus domesticus). Physiology and Behavior, 34, 917–924.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hagelin, J.C. 2007. Odors and chemical signaling. In Jamieson, B.G.M., ed. Reproductive behavior and phylogeny of Aves. Vol. 6B. Enfield, NH: Science Publishers, 76–119.Google Scholar
Jouventin, P., Mougin, J.L., Stahl, J.C.Weimerskirch, H. 1985. Comparative biology of the burrowing petrels of the Iles Crozet. Notornis, 32, 157–220.Google Scholar
Nevitt, G.A. 2008. Sensory ecology on the high seas: the odor world of the procellariiform seabirds. Journal of Experimental Biology, 211, 1706–1713.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nevitt, G.A., Bergstrom, D.Bonadonna, F. 2006. The potential role of ammonia as signal molecule for procellariiform seabirds. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 315, 271–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Dwyer, T.W.Nevitt, G.A. 2009. Exploring the mechanisms of individual odor recognition in burrow-nesting procellariiforms: a potential role for the MHC. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1170, 442–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Dwyer, T.W., Ackerman, A.L.Nevitt, G.A. 2008. Examining the development of individual recognition in a burrow-nesting procellariiform, the Leach's storm-petrel. Journal of Experimental Biology, 211, 337–340.Google Scholar
Pennycuick, C.J. 1996. Wingbeat frequency of birds in steady cruising flight: new data and improved predictions. Journal of Experimental Biology, 199, 1613–1618.Google Scholar
Warham, J. 1990. The petrels: their ecology and breeding systems. London: Academic Press, 448 pp.Google Scholar
Warham, J. 1996. The behaviour, population biology and physiology of the petrels. London: Academic Press, 616 pp.Google Scholar
Zar, J.H. 1996. Biostatistical analysis, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 672 pp.Google Scholar