Literature DB >> 18662243

Longer guts and higher food quality increase energy intake in migratory swans.

Jan A van Gils1, Jan H Beekman, Pieter Coehoorn, Els Corporaal, Ten Dekkers, Marcel Klaassen, Rik van Kraaij, Rinze de Leeuw, Peter P de Vries.   

Abstract

1. Within the broad field of optimal foraging, it is increasingly acknowledged that animals often face digestive constraints rather than constraints on rates of food collection. This therefore calls for a formalization of how animals could optimize food absorption rates. 2. Here we generate predictions from a simple graphical optimal digestion model for foragers that aim to maximize their (true) metabolizable food intake over total time (i.e. including nonforaging bouts) under a digestive constraint. 3. The model predicts that such foragers should maintain a constant food retention time, even if gut length or food quality changes. For phenotypically flexible foragers, which are able to change the size of their digestive machinery, this means that an increase in gut length should go hand in hand with an increase in gross intake rate. It also means that better quality food should be digested more efficiently. 4. These latter two predictions are tested in a large avian long-distance migrant, the Bewick's swan (Cygnus columbianus bewickii), feeding on grasslands in its Dutch wintering quarters. 5. Throughout winter, free-ranging Bewick's swans, growing a longer gut and experiencing improved food quality, increased their gross intake rate (i.e. bite rate) and showed a higher digestive efficiency. These responses were in accordance with the model and suggest maintenance of a constant food retention time. 6. These changes doubled the birds' absorption rate. Had only food quality changed (and not gut length), then absorption rate would have increased by only 67%; absorption rate would have increased by only 17% had only gut length changed (and not food quality). 7. The prediction that gross intake rate should go up with gut length parallels the mechanism included in some proximate models of foraging that feeding motivation scales inversely to gut fullness. We plea for a tighter integration between ultimate and proximate foraging models.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18662243     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01452.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Ecol        ISSN: 0021-8790            Impact factor:   5.091


  5 in total

Review 1.  How do energy stores and changes in these affect departure decisions by migratory birds? A critical view on stopover ecology studies and some future perspectives.

Authors:  Heiko Schmaljohann; Cas Eikenaar
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2017-03-22       Impact factor: 1.836

2.  Spare capacity and phenotypic flexibility in the digestive system of a migratory bird: defining the limits of animal design.

Authors:  Scott R McWilliams; William H Karasov
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Energetic costs and implications of the intake of plant secondary metabolites on digestive and renal morphology in two austral passerines.

Authors:  Gonzalo Barceló; Juan Manuel Ríos; Karin Maldonado; Pablo Sabat
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2016-03-01       Impact factor: 2.200

4.  A mechanistic assessment of the relationship between gut morphology and endozoochorous seed dispersal by waterfowl.

Authors:  Erik Kleyheeg; Bart A Nolet; Sandra Otero-Ojea; Merel B Soons
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2018-10-30       Impact factor: 2.912

5.  Nocturnal foraging lifts time constraints in winter for migratory geese but hardly speeds up fueling.

Authors:  Thomas K Lameris; Adriaan M Dokter; Henk P van der Jeugd; Willem Bouten; Jasper Koster; Stefan H H Sand; Coen Westerduin; Bart A Nolet
Journal:  Behav Ecol       Date:  2021-03-25       Impact factor: 2.671

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.