Literature DB >> 22874749

Visual accommodation and active pursuit of prey underwater in a plunge-diving bird: the Australasian gannet.

Gabriel E Machovsky-Capuska1, Howard C Howland, David Raubenheimer, Robin Vaughn-Hirshorn, Bernd Würsig, Mark E Hauber, Gadi Katzir.   

Abstract

Australasian gannets (Morus serrator), like many other seabird species, locate pelagic prey from the air and perform rapid plunge dives for their capture. Prey are captured underwater either in the momentum (M) phase of the dive while descending through the water column, or the wing flapping (WF) phase while moving, using the wings for propulsion. Detection of prey from the air is clearly visually guided, but it remains unknown whether plunge diving birds also use vision in the underwater phase of the dive. Here we address the question of whether gannets are capable of visually accommodating in the transition from aerial to aquatic vision, and analyse underwater video footage for evidence that gannets use vision in the aquatic phases of hunting. Photokeratometry and infrared video photorefraction revealed that, immediately upon submergence of the head, gannet eyes accommodate and overcome the loss of greater than 45 D (dioptres) of corneal refractive power which occurs in the transition between air and water. Analyses of underwater video showed the highest prey capture rates during WF phase when gannets actively pursue individual fish, a behaviour that very likely involves visual guidance, following the transition after the plunge dive's M phase. This is to our knowledge the first demonstration of the capacity for visual accommodation underwater in a plunge diving bird while capturing submerged prey detected from the air.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22874749      PMCID: PMC3441088          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2012.1519

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  16 in total

1.  Corneal power and underwater accommodation in great cormorants (Phalacrocorax carbo sinensis).

Authors:  Gadi Katzir; Howard C Howland
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 3.312

2.  Cormorants keep their power: visual resolution in a pursuit-diving bird under amphibious and turbid conditions.

Authors:  Tamir Strod; Zeev Arad; Ido Izhaki; Gadi Katzir
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2004-05-25       Impact factor: 10.834

3.  Infrared photoretinoscope.

Authors:  F Schaeffel; L Farkas; H C Howland
Journal:  Appl Opt       Date:  1987-04-15       Impact factor: 1.980

4.  Amphibious visual optics of the eyes of the double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus) and the brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis).

Authors:  J G Sivak; J L Lincer; W Bobier
Journal:  Can J Zool       Date:  1977-05       Impact factor: 1.597

5.  Penguin vision in air and water.

Authors:  H C Howland; J G Sivak
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  Cattle egrets are less able to cope with light refraction than are other herons.

Authors: 
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 2.844

Review 7.  Optimization, constraint, and history in the evolution of eyes.

Authors:  T H Goldsmith
Journal:  Q Rev Biol       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 4.875

8.  Pursuit plunging by northern gannets (Sula bassana) feeding on capelin (Mallotus villosus).

Authors:  S Garthe; S Benvenuti; W A Montevecchi
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2000-09-07       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Visual optics in toads (Bufo americanus).

Authors:  U Mathis; F Schaeffel; H C Howland
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 1.836

10.  Vision and foraging in cormorants: more like herons than hawks?

Authors:  Craig R White; Norman Day; Patrick J Butler; Graham R Martin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2007-07-25       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  6 in total

1.  How seabirds plunge-dive without injuries.

Authors:  Brian Chang; Matthew Croson; Lorian Straker; Sean Gart; Carla Dove; John Gerwin; Sunghwan Jung
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-10-04       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Gadfly petrels use knowledge of the windscape, not memorized foraging patches, to optimize foraging trips on ocean-wide scales.

Authors:  Francesco Ventura; José Pedro Granadeiro; Oliver Padget; Paulo Catry
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2020-01-15       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  When hawks attack: animal-borne video studies of goshawk pursuit and prey-evasion strategies.

Authors:  Suzanne Amador Kane; Andrew H Fulton; Lee J Rosenthal
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2015-01-15       Impact factor: 3.312

4.  Energetic and physical limitations on the breaching performance of large whales.

Authors:  Paolo S Segre; Jean Potvin; David E Cade; John Calambokidis; Jacopo Di Clemente; Frank E Fish; Ari S Friedlaender; William T Gough; Shirel R Kahane-Rapport; Cláudia Oliveira; Susan E Parks; Gwenith S Penry; Malene Simon; Alison K Stimpert; David N Wiley; K C Bierlich; Peter T Madsen; Jeremy A Goldbogen
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-03-11       Impact factor: 8.140

5.  Seabird diving behaviour reveals the functional significance of shelf-sea fronts as foraging hotspots.

Authors:  S L Cox; P I Miller; C B Embling; K L Scales; A W J Bicknell; P J Hosegood; G Morgan; S N Ingram; S C Votier
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2016-09-21       Impact factor: 2.963

6.  Social information use and collective foraging in a pursuit diving seabird.

Authors:  Julian C Evans; Colin J Torney; Stephen C Votier; Sasha R X Dall
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-09-23       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.