| Literature DB >> 33985582 |
Camille Bégin-Marchand1, André Desrochers2, Philip D Taylor3,4, Junior A Tremblay5,2, Lucas Berrigan4, Barbara Frei6,7, Ana Morales8, Greg W Mitchell9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Migratory connectivity links the different populations across the full cycle and across the species range and may lead to differences in survival among populations. Studies on spatial and temporal migratory connectivity along migration routes are rare, especially for small migratory animals.Entities:
Keywords: Migration pace; Migratory connectivity; Motus; Neotropical migrants; Radio-telemetry
Year: 2021 PMID: 33985582 PMCID: PMC8117314 DOI: 10.1186/s40462-021-00263-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mov Ecol ISSN: 2051-3933 Impact factor: 3.600
Selection of 4 generalized additive models (GAMs) to describe the influence of latitude, tagging longitude, age and the interaction between age and latitude on migration pace (log) and their relative weight according to Akaike’s criterion. Bird ID and year of capture were random effects (re) and distance between receiving stations was included as a covariate. The strongest model (bold) is the full model and the fourth is the null model
| Model | AIC | Delta AIC | Model likelihood | AIC weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| s(tagging longitude) + s(latitude) + s(distance) + s(year(re)) + s(bird ID (re)) | 1899.72 | 0.75 | 0.69 | 0.39 |
| s(latitude, by = age, m = 1) + age + s(distance) + s(year(re)) + s(bird ID (re)) | 1903.75 | 4.78 | 0.09 | 0.05 |
| s(distance) + s(year(re)) + s(bird ID (re)) | 1908.13 | 9.15 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
Fig. 1Number of birds detected in the Motus network from different tagging locations (solid black circles). Receiving stations were aggregated in cells of 1 × 1 degree. Every individual was counted only once per receiving station. Empty cells are receiving stations with no detections and colored cells represent the number of individuals detected per cell
Fig. 2Variation of the spatial (continuous line) and temporal (hatched line) migratory connectivity (Mantel Rm statistic) en route between tagging sites along a latitudinal gradient of cells of 1 × 1 degree (values close to 0 = weak migratory connectivity, values close to 1 = strong migratory connectivity). Populations converged near the Florida peninsula but maintained a finer scale spatial structure (continuous line). We calculated the median latitude of the 16 intervals of 5°N tested. Observations between 37 and 33 °N did not include enough receiving stations for a robust statistical interpretation. Populations maintained a temporal segregation (hatched line) in the early stages of migration, but no differences associated to the origin was found south of 38°N, despite a slight increase, but weak connectivity, in the last detections south of 30°N. Vertical bars represent 95% confidence limits based on 100 bootstrap samples. The read horizontal line represents the y-intercept = 0
Fig. 3Time (a: hours, b: days) between successive detections in relation to distance between stations (km)) and migration pace (km/h) of 553 segments from 236 Swainson’s Thrushes for segments within the same day (a) and > 1 day (b). Migration pace is the result of the distance and the time elapsed between two receiving stations. The migration pace does not indicate the ground speed of the birds as the distance between receiving stations is not representative of the distance traveled by the bird
Fig. 4Fitted splines for a generalized additive model of the relationship between distance between receiving stations and latitude (smooth terms) on migration pace (log). Distance between receiving stations (left) suggest a lack of variation of the migration pace for longer segments. Birds have a slower migration pace in northern latitude, closer to their breeding origin (right). Migration paces were slower and more variable in northern latitudes suggesting more stopover closer to the breeding grounds