Complex movement patterns by foraging loggerhead sea turtles outside the breeding season identified using Argos‐linked Fastloc‐Global Positioning System

We used Argos‐linked Fastloc‐Global Positioning System (Argos‐linked Fastloc‐GPS) satellite tags to investigate how loggerhead sea turtles use neritic foraging habitats at multiple scales. Out of 24 turtles, six individuals used more than one foraging site, with all sites being separated by >25 k...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Marine ecology (Berlin, West) West), 2018-02, Vol.39 (1), p.n/a
Main Authors: Dujon, Antoine M., Schofield, Gail, Lester, Rebecca E., Papafitsoros, Kostas, Hays, Graeme C.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
agonistic interaction
Aquatic reptiles
Biological competition
Breeding
Breeding seasons
Caretta caretta
Competition
exploratory movement
Food availability
Foraging
foraging behaviour
Foraging habitats
Global positioning systems
GPS
grazing pressure
habitat selection
home‐range
Interactions
kernel
Marine parks
Marine protected areas
Night
Overwintering
Positioning systems
Protected areas
Refuges
Resource availability
Satellite navigation systems
Satellites
Sea turtles
search behaviour
spatial memory
Turtles
Visual observation
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We used Argos‐linked Fastloc‐Global Positioning System (Argos‐linked Fastloc‐GPS) satellite tags to investigate how loggerhead sea turtles use neritic foraging habitats at multiple scales. Out of 24 turtles, six individuals used more than one foraging site, with all sites being separated by >25 km. These six individuals used up to four sites, remaining at each site for a mean of 150 days and returning to the same site a minimum of 52 days later. The other 18 turtles remained in a single site. The area within sites was not used uniformly, with 15 out of 24 turtles exhibiting complex movement patterns within and amongst up to five focal patches, which were typically 0.1–5.0 km apart within a single site. Movements between sites and patches might sometimes have reflected overwintering behaviour; however, similar movement patterns occurred at multiple times of the year, suggesting other factors were also involved. Use of multiple sites and patches might be driven by differences in resource availability, such as food and/or night‐time refuges, competition, or exploratory movement to investigate or locate alternative patches. We confirmed competition via direct visual observations of aggressive interactions between individuals at one foraging patch. Our results illustrate the importance of standardizing data to the same number of locations per day and night to accurately delineate key areas used by turtles or for evidence‐based marine protected area planning.
ISSN:0173-9565
1439-0485
DOI:10.1111/maec.12489