Ecosphere (Sep 2022)
Predation probabilities and functional responses: How piscivorous waterbirds respond to pulses in fish abundance
Abstract
Abstract How predators respond to changes in prey abundance (i.e., functional responses) is foundational to consumer–resource interactions, predator–prey dynamics, and the stability of predator–prey systems. Predation by piscivorous waterbirds on out‐migrating juvenile steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) is considered a factor affecting the recovery of multiple Endangered Species Act‐listed steelhead populations in the Columbia River basin. Waterbird functional responses, however, may vary by predator species and location, with important implications to predator management strategies. We used a 13‐year dataset on waterbird abundance across seven breeding colonies (three Caspian tern [Hydroprogne caspia], two double‐crested cormorant [Nannopterum auritum], and two California and ring‐billed gull [Larus californicus and Larus delawarensis] colonies) and steelhead tag‐recovery data (>645,000 tagged and >32,000 recovered steelhead) to quantify weekly predation probabilities and functional responses across waterbird species, colonies, and years. Weekly predation probabilities were highly variable, ranging from 0.01 to 0.30 at tern colonies, 0.01 to 0.20 at cormorant colonies, and 0.03 to 0.13 at gull colonies. Per capita predation probabilities were an order of magnitude higher at inland tern and cormorant colonies relative to estuary colonies of the same species. Terns displayed Type II functional responses across colonies and years, where predation probabilities peaked at low steelhead abundances and declined as steelhead abundance increased (i.e., predator swamping). Cormorants nesting at the large estuary colony (several thousand birds) displayed a Type III functional response, but cormorants nesting at the smaller inland colony (several hundred birds) displayed a Type II response. Consumption probabilities of steelhead by gulls remained consistent across a large range of steelhead availability, suggesting a Type I or a Type III functional response, but a lack of colony abundance data prevented quantifying functional responses. The level of tern predation combined with Type II functional responses indicate possible population‐level impacts that could destabilize small or declining prey populations. Conversely, the apparent Type III functional responses of gulls and estuary nesting cormorants are indicative of prey switching behaviors targeted at periods of high steelhead abundance. Our results illustrate the complexity of predator–prey interactions and the importance of quantifying predator‐ and location‐specific functional responses when predicting the efficacy of management strategies to enhance prey populations.
Keywords
