QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

This Article Summary Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Nevitt, G. A. Articles by Haberman, K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Nevitt, G. A. Articles by Haberman, K.

Behavioral attraction of Leach's storm-petrels (Oceanodroma leucorhoa) to dimethyl sulfide

Gabrielle A. Nevitt^1,* and Karen Haberman²

¹ Section of Neurobiology, Physiology and Behavior, Division of Biological Sciences, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA
² Division of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Western Oregon University, 345 Monmouth Ave. N., Monmouth, OR 97361, USA

View larger version (10K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Means ± S.E.M. of responses to dimethyl sulfide (DMS) and associated control presentations (N=12 paired trials). These data show that Leach's storm-petrels were attracted in significantly higher numbers (P<0.05) to DMS presentations than to plain water in colony tests (see text for details).

View larger version (10K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Means ± S.E.M. of responses to cod liver oil and associated control presentations (N=11 paired trials). These data show that Leach's storm-petrels were attracted in similar numbers to cod liver oil and control presentations than to plain water in colony tests (see text for details).

View larger version (13K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Distributions of rates of attraction to (A) dimethyl sulfide (DMS) and (B) cod liver oil compared with distributions predicted by relative Poisson processes. These graphs compare the observed distributions of approach rates (black bars) to distributions predicted if birds were approaching the platforms at random (gray bars). The approach rate (approaches min–1) was calculated by taking the total number of approaches recorded in a 5-min observation period and dividing by five. We then tallied the frequency of occurrence of each rate to generate the curves for DMS (N=12) and cod liver oil (N=11). The distribution of approach rates departed significantly from a Poisson distribution for DMS but not for cod liver oil presentations; approaches to DMS were clustered, whereas approaches to cod liver oil occurred at random (Zar, 1996).