Observations of chick feeding rates and parental defensive responses to disturbance at nests in the critically endangered New Zealand fairy tern/tara iti (Sternula nereis davisae)

References

• Baling M. 2008. Conservation of the Fairy Tern (Sternula nereis spp.) via subspecies level management. Endangered Species Update. 25(3):86–93.
   Google Scholar
• Baling M, Brunton DH. 2022. Structured phylogeography and restricted gene flow among populations of Fairy Tern (Sternula nereis) across Australasia: implications for the endangered New Zealand population. Ibis. 164:800–808. https://doi -org .ezproxy.massey.ac.nz/10 .1111/ibi.13048.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BirdLife International. 2018. Sternula nereis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T22694691A132568135. doi:10.2305/IUCN.UK.2018-2.RLTS.T22694691A132568135.en.
   Google Scholar
• BirdLife International. 2023. Species dashboard: seabirds and laridiae. Downloaded from http://datazone.birdlife.org/ on 20/07/2023.
   Google Scholar
• Byerly PA, Zaluski S, Nellis D, Leberg PL. 2022. Effects of colony disturbance on reproductive success and nest defence behaviours in Caribbean roseate terns. Waterbirds. 44(4):463–471.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caro TM. 2005. Antipredator defenses in birds and mammals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Croxall J, Butchart S, Lascelles B, Stattersfield A, Sullivan B, Symes A, Taylor P. 2012. Seabird conservation status, threats and priority actions: A global assessment. Bird Conservation International. 22(1):1–34. doi:10.1017/S0959270912000020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darrah AJ. 2020. Mixed evidence for effects of stewardship on least tern reproductive success in coastal Mississippi. Ornithological Applications. 122(4):1–13. doi:10.1093/condor/duaa050.
   Google Scholar
• Davies S. 1981. Development and behaviour of little tern chicks. British Birds. 74:291–298.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dias MP, Martin R, Pearmain EJ, Burfield IJ, Small C, Phillips RA, Croxall JP. 2019. Threats to seabirds: a global assessment. Biological Conservation. 237:525–537. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2019.06.033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donehower CE, Bird DM, Hall CS, Kress SW. 2007. Effects of gull predation and predator control on tern nesting success at eastern egg rock, Maine. Waterbirds: The International Journal of Waterbird Biology. 30(1):29–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira SM, Hansen KM, Parrish GR, Pierce RJ, Pulham GA, Taylor S. 2005. Conservation of the endangered New Zealand fairy tern. Biological Conservation. 125(3):345–354. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2005.04.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friard O, Gamba M. 2016. BORIS: A free, versatile open-source event-logging software for video/audio coding and live observations. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 7:1325–1330. doi:10.1111/2041-210X.12584.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grant ML, Bond AL, Lavers JL. 2022. The influence of seabirds on their breeding, roosting, and nesting grounds: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Animal Ecology. 91(6):1266–1289. doi:10.1111/1365-2656.13699.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenwell C. 2021. Inferred predation of fairy tern eggs by ruddy turnstones at Rottnest island, western Australia, an internationally significant shorebird site. Australian Field Ornithology. 38:115–117. doi:10.20938/afo38115117.
   Google Scholar
• Greenwell CN, Calver MC, Loneragan NR. 2019. Cat gets its tern: A case study of predation on a threatened coastal seabird. Animals. 9(7):445. doi:10.3390/ani9070445.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ismar SM, Trnski TO, Beauchamp T, Bury SJ, Wilson D, Kannemeyer R, Bellingham M, Baird K. 2014. Foraging ecology and choice of feeding habitat in the New Zealand fairy tern Sternula nereis davisae. Bird Conservation International. 24(1):72–87. doi:10.1017/S0959270913000312.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medeiros R, Ramos JA, Paiva VH, Almeida A, Pedro P, Antunes S. 2007. Signage reduces the impact of human disturbance on little tern nesting success in Portugal. Biological Conservation. 135(1):99–106. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2006.10.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medeiros R, Ramos JA, Pedro P, Thomas RJ. 2012. Reproductive consequences of nest site selection by little terns breeding on sandy beaches. Waterbirds. 35(4):512–524. doi:10.1675/063.035.0402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris RD, Kirkham IR, Chardine JW. 1980. Management of a declining common tern colony. Journal of Wildlife Management. 44:241–245. doi:10.2307/3808378.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palestis BG. 2005. Nesting stage and nest defense by common terns. Waterbirds. 28(1):87–94. doi:10.1675/1524-4695(2005)028[0087:NSANDB]2.0.CO;2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parrish GR, Pulman GA. 1995. Observations on the breeding of the New Zealand fairy tern. Tane. 35:161–173.
   Google Scholar
• Preddey M. 2008. Post-fledging parental care of a juvenile New Zealand fairy tern (Sterna nereis davisae). Notornis. 55(3):159–161.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson JA, Hamer KC. 2000. Brood size and food provisioning in common terns Sterna hirundo, and Arctic terns S. paradisaea: consequences for chick growth. Ardea. 88(1):51–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romanoff A. 1944. Avian spare yolk and its assimilation. The Auk. 61(2):235–241. doi:10.2307/4079367.
   Google Scholar
• RStudio Team. 2020. RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, PBC, Boston, MA. http://www.rstudio.com/.
   Google Scholar
• Sherfy MH, Anteau MJ, Shaffer TL, Sovada MA, Stucker JH. 2012. Foraging ecology of least terns and piping plovers nesting on Central Platte River sandpits and sandbars. US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey.
   Google Scholar
• Syrova M, Hromadkova T, Pavel V, Vesely P. 2020. Responses of nesting Arctic terns (Sterna paradisaea) to disturbance by humans. Polar Biology. 43:399–407. doi:10.1007/s00300-020-02641-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Székely T, Reynolds JD. 1995. Evolutionary transitions in parental care in shorebirds. Proceedings: Biological Sciences. 262(1363):57–64. doi:10.1098/rspb.1995.0176.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas GH, Székely T. 2005. Evolutionary pathways in shorebird breeding systems: sexual conflict, parental care, and chick development. Evolution. 59(10):2222–2230.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Wagt I, de Jong IC, Mitchell MA, Molenaar R, van den Brand H. 2020. A review on yolk sac utilization in poultry. Poultry Science. 99(4):2162–2175. doi:10.1016/j.psj.2019.11.041.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar