Nova Southeastern University NSUWorks HCNSO Student Theses and Dissertations HCNSO Student Work 12-6-2018 The elr ationship of endoparasite diversity and feeding ecology in the seabird complex of South Florida Michael Nakama Nova Southeastern University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/occ_stuetd Part of the Marine Biology Commons Share Feedback About This Item NSUWorks Citation Michael Nakama. 2018. The relationship of endoparasite diversity and feeding ecology in the seabird complex of South Florida. Master's thesis. Nova Southeastern University. Retrieved from NSUWorks, . (500) https://nsuworks.nova.edu/occ_stuetd/500. This Thesis is brought to you by the HCNSO Student Work at NSUWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in HCNSO Student Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of NSUWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Thesis of Michael Nakama Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science M.S. Marine Environmental Sciences Nova Southeastern University Halmos College of Natural Sciences and Oceanography December 2018 Approved: Thesis Committee Major Professor: David W. Kerstetter, Ph.D. Committee Member: Christopher A. Blanar, Ph.D. Committee Member: Sean Locke, Ph.D. Committee Member: Bernhard Riegl, Ph.D. This thesis is available at NSUWorks: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/occ_stuetd/500 Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center Halmos College of Oceanography and Natural Sciences The relationship of endoparasite diversity and feeding ecology in the seabird complex of South Florida By Michael Yoshio Nakama Submitted to the faculty of the Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center Halmos College of Oceanography and Natural Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science with a specialty in: Marine Environmental Sciences December 2018 Acknowledgements I extend my sincerest appreciation to my committee members, Drs. David W. Kerstetter, Christopher Blanar, Sean Locke, and Bernhard Riegl for their continued support and mentorship throughout my thesis research. I thank my fellow lab mates and volunteers for their assistance with dissections, laboratory processing of samples, and seabird collections. A special thanks goes to my lab mates Brittany White, Caitlyn Nay, and Sarah Gumbleton for providing invaluable advice and resources for the progression of my research, and their continued support of pursuing higher educaiton. Finally, I would like to express a wholehearted thank you to my family, especially my mother and sister, and friends for the encouragement and support in completing my Master of Science degree. This project was made possible through the Title V Promoting Postbaccalaureate Opportunities for Hispanic Americans Program (PPOHA) – January 18, 2014 to October 31, 2015. The funding from Title V-PPOHA provided the opportunity to work as a research assistant conducting studies for a thesis Master of Science degree. Funding for the collection of specimens from the four wildlife rescue agencies (and other opportunistic collections), including required state and federal permits (FWC permit LSSC-12-00075 and USFWS permit MB8290-A-0), was provided by a FY2014 PFRDG award to D.W. Kerstetter and A. C. Hirons. Funding for the collection, identification, and preservation of specimens from host species, such as the Amscope dissection microscope and chemicals, was provided in part by a FY2015 PFRDG to C.A. Blanar. Last, I would like to thank Halmos College of Natural Sciences and Oceanography for providing a Teaching Assistant scholarship from Fall 2016 to Winter 2018. ii Abstract Endoparasite community structure has been poorly studied in migratory birds, particularly among the seabirds of south Florida. We examined parasite communities in seven south Florida seabird species: brown pelican Pelecanus occidentalis (n=33), northern gannet Morus bassanus (n=31), double-crested cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus (n=33), osprey Pandion haliaetus (n=27), royal tern Thalasseus maximus (n=30), herring gull Larus argentatus (n=12), and laughing gull Leucophaeus atricilla (n=40). We identified 33 parasitic helminth species: 6 nematodes, 2 cestodes, 3 acanthocephalans, and 22 digeneans. Subsequent pairwise tests and similarity profile analysis identified four distinct clusters with similar parasite community structures: (1) pelican and gannet; (2) cormorant; (3) osprey; and (4) tern and both gull species. The mean infracommunity observed species richness differed among the several seabird host species with the highest observed values in pelicans (5.7±0.4) and gannets (5.1±0.4), while the lowest values were seen in herring (0.8±0.7) and laughing (0.4±0.4) gulls. RELATE analyses indicated that the factors of host phylogeny (Rho=0.564, p=0.017), host feeding range (Rho=0.553, p=0.005), and host feeding technique (Rho=0.553, p=0.039) were significant and had similar magnitudes of effect on the structure of observed parasite communities within the several seabird species of this study. Host prey preference was not significant from the RELATE analyses (Rho=0.124, p=0.278), suggesting that preferred prey items of the several seabird hosts had a negligible impact in the structuring of parasite communities. From our results, host phylogeny and host feeding ecology are important driving factors of parasite community composition and structure of these south Florida seabirds, while host prey preference had little influence on parasite communities. Keywords: Feeding ecology, seabirds, parasites, host species, species richness, Pelecaniformes, Suliformes, Accipitriformes, Charadriiformes iii Table of Contents Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... ii Abstract ............................................................................................................................. iii List of Figures .....................................................................................................................v List of Tables .................................................................................................................... vi Introduction ........................................................................................................................1 Feeding Ecology ......................................................................................................1 Host-Parasite Trophic Interaction ...........................................................................4 Life history and Host-Parasite Interaction of Studied Species ................................9 Purpose and Objectives .........................................................................................15 Materials and Methods ....................................................................................................15 Sample Collection ..................................................................................................15 Laboratory Processing...........................................................................................16 Helminth Identification ..........................................................................................17 Data Analysis .........................................................................................................18 Results ...............................................................................................................................19 Discussion..........................................................................................................................28 Host Species ...........................................................................................................28 Feeding Ecology ....................................................................................................31 Future Research .....................................................................................................33 Conclusion .............................................................................................................34 References .........................................................................................................................36 Appendix 1 ........................................................................................................................48 Appendix 2 ........................................................................................................................63 Appendix 3 ........................................................................................................................80 iv List of Figures Figure 1. Foraging techniques of seabirds ...........................................................................2 Figure 2. Feeding range and depth of seabird species .........................................................7 Figure 3. Shade plot of parasite abundance in seabird species ..........................................24 Figure 4. Non-metric multi-dimensional scale of parasite communities based on seabird hosts ...................................................................................................................................25 Figure 5. Non-metric multi-dimensional scale of parasite community similarity for infracommunities in individual birds .................................................................................26 Figure 6. 2STAGE non-metric multidimensional