- In 1-2 sentences describe the hypothesis of this paper
The paper worked under the hypothesis that birds (Leach’s storm-petrels) used the detection of biogenic sulfur compounds together with other cues in order to locate foraging hotspots.
- In 1-3 sentences describe one line of evidence from the introduction that supports the hypothesis
The hypothesis is supported by the fact that Leach’s storm-petrels employ both visual and odor cues in locating prey, as well as productive areas where chances of prey aggregation are high.
- What is one prediction stemming from the hypothesis that is then tested by the authors?
One prediction that was made in the study was that Leach’s storm petrels visited dimethyl sulfide (DMS) at a higher frequency compared to the control presentations that were not scented. This would be an indication that the birds have the ability to smell the DMS odor and potentially use the odor to locate foraging hotspots over the ocean.
- In 1-3 sentences describe the major findings of this paper
The paper found that Leach’s storm-petrels bird approached presentations that were treated with DMS almost twice as frequently as they did to the controls. On the contrast, the birds approached in a similar way to presentations treated with cod liver oil and the controls.
- In 1-3 sentences describe why the findings/conclusions of this paper are important for this field of study
The findings of this paper are important for this field of study since they have shown that birds were not stimulated by cod liver oil, which is a potent attractants to the birds at sea. This is an indication that the compelling questions to be answered are not only the compounds that birds need to identify foraging hotspots, but the manner in which the birds make use of the various foraging cues to make an ecological meaning.