Seabird Feathers Reveal Less-Resilient Ocean

By analyzing 130 years of seabird feathers, researchers determined that food webs are losing complexity in the Pacific—meaning less-resilient ecosystems. Christopher Intagliata reports.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Today we have sophisticated buoys packed with instruments, and robotic underwater drones. But a more than a century ago the seas were surveyed by different types of autonomous data-gathering instruments. Which also happened to be alive:

"We just call them sea otters and white sharks and bluefin tuna." Kyle Van Houtan is director of science at the Monterey Bay Aquarium. And what he means is that marine mammals and fish and seabirds concentrate unique chemical clues about the ocean and what lives in it, within their tissues. "In their bones, in their feathers, in their vertebrae, in their earwax."

For his most recent study, Van Houtan needed to locate feathers from some long-dead birds.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


"Let's see, so I'm just looking here, that was a Bulwer's petrel, from French Frigate Shoals--I have the database open in front of me here…." Molly Hagemann, who describes herself as 'a librarian for dead animals' at Honolulu's Bishop Museum, was able to help.

"So that one was collected in May 1891. And then we also had a brown noddy from 1895…"

The scientists analyzed the ratios of heavy to light nitrogen isotopes in those old feathers, compared to ratios in modern-day specimens. And they found that Pacific seabirds of yore ate diets dominated by fish. But the birds of today were fishing farther down in the food web. And seemed to be eating nearly twice as much squid as their ancestors did—maybe due to the combined effects of commercial fishing and climate change. The details are in the journal Science Advances. [Tyler O. Gagne et al., Trophic signatures of seabirds suggest shifts in oceanic ecosystems]

Now, nothing against consuming calamari. But: “KVH: It's a risky business to depend on squid. Because squid go through these boom/bust cycles." So the shift in protein source could one day leave the birds hungry.

But the bigger picture is that it appears food webs in the central Pacific have lost components and become less complex over the last 130 years—meaning they're less resilient to changes.

KVH: "It's more than just climate: It's all the noise we're adding to the ocean. All of the contaminants, the microplastic. It's a warming ocean. It's an ocean with more nutrients. It's an ocean with less oxygen."

And it’s an ocean with less capacity to recover from all those insults.

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe