Rates of foot darkening with age in banded (Spheniscus) penguins suggest that foot pigments provide UV protection


Abstract

Spheniscus (banded) penguins have pale feet without spots at hatching. Individual penguins’ feet become spotted and darken with age. Rates of darkening among these four species is consistent with the hypothesis that the dark pigment acts in UV protection. The species that breeds at the lowest latitudes and experiences the highest UV radiation (Galápagos Penguins Spheniscus mendiculus) had feet that darkened fastest, and the species that breed at higher latitudes and experience less intense insolation (African S. demersus and Magellanic S. magellanicus Penguins) had feet that darkened slowest. Humboldt Penguins S. humboldti breed mostly at low latitudes and had intermediate rates of foot darkening. If the function of darkening is thermoregulation, feet should be darker at higher latitudes where penguins swim in colder water, the opposite of what we found. We also found that males’ feet darken somewhat faster than females’ feet, likely because females spend more time in their nests (burrows or under vegetation) than males and have less sun exposure. We found that feet darkened over years, but not within a breeding season. The color change is a life-long process, not a seasonal response to UV radiation. Finally, we showed that we can accurately predict the age structure of a colony of Magellanic Penguins based on a sample of foot colors. Penguins cannot be aged once they molt into adult plumage, at 6 to 24 months of age in Spheniscus penguins, and individuals can live more than 30 years. Age structure is important in conservation and management of populations. We propose foot darkening as a way to assess age structure in banded penguins. Foot color in a colony of Magellanic Penguins can provide a rapid, noninvasive method to estimate the age structure of the colony.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at peer.review@peerj.com.