Anderson D W, Newman S H, Kelly P R, Herzog S K, Lewis K P
Department of Wildlife, Fish, & Conservation Biology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Environ Pollut. 2000 Mar;107(3):285-94. doi: 10.1016/s0269-7491(99)00180-3.
In spring 1995, we studied survival, condition and behavior of 37 oiled/rehabilitated (OR) American coots (Fulica americana) (RHB) and compared them to 38 wild-caught, non-oiled and non-rehabilitated coots (REF). All coots were wing-clipped to prevent long-range dispersal, mixed equally and randomly and soft-released into two fenced marshes. Twenty RHB+20 REF coots were subjected to handling and sampling four times during the 4-month study and the remainder were left undisturbed. The study ended before any coots dispersed following remige regrowth. Overall survival was significantly lower for RHB coots, regardless of the way survival was viewed (four Chi 2 tests varied between p<0.045 and p<0.006). Mortality was 2.1 times higher in RHB coots: 51% mortality in RHB coots and 24% in REF coots (4 months total). RHB coots began the experiment 9% lighter in mean body condition indices (BCI=a standardization that corrected for different-sized birds) than REF coots, but REF coots also needed a period of adjustment to captivity. BCIs then varied (p<0.02) similarly among both groups throughout the experiment. Initially, RHB coots lost more weight in comparison to REF coots (although RHB coots fed more), but those RHB coots that did survive recovered to REF-comparable BCIs after about 6 weeks: both higher and equivalent at the beginning of moult and then both equivalent but lower through the moulting period. Long-term RHB coot and REF coot survivors both had significant (p<0.001) positive correlations between their initial and ending body weights. A similar relationship was also suggested for the non-surviving REF coots, but could not be tested for statistical significance. In contrast to all other groups, however, non-surviving RHB coots failed to show any relationship between their initial and ending body weights (p>0.10), indicating that non-surviving RHB coots were unable to gain or maintain body condition for about 2-3 months following their oiling/rehabilitation experience. Throughout the experiment, RHB coots preened more on water and on land, bathed more, slept less during the day, and exhibited feeding and drinking behaviors more frequently or of greater duration than REF coots (all statistical tests with Bonferroni-corrected p<0.05).
1995年春季，我们研究了37只经过油污处理/康复的（OR）美国白骨顶鸡（Fulica americana）（RHB）的存活情况、身体状况及行为，并将其与38只野生捕获、未受油污且未经过康复处理的白骨顶鸡（REF）进行比较。所有白骨顶鸡均进行了翼部修剪以防止远距离扩散，将它们同等且随机地混合，然后放归到两个有围栏的沼泽地。在为期4个月的研究中，对20只RHB + 20只REF白骨顶鸡进行了4次处理和采样，其余的则未受干扰。在飞羽重新生长后白骨顶鸡出现扩散之前，研究就结束了。无论从何种角度看待存活率，RHB组白骨顶鸡的总体存活率都显著更低（四项卡方检验的p值在0.045至0.006之间）。RHB组白骨顶鸡的死亡率高出2.1倍：RHB组白骨顶鸡的死亡率为51%，REF组为24%（总计4个月）。RHB组白骨顶鸡在实验开始时的平均身体状况指数（BCI，一种针对不同体型鸟类进行校正的标准化指标）比REF组轻9%，但REF组白骨顶鸡也需要一段时间来适应圈养环境。在整个实验过程中，两组的BCI变化情况相似（p < 0.02）。最初，与REF组白骨顶鸡相比，RHB组白骨顶鸡体重下降得更多（尽管RHB组白骨顶鸡进食更多），但那些存活下来的RHB组白骨顶鸡在大约6周后恢复到了与REF组相当的BCI：在换羽开始时两者都更高且相当，然后在换羽期两者相当但更低。长期存活的RHB组和REF组白骨顶鸡的初始体重与最终体重之间均存在显著的正相关（p < 0.001）。对于未存活的REF组白骨顶鸡也显示出类似的关系，但无法进行统计学显著性检验。然而，与所有其他组不同的是，未存活的RHB组白骨顶鸡在初始体重与最终体重之间未显示出任何关系（p > 0.10），这表明未存活的RHB组白骨顶鸡在经历油污处理/康复后约2至3个月内无法增加或维持身体状况。在整个实验过程中，RHB组白骨顶鸡在水上和陆地上梳理羽毛的次数更多、洗澡更频繁、白天睡眠时间更少，并且比REF组白骨顶鸡更频繁地表现出进食和饮水行为或持续时间更长（所有统计检验的p值经Bonferroni校正后< 0.05）。
