|Scientific Name:||Diomedea dabbenena Mathews, 1929|
Diomedea chionoptera ssp. chionoptera Mathews, 1929 — Robertson and Nunn (1998)
|Taxonomic Source(s):||del Hoyo, J., Collar, N.J., Christie, D.A., Elliott, A. and Fishpool, L.D.C. 2014. HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World. Volume 1: Non-passerines. Lynx Edicions BirdLife International, Barcelona, Spain and Cambridge, UK.|
|Identification information:||110 cm. Huge albatross, very similar in plumage to Wandering Albatross D.exulans. Probably indistinguishable in field, but plumage generally darker. Separated by smaller size (e.g. bill c. 25 mm shorter) (Neves et al. 2000) and slower acquisition of white adult plumage, never attaining very white plumage of old male D. exulans.|
|Red List Category & Criteria:||Critically Endangered A4ade ver 3.1|
|Reviewer(s):||Butchart, S. & Symes, A.|
|Contributor(s):||Bond, A., Cooper, J., Croxall, J., Cuthbert, R., Hilton, G., Ryan, P.G. & Wanless, R.|
|Facilitator/Compiler(s):||Anderson, O., Ashpole, J, Calvert, R., Mahood, S., Martin, R, McClellan, R., Moreno, R., Nel, D., Shutes, S., Stattersfield, A., Sullivan, B., Symes, A., Taylor, J.|
This species qualifies as Critically Endangered owing to its extremely small breeding range and a projected extremely rapid population decline over three generations (70 years). Modelled population declines are a consequence of very low adult survival owing to incidental mortality in longline fisheries, compounded by low fledging success caused by predation of chicks by introduced mice.
|Previously published Red List assessments:|
|Range Description:||Diomedea dabbenena breeding populations are essentially restricted to Gough Island, Tristan da Cunha, St Helena (to UK), having become extinct on Tristan (although birds were seen prospecting in 1999 [Ryan et al. 2001]), and 2-3 pairs breed annually on Inaccessible Island (McClelland et al. 2016). Using consecutive annual accounts of incubating adults and a population model the population has been estimated at c. 1,700 breeding pairs, giving a total global population of 7,100 individuals (ACAP 2010). Recent counts suggest that the population on Gough has decreased by 28% over 46 years, and at 3% annually between 2000 and 2011 (Cuthbert et al. 2014), and by nearly 50% between 2001-2016 (0-8% decline per year; RSPB and UCT unpubl. data) in line with population modelling predictions of annual decline rates of 2.9-5.3% (Ryan et al. 2001, Wanless et al. 2009), equivalent to declines of >96% in three generations. Predation of chicks by mice has led to very low breeding success; between 2000 and 2015 this averaged only 27%, less than half that of other studied Diomedea colonies (Cuthbert et al. 2003, Cuthbert and Hilton 2004, Wanless et al. 2007, Cuthbert et al. 2014, Davies et al. 2015). Breeding success in 2014 was just 9.6%, the lowest recorded since counts started in 2001 (Davies et al. 2015). Outside the breeding season, it disperses to the western South Atlantic in summer, moves eastwards to South African waters and, northwards along the African Atlantic coast as far as southern Angola (Reid et al. 2013) . Up to 15% migrate across the Indian Ocean to southern Australian waters (Reid et al. 2013).|
Native:Angola; Argentina; Brazil; Namibia; Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha (Tristan da Cunha); South Africa; Uruguay
|Range Map:||Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.|
Breeding populations are essentially restricted to Gough Island, with 2-3 pairs nesting intermittently on Inaccessible Island (McClelland et al. 2016). The annual breeding population is currently estimated to be 1,250-1,750 pairs annually (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and University of Cape Town unpubl. data), equivalent to a total population of 5200-7300 individuals for this biennially breeding species (RSPB and UCT unpubl. data). This roughly equates to 3,400-4,800 mature individuals.
Trend Justification: Recent counts suggest that the population on Gough has decreased by 28% over 46 years, and at 3-5% annually between 2000 and 2016 (Cuthbert et al. 2014, RSPB and UCT unpubl. data), which is in line with population modelling predicting annual rates of decline of 2.9-5.3% (Ryan et al. 2001, Wanless et al. 2009). More recent population modelling, conducted over three generations since 1980, suggests a decline equivalent to a 96% reduction in population size over three generations, since declines began (BirdLife International unpubl. data). The rate of on-going decline is therefore placed here in the band 80-100% over three generations (86 years).
|Current Population Trend:||Decreasing|
|Habitat and Ecology:||Behaviour It is a colonial, biennially breeding species. Adults return in November and December, lay in January and the chicks fledge in November. Immature birds begin returning to their breeding colony at 3-7 years after fledging. Vast majority of D. dabbenena recruit in their natal colony, at a mean age of 10 years (range 4-20 years) (ACAP 2009). The oldest recorded bird was at least 38 years old (Ryan 2009). It catches prey by surface-seizing, and the prevalence of a bioluminescent group of cephalopods in one dietary study suggests that D. dabbenena often feed at night (ACAP 2009). During the breeding season the length and range of foraging trips varies considerably, depending on the stage of the breeding cycle (BirdLife International 2004, Cuthbert et al. 2005). Habitat Breeding It nests at 400-700 m (rarely to 300 m) (Ryan and Glass 2001, Davies et al. 2015), primarily in wet heath where it is open enough for take-off and landings. Diet It feeds on cephalopods and fish (J. Cooper in litt. 1999), and probably follows ships and trawlers for offal and galley refuse.|
|Continuing decline in area, extent and/or quality of habitat:||Unknown|
|Generation Length (years):||28.7|
|Movement patterns:||Full Migrant|
|Congregatory:||Congregatory (and dispersive)|
On Inaccessible Island, its decline was probably due to predation by feral pigs (now absent) and humans (Fraser et al. 1988, Ryan et al. 1990). The failure to recover is unclear, but may be because young birds become entangled in thick vegetation (Ryan et al. 1990, P. G. Ryan in litt. 1999), or there is a high mortality in long-line fisheries. On Tristan, its extirpation was probably the result of human exploitation (Hagen 1952), although predation by rats (and possibly mice) may have been a factor (Fraser et al. 1988). On Gough, predation by the introduced house mouse Mus musculus causes very low breeding success and alone is sufficient to drive a population decline of over 50% over three generations (Cuthbert et al. 2003, Cuthbert and Hilton 2004, Wanless et al. 2007, Davies et al. 2015). Mouse attacks on chicks peaked in May-June at the start of the austral winter. All predation took place at night, usually 1-2 mice were recorded attacking the chick, with death occurring 3.9 ±1.2 days after the first attack (Davies et al. 2015). An additional threat on Gough is peat slips caused by storms burying and killing nestlings and adults, although this is probably a very rare event (Ryan 1993).
Conservation Actions Underway
|Amended reason:||Map revised. Edited: Geographic Range, Population Justification, Habitat and Ecology, Threats, Conservation Actions proposed, Underway and in Place, Important Conservation Actions Needed and Research Needed. The estimated number of mature individual were altered. Added references and also added a new Contributors and a new Facilitator.|
|Citation:||BirdLife International. 2017. Diomedea dabbenena. (amended version published in 2016) The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T22728364A111143392.Downloaded on 24 November 2017.|
|Feedback:||If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please provide us with feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided|