277

Ochoa-Sánchez et al.: Magellanic Penguin colonies in southern Chile 277

UPDATED DISTRIBUTION AND POPULATION DYNAMICS OF

MAGELLANIC PENGUIN SPHENISCUS MAGELLANICUS COLONIES
IN THE STRAIT OF MAGELLAN, CHILE
MANUEL OCHOA-SÁNCHEZ1*,2,3, JORGE ACEVEDO2*, CLAUDIO MORAGA2, KATHERINE GAETE2, PEDRO VALENZUELA2,
VALERIA SOUZA1,2 & ELIANA PAOLA ACUÑA GOMEZ2

1Institutode Ecología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City, Mexico *([email protected])
2
Centro de Estudios del Cuaternario de Fuego - Patagonia y Antártica (CEQUA), Punta Arenas, Chile *([email protected])
3
Posgrado en Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico

Received 15 January 2024, accepted 09 May 2024

ABSTRACT

OCHOA-SÁNCHEZ, M., ACEVEDO, J., MORAGA, C., GAETE, K., VALENZUELA, P., SOUZA, V. & ACUÑA GOMEZ, E.P. 2024.
Updated distribution and population dynamics of Magellanic Penguin Spheniscus magellanicus colonies in the Strait of Magellan, Chile.
Marine Ornithology 52: 277–282.

The Magellanic Penguin Spheniscus magellanicus exhibits a broad latitudinal distribution in southern South America. However, the locations
of many breeding colonies remain poorly known on the Pacific side, particularly in the southernmost region. Here, we provide information
for six Magellanic Penguin colonies in the Strait of Magellan and adjacent waters that have been known by the local community for years
but were unknown in the scientific literature until now: Rupert Islet, Tuckers Islet 1, Tuckers Islet 2, James Island 1, James Island 2, and
Monmouth Island. These locations differ in population size and in vegetation coverage: most colonies are characterized by mosses, grasses,
and bushes, but a dense forest cover characterizes Tuckers Islet 2. These records update our knowledge of the distribution of Magellanic
Penguin colonies on the southernmost tip of South America.

Key words: environmental refugee, seabird distribution, behavioral plasticity, subantarctic penguin colonies

INTRODUCTION Islote Redondo (Redondo Islet, 41°26′S) in Argentina. In contrast,

the northernmost colony on the Pacific coast is on Isla Cachagua
Penguin species differ in several natural history traits, such as (Cachagua Island, 32°35′S) in Chile (Boersma et al. 2013). The
breeding strategy. Some penguins dig burrows to rear and protect breeding range extends slightly beyond the southernmost tip of
their chicks (e.g., Spheniscus spp.), others build nests in slight the continent, to Chile’s Diego Ramirez Islands (56°31’S), and
cavities on the surface (e.g., Pygoscelis spp.), and a few rear Magellanic Penguin nests have also been reported on Islas Malvinas
their chicks in the open (e.g., Aptenodytes spp.; Borboroglu & (Falkland Islands; Schlatter & Riveros 1997, Barroso et al. 2020)
Boersma 2013). In the case of the Magellanic Penguin Spheniscus and Isla de los Estados (Staten Island; Raya Rey et al. 2022).
magellanicus, nest-site selection varies across its distribution. Magellanic Penguin breeding colonies have been predominantly
Most Magellanic Penguins breed in burrows dug in bare soil studied in Argentina (Boersma et al. 2013), but the distribution
or under bushes, while others build nests in burrows dug under of their colonies remains much less explored on the Pacific coast,
dead trees (Stokes & Boersma 1991, 1998; Miranda et al. 2009). especially in the Magallanes region of Chile, where Magellanic
Interestingly, birds breeding at higher latitudes can nest successfully Penguins are common seabirds.
in open scrapes (Boersma et al. 2013). A potential driver of this
nest-site variability could be the interaction between climate Historically, Magdalena Island is the most well-known Magellanic
conditions, vegetation cover, and predator pressure. Nests covered Penguin colony in the Strait of Magellan and was named
by vegetation (e.g., bushes, grasses) or soil (i.e., burrows) improve “Monumento Natural Los Pingüinos” by Chile’s Corporación
chicks’ survival probabilities (Frere et al. 1992, 1998; Stokes & Nacional Forestal in 1982 (Bingham & Herrmann 2008). Other
Boersma 1998) in two important ways: predation avoidance from efforts to update the distribution of breeding colonies in the area
aerial predators (e.g., skuas Stercorarius spp.) and environmental (Fig. 1) reported sites at Rupert Island (Soto 1990, Acevedo et al.
protection from winds, rain, and heat loss (Gandini et al. 1997, 2007, Miranda et al. 2009, Acevedo et al. 2014), Contramaestre
1999). Chicks under three weeks of age are particularly vulnerable Island (Bingham & Herrmann 2008, CEQUA 2018), Offing
to heat loss, since their metabolic rate is low and their feather coat Island (Legoupil et al. 2011), and Recalada Island (Oehler et al.
is not thick enough to provide insulation (Taylor 1985, Duchamp 2007). However, there are likely unknown colonies throughout the
et al. 2002). Magallanes region, with several colonies probably associated with
concentrations of individuals observed foraging at several places in
The Magellanic Penguin inhabits the coasts of South America the Strait. As well, the penguins were a common natural resource
(Boersma et al. 2013), breeding in a range that spans more than for Indigenous peoples in some of these localities (Legoupil et al.
15° of latitude. On the Atlantic coast, the northernmost colony is on 2011). Thus, the locals knew where the colonies were located.

Marine Ornithology 52: 277–282 (2024)

278 Ochoa-Sánchez et al.: Magellanic Penguin colonies in southern Chile

Fig. 1. Location of known and new Magellanic Penguin Spheniscus magellanicus colonies in the Strait of Magellan and adjacent waters in
southern Chile. Previously known colonies are depicted by circles and new colonies are indicated with arrows. Inset A) shows the colonies in
the Francisco Coloane Marine and Coastal Protected Area in the northwestern section of the Strait of Magellan. Inset B) shows the southern
end of Dawson Island, where the Tuckers 1 and Tuckers 2 colonies are located. The location of FC-AMCP is shown in a grey shaded polygon.

Here, we report new Magellanic Penguin colonies in the Strait In both 2007 and 2013, the population size of each colony was
of Magellan and adjacent waters that have been known for estimated (Acevedo et al. 2007, 2014) using circular plots of
years by members of the local communities but were not 100 m2 (see Borboroglu et al. 2002 for a detailed description of
documented in the literature, including previously unpublished survey methods). Briefly, the first plot was placed at a random
census information collected by one of the authors (JA). All these point and the remainder were placed in a ~35-m zigzag path
colonies were visited while conducting sampling for the ongoing through the colony area. Within each circular plot, the total
project Microbiome of the external surface of keystone species of number of burrows was counted, and each burrow was categorized
ecological and economic importance in the Magellanes region as active or inactive. A nesting burrow was considered active
and the Chilean Antarctic (see Ochoa-Sánchez et al. 2023a for a when it contained adults, eggs, or chicks; it was considered
description of the project). inactive if it had none of these. The breeding-area boundaries
of each colony were estimated from georeferenced points using
MATERIALS AND METHODS a handheld GPS unit (Garmin e-Trex H; Olathe, USA), with the
data subsequently plotted on a satellite image using the ArcView
In 2007, Magellanic Penguin breeding colonies in the Francisco program (Environmental Systems Research Institute; Redlands,
Coloane Marine and Coastal Protected Area (FC-AMCP, northern USA). These georeferenced points were then used to define
and southern boundaries are 53°43′S, 071°52′W and 53°17′S, the area occupied by the penguins, resulting in a polygon of
072°26′W, respectively) were censused as part of the project the nesting boundaries. To estimate a raw population size (N̂),
Diagnóstico de flora, fauna terrestre y aves marinas en el Área Acevedo et al. (2007, 2014) utilized the formula N̂ = d × A, where
Marina Costera Protegida Francisco Coloane (Acevedo et al. d is the average burrow density per square meter and A is the nesting
2007) at the beginning of the chick-rearing period. In 2013, area in square meters (m2). To obtain 95% confidence intervals and
another census was conducted as part of the project Diagnóstico de the corrected mean, they explored the spatial pattern distribution of
relación predadores – presas del Área Marina Costera Protegida the data following the methods of Krebs (1999) and performed a
Francisco Coloane (Acevedo et al. 2014), this time during the U-Statistic goodness-of-fit test to confirm whether the distribution
incubation period. Both surveys were carried out by researchers of the data was further supported.
with experience in penguin censuses and covered the known
breeding colony of Rupert Island, and the new breeding colonies: During 2022 and 2023, breeding colonies in the Strait of Magellan
two colonies on separate landmasses in the James Islands and a were revisited, from the known breeding colony at Contramaestre
single colony on Monmouth Island (Fig. 1). Island (52°56′35″S, 070°21′29″W) to Rupert Island at FC-AMCP

Marine Ornithology 52: 277–282 (2024)

 Ochoa-Sánchez et al.: Magellanic Penguin colonies in southern Chile 279

(53°39′40″S, 072°12′43″W), including the new colonies on Tuckers islets colonies

Tuckers Islets (54°09′59″S, 070°17′48″W; Acevedo et al. 2024)
(Fig. 1). The breeding colonies were revisited between October Penguins were found nesting at two separate colonies at Tuckers
and January/February as part of the project Microbiome of the Islets, which comprise two islets situated near the southwestern
external surface of keystone species of ecological and economic coast of Dawson Island in Whiteside Channel, Tierra del Fuego
importance in the Magallanes region and the Chilean Antarctic: Island, Chile (Fig. 1B). There was one colony on each islet. The
Microbes as bioindicators of the aquatic ecosystem health in a northern islet (Tuckers 1) is 9.55 ha (0.0955 km2) and is shaped like
global warming scenario (see Ochoa-Sánchez et al. 2023a for a a U that opens to the west. It has a heterogeneous vegetation cover,
description of the project and Ochoa-Sánchez et al. 2023b, 2024 dominated by tall grasses (family: Poaceae), shrubs (Fig. 2A),
for sampling details and findings about penguin body microbiota). and the remains of desiccated dead trees (likely the remains of
This allowed us to update the presence/absence of the locally Nothofagus spp.), under which penguin burrows were found
known and new breeding colonies and to describe each colony’s (Fig. 2F). In higher-altitude areas of the islet, the colony was
vegetation habitat. dominated mainly by bare soil; in some areas, it was dominated by
Sphagnum spp. mosses. Burrows were primarily associated with tall
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION grasses and shrubs, though smaller numbers of nests were observed
where the ground was bare, in the roots of dead trees, and sparingly
Unreported breeding colonies were found on six islands/islets in in the Sphagnum area. A recent survey of Tuckers 1 resulted in
the study region (Fig. 1). These landmasses varied considerably an estimate of 2218 breeding pairs (95% confidence interval (CI)
in their topography and vegetation cover, highlighting the 1593–2840; Acevedo et al. 2024). In contrast, the southern islet
phenotypic plasticity exhibited by Magellanic Penguins in their (Tuckers 2) is 7.2 ha and oval-shaped. Its vegetation cover is a
choice of nesting habitat (Fig. 2). We describe each of the six homogenous, dense forest dominated by Nothofagus spp. (Fig. 2B),
colonies below. and penguins nest both in holes inside fallen trees (Fig. 2G) and

A B

C D

E F

Fig 2. Environmental characteristics of the six newly identified Magellanic Penguin Spheniscus magellanicus colonies in the Strait of
Magellan in southern Chile. Images (A–E) show the overall vegetation on the islet or island, while F–H show examples of nesting sites.
A) Tuckers 1 is characterized by heterogeneous vegetation with tree remnants, bushes, grasses, and mosses. B) Tuckers 2 is characterized
by dense forest cover. C) Monmouth Island is characterized by heterogeneous vegetation with bushes, mosses, and forest. The specific
location where penguin burrows were located are indicated with a red arrow. Rupert Islet (D) and the James Islands (James 1 and 2; E) are
characterized by heterogeneous vegetation including bushes and mosses. F) Penguins on Tuckers 1 nest below the remnants of dead trees. On
Tuckers 2, penguins nest inside a hollow of a fallen tree (G) and between the roots of living trees (H). Photo credits: A–B) Pedro Valenzuela,
January 2022; C–E) Pedro Valenzuela, December 2023; F–H) Manuel Ochoa-Sánchez, January 2022.

Marine Ornithology 52: 277–282 (2024)

280 Ochoa-Sánchez et al.: Magellanic Penguin colonies in southern Chile

below the roots of living trees (Fig. 2H). No census was carried out Similarly, it appears that penguins from Tuckers 1 are moving
during our visits to this second islet due to the density of the forest. to Tuckers 2. This is indicated by the low burrow occupancy
coupled with increased erosion on Tuckers 1 (Acevedo et al.
FC-AMCP 2024), which was not observed on Tuckers 2. Erosion may be a
consequence of penguin burrowing, as has been reported on Punta
Colonies at Monmouth Island, the James Islands, and Rupert Islet Entrada (50°08′S, 068°21′W, 460 km northeast) at the mouth of
are located in the FC-AMCP (Fig. 1A). All these colonies have been the Santa Cruz River estuary (Ercolano et al. 2016) and Martillo
locally known since at least 2006 (Acevedo et al. 2007). Island (54°54′S, 067°22′W, 200 km southeast) in Beagle Channel
(Quiroga et al. 2020). Further monitoring and tracking of penguins
Monmouth Island, with a surface approximate of 45.8 ha, is situated at Tuckers 1 and 2 are required to better understand these dynamics.
to the south of the known breeding colony of Rupert Island. However, Magellanic Penguins nesting in the forest could influence erosion
the breeding colony occurs only in a small area (0.79 ha) on the and ecological succession. In the long term, penguins nesting on
northern coast of the island. The nesting area is characterized by Tuckers 2 could enhance erosion by causing extensive damage to
heterogeneous vegetation, with tall grasses (family: Poaceae) and roots, as appears to be the case on Rupert Island (Miranda et al.
shrubs (Gaultheria mucronata and Hebe elliptica) alternating with 2009) and Tuckers 1. Whether the trend of Magellanic Penguins
Nothofagus betuloides and Drimys winteri forest (Fig. 2C). The establishing colonies on forest islands continues in this region is
penguin burrows are located under shrubs and in areas without an open yet relevant question. Overall, Magellanic Penguins could
vegetation. Penguins were also seen in the D. winteri forest, but be considered “ecosystem engineers” that enhance diversity and
we did not explore that habitat further; transiting the island was ecological succession, including the enrichment of soil by nitrogen
challenging due to the harsh meteorological conditions. We believe from their feces (Pisano & Schlatter 1981). This might lead to
that penguins would likely nest under living trees, as they do at the vegetative succession involving plant species that thrive in high
Tuckers 2 colony, but further surveys are required to confirm this. A concentrations of nitrogen (e.g., some grass species). Additionally,
census conducted in 2007 estimated a population of 316 breeding other animals could use abandoned nests as refuges, especially
pairs (Acevedo et al. 2007), which declined to 42 (95% CI 22–61) arthropods. Together these aspects could enhance diversity, but
pairs in 2013 (Acevedo et al. 2014). No census was conducted during more work is needed to prove this hypothesis.
our short visits in October 2022 and October–November 2023, but
the colony may continue to have a low number of pairs due to the Recently, Magellanic Penguin colonies in northern latitudes have
large proportion of empty nests found throughout the surveys. decreased in numbers due to extreme heatwaves and increased
mortality of females (Boersma & Rebstock 2014, Holt & Boersma
James Islands comprise two small islands located northwest of 2022). This trend is likely to continue since the frequency and
Monmouth Island (Fig. 1A). There was one colony on each island. intensity of weather anomalies linked to climate change are going
James Island 1 (James 1) is 2.05 ha and James Island 2 (James 2) is to increase in the mid-latitudes of South America, whereas warming
1.59 ha. Both are characterized by a homogenous cover of bushes in southern latitudes may be less (Feron et al. 2019). Because the
(G. mucronota; Fig. 2D) with nests distributed throughout. In 2007, southernmost region of South America could become a more suitable
there were an estimated 2052 breeding pairs on James 1 and 1536 on place for the establishment and persistence of Magellanic Penguin
James 2 (Acevedo et al. 2007). This trend changed six years later: in colonies, the specific locations of colonies are valuable information
2013, there were an estimated 384 (95% CI 183–468) and 373 (95% for monitoring the status of this species and its effect on its habitat.
CI 139–571) breeding pairs on James 1 and 2, respectively (Acevedo
et al. 2014). No census was conducted during our short visits in ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
October–November 2022, but we suspect that the colony could
continue to have a low number of pairs, again, in line with the large We thank Captain Hugo Cárdenas and the crews of the MaryPaz II
proportion of unoccupied nests found throughout our short survey. and Huracan for our safe trips and for logistical support and
transportation during the surveys. We acknowledge the support
Rupert Islet (2.54 ha) is located to the south of Rupert Island of Edy Cadin, Oscar Mancilla, and Alex Marin for their help
and to the northeast of Monmouth Island. It is characterized during fieldwork. The 2022–2023 surveys were framed within the
by a heterogeneous cover of grasses (family: Poaceae), shrubs ongoing project Microbiome of the external surface of keystone
(G. mucronata and H. elliptica), and Sphagnum spp. mosses species of ecological and economic importance in the Magallanes
(Fig. 2D). Nests occur mostly in the upper part of the islet. No region and the Chilean Antarctic: Microbes as bioindicators of
population census has been conducted. the aquatic ecosystem health in a global warming scenario by the
Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo de Chile (ANID;
These six colonies are new for the scientific literature and their Strengthening of the Scientific Development of Regional Centers,
inclusion here expands the knowledge of penguin breeding-colony project number R20F0009). Andrea Raya Rey provided valuable
distribution on the southernmost tip of South America. We also comments to improve our paper.
increase our knowledge about the Magellanic Penguin population
size and its associated changes, particularly in the FC-AMCP. In REFERENCES
that area, the low number of breeding pairs on Monmouth and James
islands in 2013 coincides with a 28.4% increase in the number of ACEVEDO, J., AGUAYO-LOBO, A., DOORN, M.A., ET AL.
breeding pairs on Rupert Island (Acevedo et al. 2014). However, the 2007. Diagnóstico de flora, fauna terrestre y aves marinas en
total population estimate in FC-AMCP (combining Rupert Island, el Área Marina Costera Protegida Francisco Coloane. Final
Monmouth Island, and James 1 and 2) has remained relatively Report for Project BIP N°30061426-0. Punta Arenas, Chile:
stable between 2007 (n = 9692) and 2013 (n = 8892). Therefore, Fundación Centro de Estudios del Cuaternario Fuego- Patagonia
these sites may constitute a “meta-colony” with interacting parts. y Antártica.

Marine Ornithology 52: 277–282 (2024)

 Ochoa-Sánchez et al.: Magellanic Penguin colonies in southern Chile 281

ACEVEDO, J., AGUAYO-LOBO, A., HARO, D., ET AL. 2014. GANDINI, P., FRERE, E. & BOERSMA, D. 1997. Efectos de
Diagnóstico de relación predadores-presas del Área Marina la calidad de hábitat sobre el éxito reproductivo del pingüino
Costera Protegida Francisco Coloane. Final Report for de magellanes (Spheniscus magellanicus) en Cabo Virgenes
Project ID 612543-3-LE13. Punta Arenas, Chile: Fundación Santa Cruz, Argentina. Ornitología Neotropical 8: 37–48.
Centro de Estudios del Cuaternario Fuego y Patagonia GANDINI, P., FRERE, E. & BOERSMA, D. 1999. Nest
Antártica. concealment and its relationship to predation and reproductive
ACEVEDO J., MORAGA, C.A., GAETE, K., ET AL. 2024. success in the Magellanic Penguin at its southern-most
First abundance estimates of Magellanic Penguin (Spheniscus continental colony. Ornitología Neotropical 10: 145–150.
magellanicus) colony at Tucker Islets. Polar Biology 47: HOLT, K.A. & BOERSMA, P.D. 2022. Unprecedented
157–162. doi:10.1007/s00300-023-03215-8 heat mortality of Magellanic Penguins. Ornithological
BARROSO, O., CREGO, R.D., MELLA, J., ET AL. 2020. Applications 124: duab052. doi:10.1093/ornithapp/duab052
Colaboración científica con la Armada de Chile en estudios KREBS, C.J. 1999. Ecological Methodology, 2nd Edition.
ornitológicos a largo plazo en el archipiélago Diego Ramírez: Menlo Park, USA: Addison-Wesley Educational Publication.
Primer monitoreo del ciclo anual del ensamble de aves en LEGOUPIL, D., BÉAREZ, P., LEFÈVRE, C., SAN ROMÁN,
la isla Gonzalo. Anales del Instituto de la Patagonia 48(3): M., & TORRES, Y.J. 2011. Estrategias de subsistencia
149–168. doi:10.4067/S0718-686X2020000300149 de cazadores recolectores de Isla Dawson (Estrecho de
BINGHAM, M. & HERRMANN, T.M. 2008. Magellanic Penguin Magallanes) durante la segunda mitad del Holoceno: Primeras
(Spheniscidae) monitoring results for Magdalena Island aproximaciones. Magallania 39: 153–164. doi:10.4067/
(Chile), 2000–2008. Anales del Instituto de la Patagonia S0718-22442011000200011
36(2): 19–32. doi:10.4067/S0718-686X2008000200003 MIRANDA, M., GIBBONS, J., CÁRCAMO, J., & VILINA,
BOERSMA, P.D., FRERE, E., KANE, O., ET AL. 2013. Y.A. 2009. Hábitat reproductivo y estimación del tamaño
Magellanic Penguin. In: BORBOROGLU, P.G. & BOERSMA, poblacional del pingüino de magallanes (Spheniscus
P.D. (Eds.) Penguins: Natural History and Conservation. magellanicus) en Isla Rupert, Parque Marino Francisco
Seattle, USA: University of Washington Press. Coloane, Estrecho de Magallanes. Anales del Instituto
BOERSMA, P.D. & REBSTOCK, G.A. 2014. Climate change de la Patagonia 37(1): 103–111. doi:10.4067/S0718-
increases reproductive failure in Magellanic Penguins. PLoS 686X2009000100010
One 9: e85602. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0085602 OCHOA-SÁNCHEZ, M., ACUÑA GÓMEZ, E.P., MORAGA,
BORBOROGLU, P.G. & BOERSMA, P.D. 2013. Penguins: C.A., ET AL. 2024. The ephemeral microbiota: Ecological
Natural History and Conservation. Seattle, USA: University context and environmental variability drive the body surface
of Washington Press. microbiota composition of Magellanic Penguins across
BORBOROGLU, P.G., YORIO, P., BOERSMA, P.D., DEL subantarctic breeding colonies. Molecular Ecology 33:
VALLE, H., & BERTELLOTTI, M. 2002. Habitat use and e17472. doi:10.1111/mec.1747
breeding distribution of Magellanic Penguins in northern San OCHOA-SÁNCHEZ, M., ACUÑA GOMEZ, E.P., MORENO,
Jorge Gulf, Patagonia, Argentina. The Auk 119: 233-239. L., ET AL. 2023a. Body site microbiota of Magellanic and
CEQUA (FUNDACIÓN CENTRO DE ESTUDIOS DEL King penguins inhabiting the Strait of Magellan follow
CUATERNARIO DE FUEGO PATAGONIA Y ANTÁRTICA). species-specific patterns. PeerJ 11: e16290. doi:10.7717/
2018. El Pingüino como Especie Carismática: Herramientas peerj.16290
para Desarrollar y Potenciar una Ruta Turística en el OCHOA-SÁNCHEZ, M., ACUÑA GOMEZ, E.P., RAMÍREZ-
Estrecho de Magallanes y Tierra Del Fuego. Final Report FENÁNDEZ, L., EGUIARTE, L.E., & SOUZA, V. 2023b.
Proyecto Innova CORFO 15BPCR-48591. Punta Arenas, Current knowledge of the Southern Hemisphere marine
Chile: CEQUA. microbiome in eukaryotic hosts and the Strait of Magellan
DUCHAMP, C., ROUANET, J.-L., & BARRÉ, H. 2002. surface microbiome project. PeerJ 11: e15978. doi:10.7717/
Ontogeny of thermoregulatory mechanisms in King peerj.15978
Penguin chicks (Aptenodytes patagonicus). Comparative OEHLER, D.A., FRY, W.R., WEAKLEY, L.A., & MARIN, M.
Biochemistry and Physiology A 131: 765–773. doi:10.1016/ 2007. Rockhopper and Macaroni Penguin colonies absent
s1095-6433(02)00014-4 from Isla Recalada, Chile. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology
ERCOLANO, B., CRUZ, I. & MARDERWALD, G. 2016. Impacto 119: 502–506. doi:10.1676/06-096.1
de los pingüinos patagónicos (Spheniscus magellanicus) en PISANO, E. & SCHLATTER, R.P. 1981. Vegetación y flora de
la dinámica geomorfológica de Punta Entrada (Patagonia las islas Diego Ramírez (Chile). II. Comunidades vegetales
austral, Argentina). Cuaternario y Geomorfología 30: 29–47. vasculares. Anales del Instituto de la Patagonia 12: 195–204.
doi:10.17735/cyg.v30i3-4.51463 QUIROGA, D.R.A., CORONATO, A., SCIOSCIA, G., ET AL.
FERON, S., CORDERO, R. R., DAMIANI, A., ET AL. 2019. 2020. Erosive features caused by a Magellanic Penguin
Observations and projections of heat waves in South America. (Spheniscus magellanicus) colony on Martillo Island, Beagle
Scientific Reports 9: 8173. doi:10.1038/s41598-019-44614-4 Channel, Argentina. Cuadernos de Investigación Geográfica
FRERE, E., GANDINI, P. & BOERSMA, D. 1992. Effects of nest 46: 477–496. doi:10.18172/cig.4337
type and location on reproductive success of the Magellanic RAYA REY, A., BALZA, U., DOMATO, I. & ZUNINO, F.
Penguin Spheniscus magellanicus. Marine Ornithology 20: 2022. New Magellanic Penguin Spheniscus magellanicus
1–6. colony in a subantarctic island. Polar Biology 45: 1553–1558.
FRERE, E., GANDINI, P., & BOERSMA, D. 1998. The doi:10.1007/s00300-022-03093-6
breeding ecology of Magellanic Penguins at Cabo Vírgenes, SCHLATTER, R.P. & RIVEROS, G.M. 1997. Historia natural
Argentina: What factors determine reproductive success? del Archipiélago Diego Ramírez, Chile. Serie Científica –
Colonial Waterbirds 21: 205–210. doi:10.2307/1521907 Instituto Antártico Chileno 47: 87–112.

Marine Ornithology 52: 277–282 (2024)

282 Ochoa-Sánchez et al.: Magellanic Penguin colonies in southern Chile

SOTO, N. 1990. Proyecto de protección y manejo de las colonias STOKES, D.L. & BOERSMA, P.D. 1998. Nest-site characteristics
de pingüinos presentes en Isla Rupert e Isla Recalada, Reserva and reproductive success in Magellanic Penguins (Spheniscus
Nacional Alacalufes. Informe de temporada 1989–1990. Punta magellanicus). The Auk 115: 34–49. doi:10.2307/4089109
Arenas, Chile: Corporacion Nacional Forestal de Chile. TAYLOR, J.R.E. 1985. Ontogeny of thermoregulation and
STOKES D.L. & BOERSMA, P.D. 1991. Effects of substrate on the energy metabolism in pygoscelid penguin chicks. Journal
distribution of Magellanic Penguins (Spheniscus magellanicus). of Comparative Physiology B 155: 615–627. doi:10.1007/
The Auk 108: 923–933. doi:10.1093/auk/108.4.923 BF00694453

Marine Ornithology 52: 277–282 (2024)