Study
Buoyancy and maximal diving depth in penguins: do they control inhaling air volume?
Sato, Katsufumi; Naito, Yasuhiko; Kato, Akiko; Niizuma, Yasuaki; Watanuki, Yutaka; Charrassin, Jean-Benoît
Journal of Experimental Biology, 2002
Depth, speed and body angle were logged from free-diving king and Adélie penguins, and the rate of passive ascent at different depths was used to estimate the volume of air the bird had carried down with it.
- Studied in
- Aptenodytes patagonicus, Pygoscelis adeliae
- Sample size
- free-diving penguins carrying depth and acceleration loggers
Estimated inhaled air volume increased with the depth of the dive the bird then performed, implying that the amount taken down is adjusted before descent rather than fixed. Air provides both buoyancy to be overcome on the way down and assistance on the way up, and the adjustment appears to balance the two.
What it means
The authors' reading, and ours. Where they differ, that difference is the point.
How the authors put it
Penguins regulate the air volume carried into a dive according to intended depth, managing buoyancy as a cost to be optimised.
How NatureHQ reads it
The finding worth holding on to is that the bird apparently decides how deep it is going before it goes. That is a stronger claim than it sounds and the authors are careful with it — the inference runs from ascent rate to air volume to intention, and each step is a model. But the pattern is consistent, and it fits the wider picture from diving physiology: the air in a diving bird is a liability at depth, not a supply, and the oxygen that matters is already in the blood.
- Air volume is inferred from ascent dynamics rather than measured directly.
- Loggers add drag and may alter dive behaviour.
- The inference of intended depth is a model-based interpretation, not an observation.
What this study is used for on NatureHQ
One study can inform several subjects. Here is everywhere this one is cited.
Published by: The Company of BiologistsPublished by The Company of Biologists.
doi.org/10.1242/jeb.205.9.1189
This reference was resolved automatically against Crossref on 2026-08-11.
NatureHQ summarises research in its own words and does not reproduce published text. Reviewed 2026-08-11.