DOCSLIB.ORG

Feeding and Trophic Relationshps of Bowhead Whales and Other

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Feeding and Trophic Relationshps of Bowhead Whales and Other filoST"/L~~ Vw1eeR1r1e ~uM-t"YU 11J THE &lnJFiJll:r' NM~S F,rJttn_ f2.E"PO~T Ft2os-rtLbwae'1 '"' r / /t//c)t !/S/8c d'tl/12[ cc, FI NAL REPORT ProjecT Title: Feeding and trophic relatlonshlps ot bowhead whales and other vertebrate consumers In the Beaufort Sea P~lnclpal Investigators: Kathryn J. Frost and Lloyd F. Lowry Alaska Department of Fish and Game 1300 Co I lege Road Fairbanks, AK 99701 Report Date: 1 Apr l I 1981 Contract No.: 80-ABC-00160 Submitted To: National Marine Fisheries Service National Marine Mammal Laboratory 7600 Sand Point Way, N.E. Seattle, WA 98115 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures. • • • • Ii List of Tables • • • • • I i I Acknowledgments. • • • v I • Introduction. • • • • 1 I I • Methods • • • • • • 3 A. Literature search. • • • 3 B. FieId work • • 3 C. Laboratory and analytical procedures • . • 10 111. Aval lab! I lty and Production of Food • • 12 A. Oceanography and sea lee • 12 B. Primary production ••• • • 14 c. Secondary production • • 20 IV. Populations and Biomasses of Major Vertebrate Consumers 28 A. Marine mammals • • • • 28 B. Seabirds • • • • 40 c. Fi shes • • • • • 42 v. Feeding of Major Vertebrate Consumers • 45 A. Marine mammals • • • 45 B. Seabirds • • • • 570 c. Arctic cod • • • • • • 59 VI. Trophic Interactions Among Major Vertebrate Consumers 63 VI I • Biology of Major Prey Species 69 A. Euphausiids. • • • • 69 B. Hyperiid amphipods 72 c. Mysids • • • 74 D. Copepods • 75 E. Gammarid amphipods 79 VI I I.Discussion and Conclusions. • • 79 A. Foods and feeding of bowhead whales. 79 B. Trophic interactions among major vertebrate consumers. 81 IX. Summary • • • • • 88 x. Literature Cited. • 91 Appendices I. Organisms identified in vertical plankton tows done near Beaufort Lagoon, September 1980 I I • Description of bowhead whale prey samples examined I I I • Stomach contents of ringed seals collected in the Alaskan Beaufort Sea, August-September 1980 LIST OF FIGURES Figure I• Map of the Alaskan Beaufort Sea indicating the study area (enclosed by dashed Ii ne). • . • • . • . 4 Figure 2. Drawings of representative prey species considered in this report. • . • . • . • • . • 5 Figure 3. Drawing of research vessel and samp Ii ng gear. • 7 Figure 4.· Locations where vertical plankton tow transects were made off Beaufort Lagoon and Icy Reef. • • • • • • • • • • • 9 Figure 5. Vertical distribution of copepods along Transect off Beaufort Lagoon, JO September 1980. • ••••• . 26 Figure 6. Locations where ringed seals were col Jected off Beaufort Lagoon, September 1980. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 53 Figure 7. Length distribution of arctic cod measured from otter trawls and estimated from otoliths in ringed seals • collected at Beaufort Lagoon, September 1980 ••••••• 54 Figure 8. Pie diagrams representing the proportion of the total amount of copepods, euphausiids, hyperiid amphipods, and arctic cod consumed annually in the study area by each of the major groups of vertebrate consumers. • • • • • • • • 84 i i LIST OF TABLES Table f. Estimates of total annual phytoplankton productivity in the .southern Beaufort Sea. • • • • • • . • • • • • • . 19 Table 2. Caloric values ot major prey of ringed seals, bowhead whales, and arctic cod in the Beaufort Sea. • • • • • 22 Tab te 3. Average abundance of copepods a Iong transects • • • • • • • 24 Table 4. Average length, width, and weight of major copepod species • •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 27 Table 5. Average abundance of copepods near whale sightings. • 29 Table 6. Seasonal abundance and primary foods of mammals which regularly occur in the Alaskan Beaufort Sea. • • • • • • • 30 Table 7. Ringed seal density estimates along various sectors of the Beau.fort Sea coast. 38 Table 8. Summary of abundance and biomass of marine birds in the Alaskan Beaufort Sea. • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • 41 Table 9. Species of fishes caught by otter trawl in offshore waters of the northeastern Chukchi and Beaufort Seas during 1976 and 1977. • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • . • • • • • . 43 Table 10. Summary of abundance of arctic cod and other fishes caught by otter trawls in the Beaufort Sea during August and September 1980. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 44 Table 11. Prey iQentified from samples collected from gastrointestinal tracts of bowhead whales. • •••••••••••••• 47 Table 12. Quantitative composition of stomach contents from bowhead whales. • • . • . • • 50 Table 13. Ringed seal stomach contents, Beaufort Lagoon, September 1980. • . • . • • . 52 Table 14. Ringed seal stomach contents from samples collected over the continental shelf of the Alaskan Beaufort Sea. • 56 Table 15. Estimated composition of the diet of seabirds in the study area. • . • • . • . 58 Table 16. Stomach contents of arctic cod collected near Beaufort Lagoon, September 1980. • . • . • . • • . • • • . • 60 i i i List of Tables, cont. Table 17. Organisms identified in vertical plankton tow samples taken near otter trawl stations at which arctic cod were collected. • . • . • • . • • • . • • . • • • • • 61 Table 18. Rank order of abundance of crustaceans in arctic cod stomachs and vertical plankton tows •••• _. • • • • 62 Table 19. Estimated quantities of food (t) consumed by seabirds in the study area. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 64 Table 20. Assumptions used in calculating foods consumed by ringed sea Is in the study area. • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • 65 Table 21. Estimated quantities of food {t) consumed by ringed seals in the study area. • . • . • . • • • . • • 66 Table 22. Assumptions used in computation of food consumption by bowhead and belukha whales and arctic cod in the study area. • • 67 Table 23. Total quantities of prey (tl eaten annually by major vertebrate consumers in the study area • • • • • • • • • • 68 iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many people were instrumental in the successful completion of this research project. Primary project support was provided by the National Marine Fisheries Service, National Marine Mammal Laboratory. Portions of related research were supported by OSCEAP, Project Whales, and Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Project W-17-9. Many persons helped by collecting stomach samples from ringed seals and bowheads. We acknowledge their help and that of the Eskimo hunters who made the samples available. Bob Nelson, Bruce Dinneford, Barry Lopez, and Mike Goebel al I were invaluab,le and enthusiastic participants in the field program. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service kindly al lowed us to use.their facility at Beaufort Lagoon. NOAA/OCSEAP helicopter personnel provided essential logistics support, as did Don Ljungblad, Larry Hobbs, and other personnel associated with NOSC/NMFS bowhead whale research projects. Kate Persons assisted with many aspects of the f leld program. Ken Coyle provided expert processing of plankton samples. Computer work was done by Jesse Venable, who also prepared illustrations for the report. Don Ljungblad, George Divoky, Rita Horner, and Lee Braithwaite kindly provided us access to previously unpublished data. The manuscript was typed and edited by Kathy Valentine. John Burns, Howard Braham, and Bil I Marquette were particularly helpful throughout the project. v I. Introduction Until very recently the marine waters along the north coast of Alaska, commonly cal led the Beaufort Sea, had received little scientific attention. This region, which I ies almost entirely north of 70° north latitude, is _naracterized in winter by long periods of darkness, extensive sea ice cover, and very few visible animals. During this period of cold and darkness the Beaufort Sea indeed appears to be a biological desert. However, as daylight lengthens, temperatures increase,- and the ice cover becomes less continuous, thousands of marine mammals and millions of birds appear in the area. The presence of these animals, most of which have migrated to the Beaufort from more temperate regions, suggests an area of high summer productivity. Indeed, tt was Yankee whalers pursuing the bowhead whale (Salaena mysticetus) to its summer feeding grounds who provided the first major influx of non-native people to the region (Bockstoce 1977). Observations made by these whalers during the late 19th and early 20th centuries greatly increased the generally available information on the geography, meteorology, and ice conditions of the area but provided meager data on the biology of the Beaufort Sea region. The excel lent observations of explorer/naturalists such as Stefansson (1913) and Leffingwel I (1919) dealt primarily with terrestrial fauna and flora and the more obvious marine birds and mammals. Subsequent to the demise of commercial bowhead whaling in the early 1900 1 s, activity in the Beaufort Sea declined markedly. The establishment of the Naval Arctic Research Laboratory (NARLl at Barrow in 1947 provided the first permanent research facility on the northern coast of Alaska. Several major studies of the local fauna and flora were conducted from NARL (e.g., MacGinitie 1955; Redburn 1974). In addition, NARL provided a support base for work conducted from icebreakers (e.g., Hufford 1974; Watson and Divoky 1974) and drifting ice islands (e.g., Barnard 1959; Mohr and Geiger 1968). The discovery of oil in Prudhoe Bay in 1968 and the need to transport materials and equipment to Prudhoe by sea initiated the second major surge of interest in the Beaufort Sea. A major study (Alexander et al. 1975) was conducted in the nearby Col vi I le River system which provided some of the first baseline data on the biology and ecology of nearshore waters of the central Beaufort. The
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pacific Seabirds
    PACIFIC SEABIRDS A Publication of the Pacific Seabird Group Volume 34 Number 1 Spring 2007 PACIFIC SEABIRD GROUP Dedicated to the Study and Conservation of Pacific Seabirds and Their Environment The Pacific Seabird Group (PSG) was formed in 1972 due to the need for better communication among Pacific seabird researchers. PSG provides a forum for the research activities of its members, promotes the conservation of seabirds, and informs members and the public of issues relating to Pacific Ocean seabirds and their environment. PSG holds annual meetings at which scientific papers and symposia are presented. The group’s journals are Pacific Seabirds(formerly the PSG Bulletin), and Marine Ornithology (published jointly with the African Seabird Group, Australasian Seabird Group, Dutch Seabird Group, and The Seabird Group [United King- dom]; www.marineornithology.org). Other publications include symposium volumes and technical reports. Conservation concerns include seabird/fisheries interactions, monitoring of seabird populations, seabird restoration following oil spills, establishment of seabird sanctuaries, and endangered species. Policy statements are issued on conservation issues of critical importance. PSG mem- bers include scientists, conservation professionals, and members of the public from both sides of the Pacific Ocean. It is hoped that seabird enthusiasts in other parts of the world also will join and participate in PSG. PSG is a member of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the Ornithological Council, and. the American Bird Conservancy. Annual dues for membership are $25 (individual and family); $15 (student, undergraduate and graduate); and $750 (Life Membership, payable in five $150 install- ments). Dues are payable to the Treasurer; see Membership/Order Form next to inside back cover for details and application.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Vertebrate Conservation (Including Threatened and Protected Species)
    Marine Vertebrate Conservation (including Threatened and Protected Species) Submission for National Marine Science Plan, White paper submissions for Biodiversity Conservation and Ecosystem Health Coordinated by Professor Peter L. Harrison Abstract A diverse range of important and endemic marine vertebrate species occurs in Australia’s vast marine area. Australian scientists produce significant proportions of global research on marine vertebrates, and are internationally recognised leaders in some fields including conservation and management. Many end-users require this knowledge, but relatively few species have been studied sufficiently to determine their conservation status hence data deficiency is a major problem for management. Key science needs include improved taxonomic, distribution, demographic and trend data from long-term funded programs, improved threat mitigation to ensure sustainability, and development of national marine vertebrate science hub(s) to co-ordinate and integrate future research. Background An extraordinary diversity of marine vertebrate species occurs in Australia’s vast >10 million km2 marine territorial sea and EEZ and Australian Antarctic Territory waters, which encompass shallow coastal to deep ocean ecosystems from tropical to polar latitudes. Major marine vertebrate groups include chondrichthyans (sharks, rays, chimaeras), bony fishes, marine reptiles, seabirds (petrels, albatrosses, sulids, gulls, terns and shags) and marine mammals. The numbers of species within each group occurring in Australia’s marine waters and numbers of nationally listed threatened species (and subspecies) under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) are summarised in Table 1. The total numbers of species are uncertain for some marine vertebrate groups, particularly marine Actinopterygii where a comprehensive list of species is not available for all Australian marine waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Sexual Segregation in Marine Fish, Reptiles, Birds and Mammals: Behaviour Patterns, Mechanisms and Conservation Implications
    Author's personal copy CHAPTER TWO Sexual Segregation in Marine Fish, Reptiles, Birds and Mammals: Behaviour Patterns, Mechanisms and Conservation Implications Victoria J. Wearmouth* and David W. Sims,† * Contents 1. Introduction 108 2. Types of Sexual Segregation 110 2.1. Habitat versus social segregation 110 2.2. Detecting types of sexual segregation 112 2.3. Measurement problems for marine species 113 3. Sexual Segregation in Marine Vertebrates 116 3.1. Sexual segregation in marine mammals 116 3.2. Sexual segregation in marine birds 122 3.3. Sexual segregation in marine reptiles 126 3.4. Sexual segregation in marine fish 128 4. Mechanisms Underlying Sexual Segregation: Hypotheses 134 4.1. Predation-risk hypothesis (reproductive strategy hypothesis) 134 4.2. Forage selection hypothesis (sexual dimorphism—body-size hypothesis) incorporating the scramble competition and incisor breadth hypotheses 138 4.3. Activity budget hypothesis (body-size dimorphism hypothesis) 141 4.4. Thermal niche–fecundity hypothesis 145 4.5. Social factors hypothesis (social preference and social avoidance hypotheses) 146 5. Sexual Segregation in Catshark: A Case Study 148 6. Conservation Implications of Sexual Segregation 152 7. A Synthesis and Future Directions for Research 156 Acknowledgements 160 References 160 * Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, The Laboratory, Citadel Hill, Plymouth PL1 2PB, United Kingdom { Marine Biology and Ecology Research Centre, School of Biological Sciences, University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth PL4 8AA, United Kingdom Advances in Marine Biology, Volume 54 # 2008 Elsevier Ltd. ISSN 0065-2881, DOI: 10.1016/S0065-2881(08)00002-3 All rights reserved. 107 Author's personal copy 108 Victoria J.
    [Show full text]
  • “Poop, Roots, and Deadfall: the Story of Blue Carbon”
    “Poop, Roots, and Deadfall: The Story of Blue Carbon” Mark J. Spalding, President of The Ocean Foundation “ Poop, Roots, and Deadfall: The Story of Blue Carbon” Why Blue Carbon? • Blue carbon offers a win/win/win • It allows for collaborative multi-stakeholder engagement in climate change adaptation and mitigation “ Poop, Roots, and Deadfall: The Story of Blue Carbon” The Ocean and Carbon “ Poop, Roots, and Deadfall: The Story of Blue Carbon” • The ocean is by far the largest carbon sink in the world • It removes 20-35% of atmospheric carbon emissions • Biological life in the ocean captures and stores 93% of the earth’s carbon dioxide • It has been estimated that biological life in the high seas capture and store 1.5 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide per year “ Poop, Roots, and Deadfall: The Story of Blue Carbon” What is Blue Carbon? Christiaan Triebert “ Poop, Roots, and Deadfall: The Story of Blue Carbon” Blue Carbon is the ability of tidal wetlands, seagrass habitats, and other marine organisms to take up carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, and store them helping to mitigate the effects of climate change. “ Poop, Roots, and Deadfall: The Story of Blue Carbon” • Carbon Sequestration – The process of capturing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, measured as a rate of carbon uptake per year • Carbon Storage – the long-term confinement of carbon in plant materials or sediment, measured as a total weight of carbon stored “ Poop, Roots, and Deadfall: The Story of Blue Carbon” Carbon Stored and Sequestered By Coastal Wetlands • Carbon is held in the above and below ground plant matter and within wetland soils and seafloor sediments.
    [Show full text]
  • Arctic Marine Biodiversity
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292115665 Arctic marine biodiversity CHAPTER · JANUARY 2016 READS 142 12 AUTHORS, INCLUDING: Lis Lindal Jørgensen Philippe Archambault Institute of Marine Research in Norway Université du Québec à Rimouski UQAR 36 PUBLICATIONS 285 CITATIONS 137 PUBLICATIONS 1,574 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Dieter Piepenburg Jake Rice Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel Fisheries and Oceans Canada 71 PUBLICATIONS 1,705 CITATIONS 67 PUBLICATIONS 2,279 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Andrey V. Dolgov letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 19 February 2016 Chapter 36G. Arctic Ocean Contributors: Lis Lindal Jørgensen, Philippe Archambault, Claire Armstrong, Andrey Dolgov, Evan Edinger, Tony Gaston, Jon Hildebrand, Dieter Piepenburg, Walker Smith, Cecilie von Quillfeldt, Michael Vecchione, Jake Rice (Lead member) Referees: Arne Bjørge, Charles Hannah. 1. Introduction 1.1 State The Central Arctic Ocean and the marginal seas such as the Chukchi, East Siberian, Laptev, Kara, White, Greenland, Beaufort, and Bering Seas, Baffin Bay and the Canadian Archipelago (Figure 1) are among the least-known basins and bodies of water in the world ocean, because of their remoteness, hostile weather, and the multi-year (i.e., perennial) or seasonal ice cover. Even the well-studied Barents and Norwegian Seas are partly ice covered during winter and information during this period is sparse or lacking. The Arctic has warmed at twice the global rate, with sea- ice loss accelerating (Figure 2, ACIA, 2004; Stroeve et al., 2012, Chapter 46 in this report), especially along the coasts of Russia, Alaska, and the Canadian Archipelago (Post et al., 2013).
    [Show full text]
  • BIRDS AS MARINE ORGANISMS: a REVIEW Calcofi Rep., Vol
    AINLEY BIRDS AS MARINE ORGANISMS: A REVIEW CalCOFI Rep., Vol. XXI, 1980 BIRDS AS MARINE ORGANISMS: A REVIEW DAVID G. AINLEY Point Reyes Bird Observatory Stinson Beach, CA 94970 ABSTRACT asociadas con esos peces. Se indica que el estudio de las Only 9 of 156 avian families are specialized as sea- aves marinas podria contribuir a comprender mejor la birds. These birds are involved in marine energy cycles dinamica de las poblaciones de peces anterior a la sobre- during all aspects of their lives except for the 10% of time explotacion por el hombre. they spend in some nesting activities. As marine organ- isms their occurrence and distribution are directly affected BIRDS AS MARINE ORGANISMS: A REVIEW by properties of their oceanic habitat, such as water temp- As pointed out by Sanger(1972) and Ainley and erature, salinity, and turbidity. In their trophic relation- Sanger (1979), otherwise comprehensive reviews of bio- ships, almost all are secondary or tertiary carnivores. As logical oceanography have said little or nothing about a group within specific ecosystems, estimates of their seabirds in spite of the fact that they are the most visible feeding rates range between 20 and 35% of annual prey part of the marine biota. The reasons for this oversight are production. Their usual prey are abundant, schooling or- no doubt complex, but there are perhaps two major ones. ganisms such as euphausiids and squid (invertebrates) First, because seabirds have not been commercially har- and clupeids, engraulids, and exoccetids (fish). Their high vested to any significant degree, fisheries research, which rates of feeding and metabolism, and the large amounts of supplies most of our knowledge about marine ecosys- nutrients they return to the marine environment, indicate tems, has ignored them.
    [Show full text]
  • Macropredatory Ichthyosaur from the Middle Triassic and the Origin of Modern Trophic Networks
    Macropredatory ichthyosaur from the Middle Triassic and the origin of modern trophic networks Nadia B. Fröbischa,1, Jörg Fröbischa,1, P. Martin Sanderb,1,2, Lars Schmitzc,1,2,3, and Olivier Rieppeld aMuseum für Naturkunde, Leibniz-Institut für Evolutions- und Biodiversitätsforschung an der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 10115 Berlin, Germany; bSteinmann Institute of Geology, Mineralogy, and Paleontology, Division of Paleontology, University of Bonn, 53115 Bonn, Germany; cDepartment of Evolution and Ecology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616; and dDepartment of Geology, The Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL 60605 Edited by Neil H. Shubin, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, and approved December 5, 2012 (received for review October 8, 2012) The biotic recovery from Earth’s most severe extinction event at the Holotype and Only Specimen. The Field Museum of Natural His- Permian-Triassic boundary largely reestablished the preextinction tory (FMNH) contains specimen PR 3032, a partial skeleton structure of marine trophic networks, with marine reptiles assuming including most of the skull (Fig. 1) and axial skeleton, parts of the predator roles. However, the highest trophic level of today’s the pelvic girdle, and parts of the hind fins. marine ecosystems, i.e., macropredatory tetrapods that forage on prey of similar size to their own, was thus far lacking in the Paleozoic Horizon and Locality. FMNH PR 3032 was collected in 2008 from the and early Mesozoic. Here we report a top-tier tetrapod predator, middle Anisian Taylori Zone of the Fossil Hill Member of the Favret a very large (>8.6 m) ichthyosaur from the early Middle Triassic Formation at Favret Canyon, Augusta Mountains, Pershing County, (244 Ma), of Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Program
    HAMES CENTER LAKE ST SITKA PERFORMING ARTS CENTER P PETERSON AVE 1.3 MILES NORTHWEST YAW BUILDING ALLEN HALL JEFF DAVIS ST LINCOLN ST LAKE ST P COLLEGE DR WESTMARK LINCOLN ST ExExplploorree LILIFEFE ONON TTHHEE .5 MILE WEST SITKA WHALEFEST BOUNBOUNDADARYRY SSSC 2015 MAP SITKA WHALEFEST NOV 5-8 2015 WhaleFest 2015 SITKA WHALEFEST THURSDAY, NOV 5 WHALEFEST MARKET 6:30-7 Student Marine Art Reception Sitka WhaleFest FILMFEST &CAFE NOVEMBER 6-8 7:30-8:30 WhaleFest FilmFest FRI & SAT 11-5PM• SUN 11-4PM brings the science YAW BUILDING SJC CAMPUS FREE FREE FREE FRIDAY, NOV 6 to you, informing Our third annual filmfest! Marine-themed market with local Student art show Scientists share their marine Allen Hall, Sheldon Jackson artists and food Yaw Building, SJC knowledge 11-5 The Market & Café, Silent Auction, Student Art on important Campus Yaw Building, SJC Friday Nov 6 & Saturday Nov 7 Allen Hall, Sheldon Jackson Thursday Nov 5 | 7:30-8:30pm Friday Nov 6 & Saturday Nov 7 11:00-5:00pm Campus 1-3:45 Symposium: Shallow Apex: Where Ocean & Land Meet 11:00-5:00pm Sunday Nov 8 | 11:00-4:00pm Friday Nov 6-Sunday Nov 8 topics concerning Sunday Nov 8 | 11:00-4:00pm 1:00-3:45pm 1-1:45 What do Algae, Poison, and CSI Have in Common? 2-2:45 Live Long and Prosper: Challenges of Estuary Living our marine 3-3:45 Unraveling the Past with Mud, Garbage & Chemistry environment. 5 Pre-registration for 5K/10K Run/Walk The 19th Annual Sitka WhaleFest 5:30-7 Sitka Sound Science Center Reception is a program of the Sitka Sound 7:30 Maritime Grind Science Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Tracking Fitness in Marine Vertebrates’
    Vol. 496: 1–17, 2014 MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Published January 27 doi: 10.3354/meps10691 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Contribution to the Theme Section ‘Tracking fitness in marine vertebrates’ INTRODUCTION: REVIEW Tracking fitness in marine vertebrates: current knowledge and opportunities for future research Glenn T. Crossin1,*, Steven J. Cooke2, Jeremy A. Goldbogen3, Richard A. Phillips4 1Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 4R2, Canada 2Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Biology and Institute of Environmental Science, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6, Canada 3Department of Biology, Hopkins Marine Station, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, California 93950, USA 4British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council, High Cross, Madingley Road, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire CB3 0ET, UK ABSTRACT: For more than 60 yr, electronic tags (including acoustic transmitters, archival loggers, and satellite tags) have been applied to free-ranging marine vertebrates to track their behaviour and characterize their spatial ecology. However, only recently have researchers begun using elec- tronic tags to elucidate the processes that relate directly to fitness, i.e. the ability of organisms to survive and reproduce. We briefly review the history of tracking studies focused on marine verte- brates and then provide a general overview of studies that have used tracking to address fitness- related questions. Although many studies have used at-sea movement and activity data to better understand feeding ecology, physio logy, and energetics, there is growing interest in the coupling of electronic tracking techniques with other disciplines to resolve the mechanisms underlying individual fitness, or more precisely the proxies thereof (survival, timing of reproduction, foraging success, etc.).
    [Show full text]
  • (Schindleria) in the Red Sea and Worldwide Associations with Lunar Phases
    Year-round high abundances of the world’s smallest marine vertebrate (Schindleria) in the Red Sea and worldwide associations with lunar phases Vanessa Robitzch ( [email protected] ) Austral University of Chile Victor Molina-Valdivia University of Valparaíso Jaiber Solano-Iguaran Austral University of Chile Mauricio Landaeta University of Valparaíso Michael Lee Berumen King Abdullah University of Science and Technology Research Article Keywords: coral reef sh, reproduction, light traps, otoliths, paedomorphism, Saudi Arabia Posted Date: March 19th, 2021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-267432/v1 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License Version of Record: A version of this preprint was published at Scientic Reports on July 12th, 2021. See the published version at https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93800-w. 1 Title: Year-round high abundances of the world’s smallest marine vertebrate 2 (Schindleria) in the Red Sea and worldwide associations with lunar phases 3 4 Vanessa Robitzch1,2,*, Victor Molina-Valdivia3, Jaiber J. Solano-Iguaran2,4, Mauricio 5 Landaeta3,5, & Michael L. Berumen1 6 7 1Red Sea Research Center, Division of Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering, 8 King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Thuwal, 23955, Saudi Arabia; 2Instituto 9 de Ciencias Ambientales y Evolutivas, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Austral de Chile, 10 Casilla 567, Valdivia, Chile; 3Laboratorio de Ictioplancton (LABITI), Instituto de
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Science 100
    Field Trip to Cabrillo Marine Museum ____________________________________ Objective: The Cabrillo Marine Aquarium is devoted to promoting awareness and knowledge of the rich marine life of southern California through exhibits, programs, and research. The aquarium had the largest collection of Southern California marine life on exhibit in the world. 20,000 gallons of seawater circulate through the museum’s 35 aquaria, outdoor touch tank and sea water laboratories. It also has a very large display depicting marine vertebrates (sharks, rays, fish, marine reptiles, birds, and marine mammal. In fact, the marine vertebrate display is one of the best at any museum on the western side of the United States. For this lab exercise, we will be concentrating on the marine vertebrates displayed both alive and dead throughout the aquarium/museum. Introduction The museum/aquarium is divided into the following areas. 1. Courtyard Swimming above the courtyard are a killer whale, dolphins, hammerhead sharks and a leatherback turtle. Touch a whalebone, compare your size to a bull elephant seal, or young gray whale, or get eye to eye with a spy-hopping bray whale. 2. John M. Olguin Auditorium Multimedia shows on marine life are shown daily. 3. Exhibit Hall The Exhibit Hall is divided into three major environments: (1) Rocky Shores The rocky shore is a difficult place to live, with drying air at low tide and battering surf at high tide. There are tanks, which illustrate Camouflage, Egg Cases of Sharks, Territorial Fishes, the Morey Eel, and the wide range of ways animals feed and protect themselves. (2) Sand and Mud Sand and mud are constantly shifting habitats in which only a few animals have become specialized enough to survive.
    [Show full text]
  • Offshore Marine Actinopterygian Assemblages from the Maastrichtian–Paleogene of the Pindos Unit in Eurytania, Greece
    Offshore marine actinopterygian assemblages from the Maastrichtian–Paleogene of the Pindos Unit in Eurytania, Greece Thodoris Argyriou1 and Donald Davesne2,3 1 UMR 7207 (MNHN—Sorbonne Université—CNRS) Centre de Recherche en Paléontologie, Museum National d’Histoire naturelle, Paris, France 2 Department of Earth Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK 3 UMR 7205 (MNHN—Sorbonne Université—CNRS—EPHE), Institut de Systématique, Évolution, Biodiversité, Museum National d’Histoire naturelle, Paris, France ABSTRACT The fossil record of marine ray-finned fishes (Actinopterygii) from the time interval surrounding the Cretaceous–Paleogene (K–Pg) extinction is scarce at a global scale, hampering our understanding of the impact, patterns and processes of extinction and recovery in the marine realm, and its role in the evolution of modern marine ichthyofaunas. Recent fieldwork in the K–Pg interval of the Pindos Unit in Eurytania, continental Greece, shed new light on forgotten fossil assemblages and allowed for the collection of a diverse, but fragmentary sample of actinopterygians from both late Maastrichtian and Paleocene rocks. Late Maastrichtian assemblages are dominated by Aulopiformes (†Ichthyotringidae, †Enchodontidae), while †Dercetidae (also Aulopiformes), elopomorphs and additional, unidentified teleosts form minor components. Paleocene fossils include a clupeid, a stomiiform and some unidentified teleost remains. This study expands the poor record of body fossils from this critical time interval, especially for smaller sized taxa, while providing a rare, paleogeographically constrained, qualitative glimpse of open-water Tethyan ecosystems from both before and after the extinction event. Faunal similarities Submitted 21 September 2020 Accepted 9 December 2020 between the Maastrichtian of Eurytania and older Late Cretaceous faunas reveal a Published 20 January 2021 higher taxonomic continuum in offshore actinopterygian faunas and ecosystems Corresponding author spanning the entire Late Cretaceous of the Tethys.
    [Show full text]