4 research outputs found

    Marine mammal hotspots across the circumpolar Arctic

    Get PDF
    Aim: Identify hotspots and areas of high species richness for Arctic marine mammals. Location: Circumpolar Arctic. Methods: A total of 2115 biologging devices were deployed on marine mammals from 13 species in the Arctic from 2005 to 2019. Getis-Ord Gi* hotspots were calculated based on the number of individuals in grid cells for each species and for phyloge-netic groups (nine pinnipeds, three cetaceans, all species) and areas with high spe-cies richness were identified for summer (Jun-Nov), winter (Dec-May) and the entire year. Seasonal habitat differences among species’ hotspots were investigated using Principal Component Analysis. Results: Hotspots and areas with high species richness occurred within the Arctic continental-shelf seas and within the marginal ice zone, particularly in the “Arctic gateways” of the north Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Summer hotspots were generally found further north than winter hotspots, but there were exceptions to this pattern, including bowhead whales in the Greenland-Barents Seas and species with coastal distributions in Svalbard, Norway and East Greenland. Areas with high species rich-ness generally overlapped high-density hotspots. Large regional and seasonal dif-ferences in habitat features of hotspots were found among species but also within species from different regions. Gap analysis (discrepancy between hotspots and IUCN ranges) identified species and regions where more research is required. Main conclusions: This study identified important areas (and habitat types) for Arctic marine mammals using available biotelemetry data. The results herein serve as a benchmark to measure future distributional shifts. Expanded monitoring and teleme-try studies are needed on Arctic species to understand the impacts of climate change and concomitant ecosystem changes (synergistic effects of multiple stressors). While efforts should be made to fill knowledge gaps, including regional gaps and more com-plete sex and age coverage, hotspots identified herein can inform management ef-forts to mitigate the impacts of human activities and ecological changes, including creation of protected areas

    Effects of Polar Bear and Killer Whale Derived Contaminant Cocktails on Marine Mammal Immunity

    No full text
    Most controlled toxicity studies use single chemical exposures that do not represent the real world situation of complex mixtures of known and unknown natural and anthropogenic substances. In the present study, complex contaminant cocktails derived from the blubber of polar bears (PB; Ursus maritimus) and killer whales (KW; Orcinus orca) were used for in vitro concentration-response experiments with PB, cetacean and seal spp. immune cells to evaluate the effect of realistic contaminant mixtures on various immune functions. Cytotoxic effects of the PB cocktail occurred at lower concentrations than the KW cocktail (1 vs 16 Îźg/mL), likely due to differences in contaminant profiles in the mixtures derived from the adipose of each species. Similarly, significant reduction of lymphocyte proliferation occurred at much lower exposures in the PB cocktail (EC50: 0.94 vs 6.06 Îźg/mL; P < 0.01), whereas the KW cocktail caused a much faster decline in proliferation (slope: 2.9 vs 1.7; P = 0.04). Only the KW cocktail modulated natural killer (NK) cell activity and neutrophil and monocyte phagocytosis in a concentration- and species-dependent manner. No clear sensitivity differences emerged when comparing cetaceans, seals and PB. Our results showing lower effect levels for complex mixtures relative to single compounds suggest that previous risk assessments underestimate the effects of real world contaminant exposure on immunity. Our results using blubber-derived contaminant cocktails add realism to in vitro exposure experiments and confirm the immunotoxic risk marine mammals face from exposure to complex mixtures of environmental contaminants

    Marine mammal hotspots across the circumpolar Arctic

    No full text
    Aim: Identify hotspots and areas of high species richness for Arctic marine mammals. Location: Circumpolar Arctic. Methods: A total of 2115 biologging devices were deployed on marine mammals from 13 species in the Arctic from 2005 to 2019. Getis-Ord Gi* hotspots were calculated based on the number of individuals in grid cells for each species and for phyloge-netic groups (nine pinnipeds, three cetaceans, all species) and areas with high spe-cies richness were identified for summer (Jun-Nov), winter (Dec-May) and the entire year. Seasonal habitat differences among species’ hotspots were investigated using Principal Component Analysis. Results: Hotspots and areas with high species richness occurred within the Arctic continental-shelf seas and within the marginal ice zone, particularly in the “Arctic gateways” of the north Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Summer hotspots were generally found further north than winter hotspots, but there were exceptions to this pattern, including bowhead whales in the Greenland-Barents Seas and species with coastal distributions in Svalbard, Norway and East Greenland. Areas with high species rich-ness generally overlapped high-density hotspots. Large regional and seasonal dif-ferences in habitat features of hotspots were found among species but also within species from different regions. Gap analysis (discrepancy between hotspots and IUCN ranges) identified species and regions where more research is required. Main conclusions: This study identified important areas (and habitat types) for Arctic marine mammals using available biotelemetry data. The results herein serve as a benchmark to measure future distributional shifts. Expanded monitoring and teleme-try studies are needed on Arctic species to understand the impacts of climate change and concomitant ecosystem changes (synergistic effects of multiple stressors). While efforts should be made to fill knowledge gaps, including regional gaps and more com-plete sex and age coverage, hotspots identified herein can inform management ef-forts to mitigate the impacts of human activities and ecological changes, including creation of protected areas
    corecore