Trophic position and foraging ecology of Ross, Weddell, and crabeater seals revealed by compound-specific isotope analysis

Ross seals Ommatophoca rossii are one of the least studied marine mammals, with little known about their foraging ecology. Research to date using bulk stable isotope analysis suggests that Ross seals have a trophic position intermediate between that of Weddell Leptonychotes weddellii and crabeater Lobodon carcinophaga seals. However, consumer bulk stable isotope values not only reflect trophic dynamics, but also variations in baseline isotope values, which can be substantial. We used compound-specific isotope analysis of amino acids (CSI-AA) to separate isotopic effects of a shifting baseline versus trophic structure on the foraging ecology of these ecologically important Antarctic pinnipeds. We found that Ross seals forage in an open ocean food web, while crabeater and Weddell seals forage within similar food webs closer to shore. However, isotopic evidence suggests that crabeater seals are likely following sea ice, while Weddell seals target productive areas of the continental shelf of West Antarctica. Our CSI-AA data indicate that Ross seals have a high trophic position equivalent to that of Weddell seals, contrary to prior conclusions from nitrogen isotope results on bulk tissues. CSI-AA indicates that crabeater seals are at a trophic position lower than that of Ross and Weddell seals, consistent with a krill-dominated diet. Our results redefine the view of the trophic dynamics and foraging ecology of the Ross seal, and also highlight the importance of quantifying baseline isotope variations in foraging studies

Seasonal Habitat Preference and Foraging Behaviour of Post-Moult Weddell Seals in the Western Ross Sea

Weddell seals (Leptonychotes weddellii) are important predators in the Southern Ocean and are among the best-studied pinnipeds on Earth, yet much still needs to be learned about their year-round movements and foraging behaviour. Using biologgers, we tagged 62 post-moult Weddell seals in McMurdo Sound and vicinity between 2010 and 2012. Generalized additive mixed models were used to (i) explain and predict the probability of seal presence and foraging behaviour from eight environmental variables, and (ii) examine foraging behaviour in relation to dive metrics. Foraging probability was highest in winter and lowest in summer, and foraging occurred mostly in the water column or just above the bottom; across all seasons, seals preferentially exploited the shallow banks and deeper troughs of the Ross Sea, the latter providing a pathway for Circumpolar Deep Water to flow onto the shelf. In addition, the probability of Weddell seal occurrence and foraging increased with increasing bathymetric slope and where water depth was typically less than 600 m. Although the probability of occurrence was higher closer to the shelf break, foraging was higher in areas closer to shore and over banks. This study highlights the importance of overwinter foraging for recouping body mass lost during the previous summer

Foraging Behavior and Success of a Mesopelagic Predator in the Northeast Pacific Ocean: Insights from a Data-Rich Species, the Northern Elephant Seal

The mesopelagic zone of the northeast Pacific Ocean is an important foraging habitat for many predators, yet few studies have addressed the factors driving basin-scale predator distributions or inter-annual variability in foraging and breeding success. Understanding these processes is critical to reveal how conditions at sea cascade to population-level effects. To begin addressing these challenging questions, we collected diving, tracking, foraging success, and natality data for 297 adult female northern elephant seal migrations from 2004 to 2010. During the longer post-molting migration, individual energy gain rates were significant predictors of pregnancy. At sea, seals focused their foraging effort along a narrow band corresponding to the boundary between the sub-arctic and sub-tropical gyres. In contrast to shallow-diving predators, elephant seals target the gyre-gyre boundary throughout the year rather than follow the southward winter migration of surface features, such as the Transition Zone Chlorophyll Front. We also assessed the impact of added transit costs by studying seals at a colony near the southern extent of the species’ range, 1,150 km to the south. A much larger proportion of seals foraged locally, implying plasticity in foraging strategies and possibly prey type. While these findings are derived from a single species, the results may provide insight to the foraging patterns of many other meso-pelagic predators in the northeast Pacific Ocean

Mismatches in scale between highly mobile marine megafauna and marine protected areas

Marine protected areas (MPAs), particularly large MPAs, are increasing in number and size around the globe in part to facilitate the conservation of marine megafauna under the assumption that large-scale MPAs better align with vagile life histories; however, this alignment is not well established. Using a global tracking dataset from 36 species across five taxa, chosen to reflect the span of home range size in highly mobile marine megafauna, we show most MPAs are too small to encompass complete home ranges of most species. Based on size alone, 40% of existing MPAs could encompass the home ranges of the smallest ranged species, while only < 1% of existing MPAs could encompass those of the largest ranged species. Further, where home ranges and MPAs overlapped in real geographic space, MPAs encompassed < 5% of core areas used by all species. Despite most home ranges of mobile marine megafauna being much larger than existing MPAs, we demonstrate how benefits from MPAs are still likely to accrue by targeting seasonal aggregations and critical life history stages and through other management techniques.Fil: Conners, Melinda G.. University of Washington; Estados Unidos. State University of New York. Stony Brook University; Estados UnidosFil: Sisson, Nicholas B.. Old Dominion University; Estados UnidosFil: Agamboue, Pierre D.. Wildlife Conservation Society; GabónFil: Atkinson, Philip W.. British Trust For Ornithology; Reino UnidoFil: Baylis, Alastair M. M.. Macquarie University; Australia. South Atlantic Environmental Research Institute; Reino UnidoFil: Benson, Scott R.. Noaa National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Regional Office; Estados Unidos. Moss Landing Marine Laboratories; Estados UnidosFil: Block, Barbara A.. University of Stanford; Estados UnidosFil: Bograd, Steven J.. Noaa National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Regional Office; Estados UnidosFil: Bordino, Pablo. Mote Marine Laboratory; Estados UnidosFil: Bowen, W.D.. Bedford Institute Of Oceanography, Fisheries And Oceans Canada; Canadá. Dalhousie University Halifax; CanadáFil: Brickle, Paul. South Atlantic Environmental Research Institute; Reino Unido. University of Aberdeen; Reino Unido. University Of Aberdeeen; Reino UnidoFil: Bruno, Ignacio Matias. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones y Desarrollo Pesquero; ArgentinaFil: González Carman, Victoria. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones y Desarrollo Pesquero; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras; ArgentinaFil: Champagne, Cory D.. University of Washington; Estados UnidosFil: Crocker, Daniel E.. Sonoma State University; Estados UnidosFil: Costa, Daniel P.. University of California; Estados UnidosFil: Dawson, Tiffany M.. University Of Central Florida; Estados Unidos. Old Dominion University; Estados UnidosFil: Deguchi, Tomohiro. Yamashina Institute For Ornithology; JapónFil: Dewar, Heidi. Noaa National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Regional Office; Estados UnidosFil: Doherty, Philip D.. University of Exeter; Reino UnidoFil: Eguchi, Tomo. Noaa National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Regional Office; Estados UnidosFil: Formia, Angela. Wildlife Conservation Society; Gabón. African Aquatic Conservation Fund; Estados UnidosFil: Godley, Brendan J.. University of Exeter; Reino UnidoFil: Graham, Rachel T.. Maralliance; PanamáFil: Gredzens, Christian. Padre Island National Seashore; Estados UnidosFil: Hart, Kristen M.. United States Geological Survey; Estados UnidosFil: Hawkes, Lucy A.. University of Exeter; Reino UnidoFil: Henderson, Suzanne. Scottish Natural Heritage; Reino UnidoFil: Henry, Robert William. Groundswell Coastal Ecology; Estados UnidosFil: Hückstädt, Luis A.. University of Exeter; Reino Unido. University of California; Estados Unido

Observing change in pelagic animals as sampling methods shift: the case of Antarctic krill

Understanding and managing the response of marine ecosystems to human pressures including climate change requires reliable large-scale and multi-decadal information on the state of key populations. These populations include the pelagic animals that support ecosystem services including carbon export and fisheries. The use of research vessels to collect information using scientific nets and acoustics is being replaced with technologies such as autonomous moorings, gliders, and meta-genetics. Paradoxically, these newer methods sample pelagic populations at ever-smaller spatial scales, and ecological change might go undetected in the time needed to build up large-scale, long time series. These global-scale issues are epitomised by Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba), which is concentrated in rapidly warming areas, exports substantial quantities of carbon and supports an expanding fishery, but opinion is divided on how resilient their stocks are to climatic change. Based on a workshop of 137 krill experts we identify the challenges of observing climate change impacts with shifting sampling methods and suggest three tractable solutions. These are to: improve overlap and calibration of new with traditional methods; improve communication to harmonise, link and scale up the capacity of new but localised sampling programs; and expand opportunities from other research platforms and data sources, including the fishing industry. Contrasting evidence for both change and stability in krill stocks illustrates how the risks of false negative and false positive diagnoses of change are related to the temporal and spatial scale of sampling. Given the uncertainty about how krill are responding to rapid warming we recommend a shift towards a fishery management approach that prioritises monitoring of stock status and can adapt to variability and change

Predator-derived bioregions in the Southern Ocean: Characteristics, drivers and representation in marine protected areas

Multiple initiatives have called for large-scale representative networks of marine protected areas (MPAs). MPAs should be ecologically representative to be effective, but in large, remote regions this can be difficult to quantify and assess. We present a novel bioregionalization for the Southern Ocean, which uses the modelled circumpolar habitat importance of 17 marine bird and mammal species. The habitat-use of these predators indicates biodiversity patterns that require representation in Southern Ocean conservation and management planning. In the predator habitat importance predictions, we identified 17 statistical clusters, falling into four larger groups. We characterized and contrasted these clusters based on their predator, prey and oceanographic characteristics. Under the existing Southern Ocean MPA network, some clusters fall short of 10 % representation, yet others meet or exceed these targets. Implementation of currently proposed MPAs can in some cases contribute to meeting even 30 % spatial coverage conservation targets. However, the effectiveness of mixed-use versus no-take MPAs should be taken into consideration, since some clusters are not adequately represented by no-take MPAs. These results, combined with previous studies in the Southern Ocean, can help inform the continued design, implementation, and evaluation of a representative system of MPAs for Southern Ocean conservation and management

Convergence of marine megafauna movement patterns in coastal and open oceans

Author Posting. © The Author(s), 2017. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 115 (2018): 3072-3077, doi:10.1073/pnas.1716137115.The extent of increasing anthropogenic impacts on large marine vertebrates partly depends on the animals’ movement patterns. Effective conservation requires identification of the key drivers of movement including intrinsic properties and extrinsic constraints associated with the dynamic nature of the environments the animals inhabit. However, the relative importance of intrinsic versus extrinsic factors remains elusive. We analyse a global dataset of 2.8 million locations from > 2,600 tracked individuals across 50 marine vertebrates evolutionarily separated by millions of years and using different locomotion modes (fly, swim, walk/paddle). Strikingly, movement patterns show a remarkable convergence, being strongly conserved across species and independent of body length and mass, despite these traits ranging over 10 orders of magnitude among the species studied. This represents a fundamental difference between marine and terrestrial vertebrates not previously identified, likely linked to the reduced costs of locomotion in water. Movement patterns were primarily explained by the interaction between species-specific traits and the habitat(s) they move through, resulting in complex movement patterns when moving close to coasts compared to more predictable patterns when moving in open oceans. This distinct difference may be associated with greater complexity within coastal micro-habitats, highlighting a critical role of preferred habitat in shaping marine vertebrate global movements. Efforts to develop understanding of the characteristics of vertebrate movement should consider the habitat(s) through which they move to identify how movement patterns will alter with forecasted severe ocean changes, such as reduced Arctic sea ice cover, sea level rise and declining oxygen content.Workshops funding granted by the UWA Oceans Institute, AIMS, and KAUST. AMMS was supported by an ARC Grant DE170100841 and an IOMRC (UWA, AIMS, CSIRO) fellowship; JPR by MEDC (FPU program, Spain); DWS by UK NERC and Save Our Seas Foundation; NQ by FCT (Portugal); MMCM by a CAPES fellowship (Ministry of Education)

Mismatches in Scale Between Highly Mobile Marine Megafauna and Marine Protected Areas

Marine protected areas (MPAs), particularly large MPAs, are increasing in number and size around the globe in part to facilitate the conservation of marine megafauna under the assumption that large-scale MPAs better align with vagile life histories; however, this alignment is not well established. Using a global tracking dataset from 36 species across five taxa, chosen to reflect the span of home range size in highly mobile marine megafauna, we show most MPAs are too small to encompass complete home ranges of most species. Based on size alone, 40% of existing MPAs could encompass the home ranges of the smallest ranged species, while only \u3c 1% of existing MPAs could encompass those of the largest ranged species. Further, where home ranges and MPAs overlapped in real geographic space, MPAs encompassed \u3c 5% of core areas used by all species. Despite most home ranges of mobile marine megafauna being much larger than existing MPAs, we demonstrate how benefits from MPAs are still likely to accrue by targeting seasonal aggregations and critical life history stages and through other management techniques

Mismatches in Scale Between Highly Mobile Marine Megafauna and Marine Protected Areas

Marine protected areas (MPAs), particularly large MPAs, are increasing in number and size around the globe in part to facilitate the conservation of marine megafauna under the assumption that large-scale MPAs better align with vagile life histories; however, this alignment is not well established. Using a global tracking dataset from 36 species across five taxa, chosen to reflect the span of home range size in highly mobile marine megafauna, we show most MPAs are too small to encompass complete home ranges of most species. Based on size alone, 40% of existing MPAs could encompass the home ranges of the smallest ranged species, while only \u3c 1% of existing MPAs could encompass those of the largest ranged species. Further, where home ranges and MPAs overlapped in real geographic space, MPAs encompassed \u3c 5% of core areas used by all species. Despite most home ranges of mobile marine megafauna being much larger than existing MPAs, we demonstrate how benefits from MPAs are still likely to accrue by targeting seasonal aggregations and critical life history stages and through other management techniques

Observing change in pelagic animals as sampling methods shift: the case of Antarctic krill

Understanding and managing the response of marine ecosystems to human pressures including climate change requires reliable large-scale and multi-decadal information on the state of key populations. These populations include the pelagic animals that support ecosystem services including carbon export and fisheries. The use of research vessels to collect information using scientific nets and acoustics is being replaced with technologies such as autonomous moorings, gliders, and meta-genetics. Paradoxically, these newer methods sample pelagic populations at ever-smaller spatial scales, and ecological change might go undetected in the time needed to build up large-scale, long time series. These global-scale issues are epitomised by Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba), which is concentrated in rapidly warming areas, exports substantial quantities of carbon and supports an expanding fishery, but opinion is divided on how resilient their stocks are to climatic change. Based on a workshop of 137 krill experts we identify the challenges of observing climate change impacts with shifting sampling methods and suggest three tractable solutions. These are to: improve overlap and calibration of new with traditional methods; improve communication to harmonise, link and scale up the capacity of new but localised sampling programs; and expand opportunities from other research platforms and data sources, including the fishing industry. Contrasting evidence for both change and stability in krill stocks illustrates how the risks of false negative and false positive diagnoses of change are related to the temporal and spatial scale of sampling. Given the uncertainty about how krill are responding to rapid warming we recommend a shift towards a fishery management approach that prioritises monitoring of stock status and can adapt to variability and change