35 resultados para Randall-Sundrum
Resumo:
The 19th century commercial ship-based fishery for gray whales, Eschrichtius robustus, in the eastern North Pacific began in 1846 and continued until the mid 1870’s in southern areas and the 1880’s in the north. Henderson identified three periods in the southern part of the fishery: Initial, 1846–1854; Bonanza, 1855–1865; and Declining, 1866–1874. The largest catches were made by “lagoon whaling” in or immediately outside the whale population’s main wintering areas in Mexico—Magdalena Bay, Scammon’s Lagoon, and San Ignacio Lagoon. Large catches were also made by “coastal” or “alongshore” whaling where the whalers attacked animals as they migrated along the coast. Gray whales were also hunted to a limited extent on their feeding grounds in the Bering and Chukchi Seas in summer. Using all available sources, we identified 657 visits by whaling vessels to the Mexican whaling grounds during the gray whale breeding and calving seasons between 1846 and 1874. We then estimated the total number of such visits in which the whalers engaged in gray whaling. We also read logbooks from a sample of known visits to estimate catch per visit and the rate at which struck animals were lost. This resulted in an overall estimate of 5,269 gray whales (SE = 223.4) landed by the ship-based fleet (including both American and foreign vessels) in the Mexican whaling grounds from 1846 to 1874. Our “best” estimate of the number of gray whales removed from the eastern North Pacific (i.e. catch plus hunting loss) lies somewhere between 6,124 and 8,021, depending on assumptions about survival of struck-but-lost whales. Our estimates can be compared to those by Henderson (1984), who estimated that 5,542–5,507 gray whales were secured and processed by ship-based whalers between 1846 and 1874; Scammon (1874), who believed the total kill over the same period (of eastern gray whales by all whalers in all areas) did not exceed 10,800; and Best (1987), who estimated the total landed catch of gray whales (eastern and western) by American ship-based whalers at 2,665 or 3,013 (method-dependent) from 1850 to 1879. Our new estimates are not high enough to resolve apparent inconsistencies between the catch history and estimates of historical abundance based on genetic variability. We suggest several lines of further research that may help resolve these inconsistencies.
Resumo:
The history of whaling in the Gulf of Maine was reviewed primarily to estimate removals of humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, especially during the 19th century. In the decades from 1800 to 1860, whaling effort consisted of a few localized, small-scale, shore-based enterprises on the coast of Maine and Cape Cod, Mass. Provincetown and Nantucket schooners occasionally conducted short cruises for humpback whales in New England waters. With the development of bomb-lance technology at mid century, the ease of killing humpback whales and fin whales, Balaenoptera physalus, increased. As a result, by the 1870’s there was considerable local interest in hunting rorquals (baleen whales in the family Balaenopteridae, which include the humpback and fin whales) in the Gulf of Maine. A few schooners were specially outfitted to take rorquals in the late 1870’s and 1880’s although their combined annual take was probably no more than a few tens of whales. Also in about 1880, fishing steamers began to be used to hunt whales in the Gulf of Maine. This steamer fishery grew to include about five vessels regularly engaged in whaling by the mid 1880’s but dwindled to only one vessel by the end of the decade. Fin whales constituted at least half of the catch, which exceeded 100 animals in some years. In the late 1880’s and thereafter, few whales were taken by whaling vessels in the Gulf of Maine.
Resumo:
This study, part of a broader investigation of the history of exploitation of right whales, Balaena glacialis, in the western North Atlantic, emphasizes U.S. shore whaling from Maine to Delaware (from lat. 45°N to 38°30'N) in the period 1620–1924. Our broader study of the entire catch history is intended to provide an empirical basis for assessing past distribution and abundance of this whale population. Shore whaling may have begun at Cape Cod, Mass., in the 1620’s or 1630’s; it was certainly underway there by 1668. Right whale catches in New England waters peaked before 1725, and shore whaling at Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard, and Nantucket continued to decline through the rest of the 18th century. Right whales continued to be taken opportunistically in Massachusetts, however, until the early 20th century. They were hunted in Narragansett Bay, R.I., as early as 1662, and desultory whaling continued in Rhode Island until at least 1828. Shore whaling in Connecticut may have begun in the middle 1600’s, continuing there until at least 1718. Long Island shore whaling spanned the period 1650–1924. From its Dutch origins in the 1630’s, a persistent shore whaling enterprise developed in Delaware Bay and along the New Jersey shore. Although this activity was most profi table in New Jersey in the early 1700’s, it continued there until at least the 1820’s. Whaling in all areas of the northeastern United States was seasonal, with most catches in the winter and spring. Historically, right whales appear to have been essentially absent from coastal waters south of Maine during the summer and autumn. Based on documented references to specific whale kills, about 750–950 right whales were taken between Maine and Delaware, from 1620 to 1924. Using production statistics in British customs records, the estimated total secured catch of right whales in New England, New York, and Pennsylvania between 1696 and 1734 was 3,839 whales based on oil and 2,049 based on baleen. After adjusting these totals for hunting loss (loss-rate correction factor = 1.2), we estimate that 4,607 (oil) or 2,459 (baleen) right whales were removed from the stock in this region during the 38-year period 1696–1734. A cumulative catch estimate of the stock’s size in 1724 is 1,100–1,200. Although recent evidence of occurrence and movements suggests that right whales continue to use their traditional migratory corridor along the U.S. east coast, the catch history indicates that this stock was much larger in the 1600’s and early 1700’s than it is today. Right whale hunting in the eastern United States ended by the early 1900’s, and the species has been protected throughout the North Atlantic since the mid 1930’s. Among the possible reasons for the relatively slow stock recovery are: the very small number of whales that survived the whaling era to become founders, a decline in environmental carrying capacity, and, especially in recent decades, mortality from ship strikes and entanglement in fishing gear.
Resumo:
Although selected aspects of the commercial fishery in the Virgin Islands have been documented since the early 1930's (Fiedler and Jarvis, 1932; Idyll and Randall, 1959; Hess, 1961; Swingle et al. 1970; Brownell, 1971; Brownell and Rainey, 1971; Sylvester and Dammann, 1972, and Olsen et al., 1978), fish corrals and their use have not been described. This account, based on personal observations made during 1985-86, summarizes commercial fishing methods in the Virgin Islands (U. S. and British), documents the use of fish corrals, and serves as an introduction to the methodologies of this harvesting technique. Interviews of commercial fishermen about how and when fish corrals are used provided information not available from direct observation. Local common names for gear type and fish species are shown in parentheses.
Resumo:
Skin disease occurs frequently in many cetacean species across the globe; methods to categorize lesions have relied on photo-identification (photo-id), stranding, and bycatch data. The current study used photo-id data from four sampling months during 2009 to estimate skin lesion prevalence and type occurring on bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) from three sites along the southeast United States coast [Sarasota Bay, FL (SSB); near Brunswick and Sapelo Island, GA (BSG); and near Charleston, SC (CHS)]. The prevalence of lesions was highest among BSG dolphins (P=0.587) and lowest in SSB (P=0.380), and the overall prevalence was significantly different among all sites (p<0.0167). Logistic regression modeling revealed a significant reduction in the odds of lesion occurrence for increasing water temperatures (OR=0.92; 95%CI:0.906-0.938) and a significantly increased odds of lesion occurrence for BSG dolphins (OR=1.39; 95%CI:1.203-1.614). Approximately one-third of the lesioned dolphins from each site presented with multiple types, and population differences in lesion type occurrence were observed (p<0.05). Lesions on stranded dolphins were sampled to determine the etiology of different lesion types, which included three visually distinct samples positive for herpesvirus. Although generally considered non-fatal, skin disease may be indicative of animal health or exposure to anthropogenic or environmental threats, and photo-id data provide an efficient and cost-effective approach to document the occurrence of skin lesions in free-ranging populations.
Resumo:
Sentinel species such as bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) can be impacted by large-scale mortality events due to exposure to marine algal toxins. In the Sarasota Bay region (Gulf of Mexico, Florida, USA), the bottlenose dolphin population is frequently exposed to harmful algal blooms (HABs) of Karenia brevis and the neurotoxic brevetoxins (PbTx; BTX) produced by this dinoflagellate. Live dolphins sampled during capture-release health assessments performed in this region tested positive for two HAB toxins; brevetoxin and domoic acid (DA). Over a ten-year study period (2000–2009) we have determined that bottlenose dolphins are exposed to brevetoxin and/or DA on a nearly annual basis (i.e., DA: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009; brevetoxin: 2000, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2009) with 36% of all animals testing positive for brevetoxin (n = 118) and 53% positive for DA (n = 83) with several individuals (14%) testing positive for both neurotoxins in at least one tissue/fluid. To date there have been no previously published reports of DA in southwestern Florida marine mammals, however the May 2008 health assessment coincided with a Pseudo-nitzschia pseudodelicatissima bloom that was the likely source of DA observed in seawater and live dolphin samples. Concurrently, both DA and brevetoxin were observed in common prey fish. Although no Pseudo-nitzschia bloom was identified the following year, DA was identified in seawater, fish, sediment, snails, and dolphins. DA concentrations in feces were positively correlated with hematologic parameters including an increase in total white blood cell (p = 0.001) and eosinophil (p<0.001) counts. Our findings demonstrate that dolphins within Sarasota Bay are commonly exposed to two algal toxins, and provide the impetus to further explore the potential long-term impacts on bottlenose dolphin health.
Resumo:
A competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (cELISA) was developed by using a whole-cell antigen from a marine Brucella sp. isolated from a harbor seal (Phoca vitulina). The assay was designed to screen sera from multiple marine mammal species for the presence of antibodies against marine-origin Brucella. Based on comparisons with culture-confirmed cases, specificity and sensitivity for cetacean samples tested were 73% and 100%, respectively. For pinniped samples, specificity and sensitivity values were 77% and 67%, respectively. Hawaiian monk seal (Monachus schauinslandi; n = 28) and bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus; n = 48) serum samples were tested, and the results were compared with several other assays designed to detect Brucella abortus antibodies. The comparison testing revealed the marine-origin cELISA to be more sensitive than the B. abortus tests by the detection of additional positive serum samples. The newly developed cELISA is an effective serologic method for detection of the presence of antibodies against marine-origin Brucella sp. in marine mammals.
Resumo:
Since 2001, biannual fish and habitat monitoring has been conducted for the shallow (> 30 m), colonized pavement and gorgonian dominated Buck Island Reef National Monument (BIRNM) St. Croix, USVI and adjacent waters. during October, 2005, widespread coral bleaching was observed within the ∼50 square-kilometer study area that was preceded by 10 wks of higher than average water temperatures (28.9–30.1 °C). Random transects (100 square meters) were conducted on linear reefs, patch reefs, bedrock, pavement, and scattered coral/rock habitats during October 2005, and April and October 2006, and species specific bleaching patterns were documented. During October 2005 approximately 51% of live coral cover was bleached. Nineteen of 23 coral species within 16 genera and two hydrocoral species exhibited signs of bleaching. Coral cover for Montastraea annularis and species of the genus Agaricia were the most affected, while other species exhibited variability in their susceptibility to bleaching. Bleaching was evident at all depths (1.5–28 m), was negatively correlated with depth, and positively correlated with habitat complexity. Bleaching was less prevalent at all depths and habitat types upon subsequent monitoring during April (15%) and October (3%) 2006. Four species and one genus did not exhibit signs of bleaching throughout the study period (Dendrogyra cylindrus, Eusmilia fastigata, Mussa angulosa, Mycetophyllia aliciae, Scolymia spp.).
Resumo:
Limited information currently exists on the recovery periods of bleached corals as well as the spatial extent, causative factors, and the overall impact of bleaching on coral reef ecosystems. During October, 2005, widespread coral bleaching was observed within Buck Island Reef National Monument (BUIS) St. Croix, USVI. The bleaching event was preceded by 10 weeks of higher than average water temperatures (28.9-30.1°C). Random transects (100 square meters) over hard bottom habitats (N=94) revealed that approximately 51% of live coral cover was bleached. Nineteen of 23 coral species within 16 genera and two hydrocoral species exhibited signs of bleaching; species-specific bleaching patterns were variable throughout the study area. Coral cover for Montastraea annularisand species of the genus Agariciawere the most affected, while other species exhibited variability to bleaching. Although a weak but significant negative relationship (r2=0.10, P=0.0220) was observed, bleaching was evident at all depths (1.5-28 m). Bleaching was spatially autocorrelated (P=0.001) and hot-spot analysis identified a cluster of high bleaching stations northeast of Buck Island. Bleaching was significantly reduced within all depth zones and habitat types upon subsequent monitoring during April (15%) and October (3%) 2006.
Resumo:
Coastal ecosystems and the services they provide are adversely affected by a wide variety of human activities. In particular, seagrass meadows are negatively affected by impacts accruing from the billion or more people who live within 50 km of them. Seagrass meadows provide important ecosystem services, including an estimated $1.9 trillion per year in the form of nutrient cycling; an order of magnitude enhancement of coral reef fish productivity; a habitat for thousands of fish, bird, and invertebrate species; and a major food source for endangered dugong, manatee, and green turtle. Although individual impacts from coastal development, degraded water quality, and climate change have been documented, there has been no quantitative global assessment of seagrass loss until now. Our comprehensive global assessment of 215 studies found that seagrasses have been disappearing at a rate of 110 square kilometers per year since 1980 and that 29% of the known areal extent has disappeared since seagrass areas were initially recorded in 1879. Furthermore, rates of decline have accelerated from a median of 0.9% per year before 1940 to 7% per year since 1990. Seagrass loss rates are comparable to those reported for mangroves, coral reefs, and tropical rainforests and place seagrass meadows among the most threatened ecosystems on earth.
Resumo:
Few studies have quantified the extent of nocturnal cross-habitat movements for fish, or the influence of habitat adjacencies on nutrient flows and trophodynamics. To investigate the patterns of nocturnal cross-boundary movements of fish and quantify trophic connectivity, fish were sampled at night with gillnets set along the boundaries between dominant habitat types (coral reef/seagrass and mangrove/seagrass) in southwestern Puerto Rico. Fish movement across adjacent boundary patches were equivalent at both coral reefs and mangroves. Prey biomass transfer was greater from seagrass to coral reefs (0.016 kg/km) and from mangroves to seagrass (0.006 kg/km) but not statistically significant, indicating a balance of flow between adjacent habitats. Pelagic species (jacks, sharks, rays) accounted for 37% of prey biomass transport at coral reef/seagrass and 46% at mangrove/seagrass while grunts and snappers accounted for 7% and 15%, respectively. This study indicated that coral reefs and mangroves serve as a feeding area for a wide range of multi-habitat fish species. Crabs were the most frequent prey item in fish leaving coral reefs while molluscs were observed slightly more frequently than crabs in fish entering coral reefs. For most prey types, biomass exported from mangroves was greater than biomass imported. The information on direction of fish movement together with analysis of prey data provided strong evidence of ecological linkages between distinct adjacent habitat types and highlighted the need for greater inclusion of a mosaic of multiple habitats when attempting to understand ecosystem function including the spatial transfer of energy across the seascape.
Resumo:
We present prevalence of Bartonella spp. for multiple cohorts of wild and captive cetaceans. One hundred and six cetaceans including 86 bottlenose dolphins (71 free-ranging, 14 captive in a facility with a dolphin experiencing debility of unknown origin, 1 stranded), 11 striped dolphins, 4 harbor porpoises, 3 Risso's dolphins, 1 dwarf sperm whale and 1 pygmy sperm whale (all stranded) were sampled. Whole blood (n = 95 live animals) and tissues (n = 15 freshly dead animals) were screened by PCR (n = 106 animals), PCR of enrichment cultures (n = 50 animals), and subcultures (n = 50 animals). Bartonella spp. were detected from 17 cetaceans, including 12 by direct extraction PCR of blood or tissues, 6 by PCR of enrichment cultures, and 4 by subculture isolation. Bartonella spp. were more commonly detected from the captive (6/14, 43%) than from free-ranging (2/71, 2.8%) bottlenose dolphins, and were commonly detected from the stranded animals (9/21, 43%; 3/11 striped dolphins, 3/4 harbor porpoises, 2/3 Risso's dolphins, 1/1 pygmy sperm whale, 0/1 dwarf sperm whale, 0/1 bottlenose dolphin). Sequencing identified a Bartonella spp. most similar to B. henselae San Antonio 2 in eight cases (4 bottlenose dolphins, 2 striped dolphins, 2 harbor porpoises), B. henselae Houston 1 in three cases (2 Risso's dolphins, 1 harbor porpoise), and untyped in six cases (4 bottlenose dolphins, 1 striped dolphin, 1 pygmy sperm whale). Although disease causation has not been established, Bartonella species were detected more commonly from cetaceans that were overtly debilitated or were cohabiting in captivity with a debilitated animal than from free-ranging animals. The detection of Bartonella spp. from cetaceans may be of pathophysiological concern.