The Gonads of the South American Dolphins, Inia geoffrensis, Pontoporia blainvillei, and Sotalia fluviatilis

The appearances of the gonads are described in males and females of 18 Inia geoffrensis, 11 Pontoporia blainvillei, and eight Sotalia fluviatilis from South America. Males of I. geoffrensis become sexually active at a length of about 228 centimeters, females at 175 to 180 centimeters. Length at birth is 76 to 80 centimeters; parturition occurs from about July to September in the upper Amazon. Males of P. blainvillei are still sexually immature at a length of 128.5 centimeters, females become sexually active at a length of 137 centimeters. Off Uruguay, pregnant females have fetuses 6 centimeters in length in February and 61 centimeters in October. Males of S. fluviatilis are sexually active at a length of 148 centimeters, females at 140 centimeters. Gonad weights and details of corpora lutea and albicantia are given. Corpora albicantia appear to persist as in other cetaceans. The ovaries of I. geoffrensis are relatively bulky with the corpora enclosed in the ovarian substance and not pedunculated as in P. blainvillei and S. fluviatilis in which the right ovary is poorly developed.

Distribution of North Pacific right whales (Eubalaena japonica) as shown by 19th and 20th century whaling catch and sighting records

North Pacific right whales (Eubalaena japonica) were extensively exploited in the 19th century, and their recovery was further retarded (severely so in the eastern population) by illegal Soviet catches in the 20th century, primarily in the 1960s. Monthly plots of right whale sightings and catches from both the 19th and 20th centuries are provided, using data summarized by Scarff (1991, from the whale charts of Matthew Fontaine Maury) and Brownell et al. (2001), respectively. Right whales had an extensive offshore distribution in the 19th century, and were common in areas (such as the Gulf of Alaska and Sea of Japan) where few or no right whales occur today. Seasonal movements of right whales are apparent in the data, although to some extent these reflect survey and whaling effort. That said, these seasonal movements indicate a general northward migration in spring from lower latitudes, and major concentrations above 40°N in summer. Sightings diminished and occurred further south in autumn, and few animals were recorded anywhere in winter. These north-south migratory movements support the hypothesis of two largely discrete populations of right whales in the eastern and western North Pacific. Overall, these analyses confirm that the size and range of the right whale population is now considerably diminished in the North Pacific relative to the situation during the peak period of whaling for this species in the 19th century. For management purposes, new surveys are urgently required to establish the present distribution of this species; existing data suggest that the Bering Sea, the Gulf of Alaska, the Okhotsk Sea, the Kuril Islands and the coast of Kamchatka are the areas with the greatest likelihood of finding right whales today.

The western gray whale: a review of past exploitation, current status and potential threats

Gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) occur along the eastern and western coastlines of the North Pacific as two geographically isolated populations and have traditionally been divided into the eastern (California-Chukchi) and western (Korean-Okhotsk) populations. Recent molecular comparisons confirm, based on differences in haplotypic frequencies, that these populations are genetically separated at the population-level. Both populations were commercially hunted, but only the eastern gray whale has returned to near pre-exploitation numbers. In contrast, the western population remains highly depleted, shows no apparent signs of recovery and its future survival remains uncertain. Research off Sakhalin Island, Russia between 1995 and 1999 has produced important new information on the present day conservation status of western gray whales and provided the basis for the World Conservation Union (IUCN) to list the population as 'Critically Endangered in 2000. The information presented here, in combination with potential impacts from anthropogenic threats throughout the range of this population, raises strong concerns about the recovery and continued survival of the western gray whale.

Baleen Whales: Conservation Issues and The Status Of The Most Endangered Populations

Most species of baleen whales were subject to intensive overexploitation by commercial whaling in this and previous centuries, and many populations were reduced to small fractions of their original sizes. Here, we review the status of baleen whale stocks, with an emphasis on those that are known or thought to be critically endangered. Current data suggest that, of the various threats potentially affecting baleen whales, only entanglement in fishing gear and ship strikes may be significant at the population level, and then only in those populations which are already at critically low abundance. The impact of some problems (vessel harassment, and commercial or aboriginal whaling) is at present probably minor. For others (contaminants, habitat degradation, disease), existing data either indicate no immediate cause for concern, or are insufficient to permit an assessment. While the prospect for many baleen whales appears good, there are notable exceptions; populations that are of greatest concern are those suffering from low abundance and associated problems, including (in some cases) anthropogenic mortality. These include: all Northern Right Whales Eubalaena glacialis, Bowhead Whales Balaena mysticetus of the Okhotsk Sea and various eastern Arctic populations, western Gray Whales Eschrichtius robustus, and probably many Blue Whale Balaenoptera musculus populations. We review the status of these populations and, where known, the issues potentially affecting their recovery. Although Humpback Whales Megaptera novaeangliae and Southern Right Whales Eubalaena australis were also heavily exploited by whaling, existing data indicate strong recovery in most studied populations of these species.

Past and present distribution, densities and movements of blue whales Balaenoptera musculus in the Southern Hemisphere and northern Indian Ocean

1. Blue whale locations in the Southern Hemisphere and northern Indian Ocean were obtained from catches (303 239), sightings (4383 records of ≥ 8058 whales), strandings (103), Discovery marks (2191) and recoveries (95), and acoustic recordings. 2. Sighting surveys included 7 480 450 km of effort plus 14 676 days with unmeasured effort. Groups usually consisted of solitary whales (65.2%) or pairs (24.6%); larger feeding aggregations of unassociated individuals were only rarely observed. Sighting rates (groups per 1000 km from many platform types) varied by four orders of magnitude and were lowest in the waters of Brazil, South Africa, the eastern tropical Pacific, Antarctica and South Georgia; higher in the Subantarctic and Peru; and highest around Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Chile, southern Australia and south of Madagascar. 3. Blue whales avoid the oligotrophic central gyres of the Indian, Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, but are more common where phytoplankton densities are high, and where there are dynamic oceanographic processes like upwelling and frontal meandering. 4. Compared with historical catches, the Antarctic (‘true’) subspecies is exceedingly rare and usually concentrated closer to the summer pack ice. In summer they are found throughout the Antarctic; in winter they migrate to southern Africa (although recent sightings there are rare) and to other northerly locations (based on acoustics), although some overwinter in the Antarctic. 5. Pygmy blue whales are found around the Indian Ocean and from southern Australia to New Zealand. At least four groupings are evident: northern Indian Ocean, from Madagascar to the Subantarctic, Indonesia to western and southern Australia, and from New Zealand northwards to the equator. Sighting rates are typically much higher than for Antarctic blue whales.

The whaling issue: Conservation, confusion, and casuistry

Morishita’s “multiple analysis”of the whaling issue [Morishita J. Multiple analysis of the whaling issue: Understanding the dispute by a matrix. Marine Policy 2006;30:802–8] is essentially a restatement of the Government of Japan’s whaling policy, which confuses the issue through selective use of data, unsubstantiated facts, and the vilification of opposing perspectives. Here, we deconstruct the major problems with Morishita’s article and provide an alternative view of the whaling dispute. For many people in this debate, the issue is not that some whales are not abundant, but that the whaling industry cannot be trusted to regulate itself or to honestly assess the status of potentially exploitable populations. This suspicion has its origin in Japan’s poor use of science, its often implausible stock assessments, its insistence that culling is an appropriate way to manage marine mammal populations, and its relatively recent falsification of whaling and fisheries catch data combined with a refusal to accept true transparency in catch and market monitoring. Japanese policy on whaling cannot be viewed in isolation, but is part of a larger framework involving a perceived right to secure unlimited access to global marine resources. Whaling is inextricably tied to the international fisheries agreements on which Japan is strongly dependent; thus, concessions made at the IWC would have potentially serious ramifications in other fora.

The Phylogenetic Relationships and Biogeography of True Porpoises (Mammalia: Phocoenidae) Based On Morphological Data

Prior studies of phylogenetic relationships among phocoenids based on morphology and molecular sequence data conflict and yield unresolved relationships among species. This study evaluates a comprehensive set of cranial, postcranial, and soft anatomical characters to infer interrelationships among extant species and several well-known fossil phocoenids, using two different methods to analyze polymorphic data: polymorphic coding and frequency step matrix. Our phylogenetic results confirmed phocoenid monophyly. The division of Phocoenidae into two subfamilies previously proposed was rejected, as well as the alliance of the two extinct genera Salumiphocaena and Piscolithax with Phocoena dioptrica and Phocoenoides dalli. Extinct phocoenids are basal to all extant species. We also examined the origin and distribution of porpoises within the context of this phylogenetic framework. Phocoenid phylogeny together with available geologic evidence suggests that the early history of phocoenids was centered in the North Pacific during the middle Miocene, with subsequent dispersal into the southern hemisphere in the middle Pliocene. A cooling period in the Pleistocene allowed dispersal of the southern ancestor of Phocoena sinusinto the North Pacific (Gulf of California).

Diets of Baird’s Beaked Whales, Berardius bairdii, in the Southern Sea Of Okhotsk and Off the Pacific Coast Of Honshu, Japan

Stomach contents were analyzed from 127 Baird’s beaked whales, Berardizls bairdii, taken in coastal waters of Japan. During late July-August of 1985- 1987, 1989, and 1991, 107 samples were collected from off the Pacific coast of Honshu. An additional 20 samples were collected from whales taken in the southern Sea of Okhotsk during late August-September of 1988 and 1989. Prey identification using fish otoliths and cephalopod beaks revealed the whales fed primarily on deep-water gadiform fishes and cephalopods in both regions. Prey species diversity and the percentage of cephalopods and fish differed between the two regions. Off the Pacific coast of Honshu the whales fed primarily on benthopelagic fishes (81.8%) and only 18.0% on cephalopods. Eight species of fish representing two families, the codlings (Moridae) and the grenadiers (Macrouridde), collectively made up 81.3% of the total. Thirty species of cephalopods representing 14 families made up 12.7%. In the southern Sea of Okhotsk, cephalopods accounted for 87.1% of stomach contents. The families Gonatidae and Cranchiidae were the predominant cephalopod prey, accounting for 86.7% of the diet. Gadiform fish accounted for only 12.9% of the diet. Longfin codling, Laernonma longipes, was the dominant fish prey in both regions. Depth distribution of the two commonly consumed fish off the Pacific coast of Honshu indicate the whales in this region fed primarily at depths ranging from 800 to 1,200 m.

Book Review of Cetacean Societies: Field Studies Of Whales And Dolphins Edited by I. Mann, R. C. Connor, P. L. Tyack & H. Whitehead

Studying the sociobiology and behavioral ecology of cetaceans is particularly challenging due in large part to the aquatic environment in which they live. Nevertheless, many of the obstacles traditionally associated with data gathering on tree-ranging whales, dolphins and porpoises are rapidly being overcome, and are now far less formidable. During the past several decades, marine mammal scientists equipped with innovative research methods and new technologies have taken field-based behavioral studies to a new level of sophistication. In some cases, as is true for bottlenose dolphins, killer whales, sperm whales and humpback whales, modern research paradigms in the marine environment are comparable to present-day studies of terrestrial mammal social systems. Cetacean Society stands testament to the relatively recent advances in marine mammal science, and to those scientists, past and present, whose diligence has been instrumental in shaping the discipline.

Ringed and bearded seal densities in the eastern Chukchi Sea, 1999–2000

Aerial surveys were conducted in 1999 and 2000 to estimate the densities of ringed (Phoca hispida) and bearded (Erignathus barbatus) seals in the eastern Chukchi Sea. Survey lines were focused mainly on the coastal zone within 37 km of the shoreline, with additional lines flown 148–185 km offshore to assess how densities of seals changed as a function of distance from shore. Satellite-linked time-depth recorders were attached to ringed seals in both years to evaluate the time spent basking on the ice surface. Haulout patterns indicated that ringed seals transitioned to basking behavior in late May and early June, and that the largest proportion of seals (60–68%) was hauled out between 0830 and 1530 local solar time. Ringed seals were relatively common in nearshore fast ice and pack ice, with lower densities in offshore pack ice. The average density of ringed seals was 1.91 seals km-2 in 1999 (range 0.37– 16.32) and 1.62 seals km-2 in 2000 (range 0.42–19.4), with the highest densities of ringed seals found in coastal waters south of Kivalina and near Kotzebue Sound. The estimated abundance of ringed seals for the entire study area was similar in 1999 (252,488 seals, SE=47,204) and 2000 (208,857 seals, SE=25,502). Bearded seals were generally more common in offshore pack ice, with the exception of high bearded seal numbers observed near the shore south of Kivalina. Bearded seal densities were not adjusted for haulout behavior, and therefore, abundance was not estimated. Unadjusted average bearded seal density was 0.07 seals km-2 in 1999 (range 0.011–0.393) and 0.14 seals km-2 in 2000 (range 0.009– 0.652). Levels of primary productivity, benthic biomass, and fast ice distribution may influence the distributions of ringed and bearded seals in the Chukchi Sea. Information on movement and haulout behavior of ringed and bearded seals would be very useful for designing future surveys.

Provisioning Strategies of Antarctic Fur Seals and Chinstrap Penguins Produce Different Responses to Distribution of Common Prey and Habitat

Central-place foragers that must return to a breeding site to deliver food to offspring are faced with trade-offs between prey patch quality and distance from the colony. Among colonial animals, pinnipeds and seabirds may have different provisioning strategies, due to differences in their ability to travel and store energy. We compared the foraging areas of lactating Antarctic fur seals and chinstrap penguins breeding at Seal Island, Antarctica, to investigate whether they responded differently to the distribution of their prey (Antarctic krill and myctophid fish) and spatial heterogeneity in their habitat. Dense krill concentrations occurred in the shelf region near the colony. However, only brooding penguins, which are expected to be time-minimizers because they must return frequently with whole food for their chicks, foraged mainly in this proximal shelf region. Lactating fur seals and incubating penguins, which can make longer trips to increase energy gain per trip, and so are expected to be energy-maximizers, foraged in the more distant (>20 km from the island) slope and oceanic regions. The shelf region was characterized by more abundant, but lower-energy-content immature krill, whereas the slope and oceanic regions had less abundant but higher-energy-content gravid krill, as well as high-energy-content myctophids. Furthermore, krill in the shelf region undertook diurnal vertical migration, whereas those in the slope and oceanic regions stayed near the surface throughout the day, which may enhance the capture rate for visual predators. Therefore, we sug- gest that the energy-maximizers foraged in distant, but potentially more profitable feeding regions, while the time-minimizers foraged in closer, but potentially less profitable regions. Thus, time and energy constraints derived from different provisioning strategies may result in sympatric colonial predator species using different foraging areas, and as a result, some central-place foragers use sub- optimal foraging habitats, in terms of the quality or quantity of available prey.

Hunting and social behaviour of leopard seals (Hydrurga leptonyx) at Seal Island, South Shetland Islands, Antarctica

The hunting behavior of leopard seals Hydrurga leptonyx was monitored opportunistically at Seal Island, South Shetland Islands, during the austral summers from 1986/87 to 1994/95. Leopard seals used several methods to catch Antarctic fur seal pups Arctocephalus gazella and chinstrap penguins Pygoscelis antarctica, and individuals showed different hunting styles and hunting success. One to two leopard seals per year were responsible for an average of 60% of observed captures of fur seal pups. Leopard seals preyed on penguins throughout the summer, but preyed on fur seal pups only between late December and mid-February. Hunting behavior differed significantly between different locations on the island; fur seals were hunted only at one colony, and penguins were hunted in several areas. The relative abundance of prey types, size of prey in relation to predator, and specialization of individual leopard seals to hunt fur seal prey probably influence individual prey preferences among leopard seals. On five occasions, two leopard seals were seen together on Seal Island. Possible interpretations of the relationship between the interacting leopard seals included a mother-offspring relationship, a consorting male-female pair, and an adult leopard seal followed by an unrelated juvenile. In two incidents at Seal Island, two leopard seals were observed interacting while hunting: one seal captured fur seal pups and appeared to release them to the other seal. Observations of leopard seals interacting during hunting sessions were difficult to confirm as co-operative hunting, but they strongly implied that the two seals were not agonistic toward one another. The hunting success of individual leopard seals pursuing penguins or fur seals is probably high enough for co-operative hunting not to become a common hunting strategy; however, it may occur infrequently when it increases the hunting productivity of the seals.

Estimating abundance of killer whales in the nearshore waters of the Gulf of Alaska and Aleutian Islands using line-transect sampling

Killer whale (Orcinus orca Linnaeus, 1758) abundance in the North Pacific is known only for a few populations for which extensive longitudinal data are available, with little quantitative data from more remote regions. Line-transect ship surveys were conducted in July and August of 2001–2003 in coastal waters of the western Gulf of Alaska and the Aleutian Islands. Conventional and Multiple Covariate Distance Sampling methods were used to estimate the abundance of different killer whale ecotypes, which were distinguished based upon morphological and genetic data. Abundance was calculated separately for two data sets that differed in the method by which killer whale group size data were obtained. Initial group size (IGS) data corresponded to estimates of group size at the time of first sighting, and post-encounter group size (PEGS) corresponded to estimates made after closely approaching sighted groups.

Social cohesion among kin, gene flow without dispersal and the evolution of population genetic structure in the killer whale (Orcinus orca)

In social species, breeding system and gregarious behavior are key factors influencing the evolution of large-scale population genetic structure. The killer whale is a highly social apex predator showing genetic differentiation in sympatry between populations of foraging specialists (ecotypes), and low levels of genetic diversity overall. Our comparative assessments of kinship, parentage and dispersal reveal high levels of kinship within local populations and ongoing male-mediated gene flow among them, including among ecotypes that are maximally divergent within the mtDNA phylogeny. Dispersal from natal populations was rare, implying that gene flow occurs without dispersal, as a result of reproduction during temporary interactions. Discordance between nuclear and mitochondrial phylogenies was consistent with earlier studies suggesting a stochastic basis for the magnitude of mtDNA differentiation between matrilines. Taken together our results show how the killer whale breeding system, coupled with social, dispersal and foraging behaviour, contributes to the evolution of population genetic structure.

Cetaceans of Southeast Alaska: Distribution and Seasonal Occurrence

Aim To assess the distribution, group size, seasonal occurrence and annual trends of cetaceans. Location The study area included all major inland waters of Southeast Alaska. Methods Between 1991 and 2007, cetacean surveys were conducted by observers who kept a constant watch when the vessel was underway and recorded all cetaceans encountered. For each species, we examined distributional patterns, group size, seasonal occurrence and annual trends. Analysis of variance (anova F) was used to test for differences in group sizes between multiple means, and Student’s t-test was used to detect differences between pairwise means. Cetacean seasonal occurrence and annual trends were investigated using a generalized linear model framework. Results Humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) were seen throughout the region, with numbers lowest in spring and highest in the fall. Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) and minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) distributions were more restricted than that reported for humpback whales, and the low number of sightings precluded evaluating seasonal trends. Three killer whale (Orcinus orca) eco-types were documented with distributions occurring throughout inland waters. Seasonal patterns were not detected or could not be evaluated for resident and offshore killer whales, respectively; however, the transient eco-type was more abundant in the summer. Dall’s porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli) were distributed throughout the region, with more sightings in spring and summer than in fall. Harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) distribution was clumped, with concentrations occurring in the Icy Strait/Glacier Bay and Wrangell areas and with no evidence of seasonality. Pacific white-sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens) were observed only occasionally, with more sightings in the spring. For most species, group size varied on both an annual and seasonal basis. Main conclusions Seven cetacean species occupy the inland waters of Southeast Alaska, with distribution, group size, seasonal occurrence and annual trends varying by species. Future studies that compare spatial and temporal patterns with other features (e.g. oceanography, prey resources) may help in identifying the key factors that support the high density and biodiversity of cetaceans found in this region. An increased understanding of the region’s marine ecology is an essential step towards ensuring the long-term conservation of cetaceans in Southeast Alaska.