scholarly journals Using active acoustics to compare lunar effects on predator–prey behavior in two marine mammal species

2009 ◽  
Vol 395 ◽  
pp. 119-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
KJ Benoit-Bird ◽  
AD Dahood ◽  
B Würsig
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Shiu ◽  
K. J. Palmer ◽  
Marie A. Roch ◽  
Erica Fleishman ◽  
Xiaobai Liu ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 48 (5) ◽  
pp. 40-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark F. Baumgartner ◽  
Kathleen M. Stafford ◽  
Peter Winsor ◽  
Hank Statscewich ◽  
David M. Fratantoni

AbstractPersistently poor weather in the Arctic makes traditional marine mammal research from aircraft and ships difficult, yet collecting information on marine mammal distribution and habitat utilization is vital for understanding the impact of climate change on Arctic ecosystems. Moreover, as industrial use of the Arctic increases with the expansion of the open-water summer season, there is an urgent need to monitor the effects of noise from oil and gas exploration and commercial shipping on marine mammals. During September 2013, we deployed a single Slocum glider equipped with a digital acoustic monitoring (DMON) instrument to record and process in situ low-frequency (<5 kHz) audio to characterize marine mammal occurrence and habitat as well as ambient noise in the Chukchi Sea off the northwest coast of Alaska, USA. The DMON was programmed with the low-frequency detection and classification system (LFDCS) to autonomously detect and classify sounds of a variety of Arctic and sub-Arctic marine mammal species. The DMON/LFDCS reported regularly in near real time via Iridium satellite detailed detection data, summary classification information, and spectra of background noise. The spatial distributions of bowhead whale, bearded seal, and walrus call rates were correlated with surface salinity measured by the glider. Bowhead whale and walrus call rates were strongly associated with a warm and salty water mass of Bering Sea origin. With a passive acoustic capability that allows both archival recording and near real-time reporting, we envision ocean gliders will become a standard tool for marine mammal and ocean noise research and monitoring in the Arctic.


2018 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. 133-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy K Jo ◽  
Albert DME Osterhaus ◽  
Martin Ludlow
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (5) ◽  
pp. 1193-1206
Author(s):  
Stephanie K. Adamczak ◽  
D. Ann Pabst ◽  
William A. McLellan ◽  
Lesley H. Thorne

PLoS ONE ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. e43130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tero Harkonen ◽  
Karin C. Harding ◽  
Susan Wilson ◽  
Mirgaliy Baimukanov ◽  
Lilia Dmitrieva ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simona Sanvito ◽  
Alejandro Dueñes Meza ◽  
Yolanda Schramm ◽  
Pedro Cruz Hernández ◽  
Yareli Esquer Garrigos ◽  
...  

ZooKeys ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 759 ◽  
pp. 81-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
James W. Hody ◽  
Roland Kays

The geographic distribution of coyotes (Canislatrans) has dramatically expanded since 1900, spreading across much of North America in a period when most other mammal species have been declining. Although this considerable expansion has been well documented at the state/provincial scale, continent-wide descriptions of coyote spread have portrayed conflicting distributions for coyotes prior to the 1900s, with popularly referenced anecdotal accounts showing them restricted to the great plains, and more obscure, but data-rich accounts suggesting they ranged across the arid west. To provide a scientifically credible map of the coyote’s historical range (10,000–300 BP) and describe their range expansion from 1900 to 2016, we synthesized archaeological and fossil records, museum specimens, peer-reviewed reports, and records from wildlife management agencies. Museum specimens confirm that coyotes have been present in the arid west and California throughout the Holocene, well before European colonization. Their range in the late 1800s was undistinguishable from earlier periods, and matched the distribution of non-forest habitat in the region. Coyote expansion began around 1900 as they moved north into taiga forests, east into deciduous forests, west into costal temperate rain forests, and south into tropical rainforests. Forest fragmentation and the extirpation of larger predators probably enabled these expansions. In addition, hybridization with wolves (C.lupus, C.lycaon, and/or C.rufus) and/or domestic dogs has been documented in the east, and suspected in the south. Our detailed account of the original range of coyotes and their subsequent expansion provides the core description of a large scale ecological experiment that can help us better understand the predator-prey interactions, as well as evolution through hybridization.


PeerJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. e11689
Author(s):  
Wannapimol Kriangwanich ◽  
Kittisak Buddhachat ◽  
Anocha Poommouang ◽  
Siriwadee Chomdej ◽  
Chatchote Thitaram ◽  
...  

Currently, species identification of stranded marine mammals mostly relies on morphological features, which has inherent challenges. The use of genetic information for marine mammal species identification remains limited, therefore, new approaches that can contribute to a better monitoring of stranded species are needed. In that context, the ISSR-HRM method we have proposed offers a new approach for marine mammal species identification. Consequently, new approaches need to be developed to identify individuals at the species level. Eight primers of the ISSR markers were chosen for HRM analysis resulting in ranges of accuracy of 56.78–75.50% and 52.14–75.93% in terms of precision, while a degree of sensitivity of more than 80% was recorded when each single primer was used. The ISSR-HRM primer combinations revealed a success rate of 100% in terms of discrimination for all marine mammals included in this study. Furthermore, ISSR-HRM analysis was successfully employed in determining marine mammal discrimination among varying marine mammal species. Thus, ISSR-HRM analysis could serve as an effective alternative tool in the species identification process. This option would offer researchers a heightened level of convenience in terms of its performance and success rate. It would also offer field practice to veterinarians, biologists and other field-related people a greater degree of ease with which they could interpret results when effectively classifying stranded marine mammals. However, further studies with more samples and with a broader geographical scope will be required involving distinct populations to account for the high degree of intraspecific variability in cetaceans and to demonstrate the range of applications of this approach.


2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (03) ◽  
pp. 641-679
Author(s):  
ZHIHUI MA ◽  
SHUFAN WANG ◽  
HAOPENG TANG

As the two main behaviors of prey populations in ecological systems, the partially hiding behavior (PHB) and the completely hiding behavior (CHB) play a significant role in determining the dynamics of predator–prey models. This work examines to the dynamical consequences of predator–prey systems with the PHB and the CHB. Previous research has independently studied the two behaviors, and the general conclusions are that the two behaviors can have positive and/or negative impacts on the considered population models. However, to our knowledge, no study has combined and compared the two behaviors in studying the dynamical consequences of predation interactions. Motivated by this, we investigated the dynamical consequences induced by the PHB and the CHB. From a mathematical point of view, the dynamical behaviors are studied and the corresponding sufficient conditions are given. Our findings are general and some published models are special cases of ours. From an ecological point of view, we find that the size of the ecological regions is mainly determined by the two behaviors, and which one is ecologically beneficial for the health coexistence of the interacting populations are primarily determined by the functional response and the attack coefficient of predators. Moreover, we conclude that the evolutionary and optimal choices of prey behavior (PHB or CHB) depend on the predators attack coefficient (large or small attack coefficient) and the resource level (abundant or pool resource level).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document