scholarly journals Who eats whom in the Barents Sea?

2000 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bjarte Bogstad ◽  
Tore Haug ◽  
Sigbjørn Mehl
Keyword(s):  
Gadus Morhua ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Natural Mortality ◽  
Balaenoptera Acutorostrata ◽  
Fish Prey ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
Phoca Groenlandica ◽  
The Barents Sea ◽  
Minke Whales ◽  
Important Predator

An overview of the estimates of consumption by predators on the main fish stocks in the Barents Sea is given. The main predators are cod (Gadus morhua), harp seal (Phoca groenlandica) and minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata). The results indicate that cod is the most important predator, consuming about as much food annually as harp seals and minke whales combined. The consumption estimates, together with data on the amount of fish removed by commercial fisheries, are compared to estimates of the abundance and removal through natural mortality of the various species of fish prey. The consistency between these estimates is discussed. The natural mortality values for cod and haddock used in assessments are found to be reasonably consistent with the consumption estimates. The consumption of capelin is found to be higher than what is available for predation in years of low capelin abundance, while in years of high herring abundance the consumption of herring does not explain all the mortality. The way in which the consumption estimates are and can be utilised in theassessment and management of fish stocks in the Barents Sea using multispecies models and approaches is described.

scholarly journals Marine mammals' influence on ecosystem processes affecting fisheries in the Barents Sea is trivial

2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 204-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J Corkeron
Keyword(s):  
Marine Mammal ◽  
Marine Mammals ◽  
Gadus Morhua ◽  
Fishery Management ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Primary Component ◽  
Clupea Harengus ◽  
Balaenoptera Acutorostrata ◽  
The Barents Sea

Some interpretations of ecosystem-based fishery management include culling marine mammals as an integral component. The current Norwegian policy on marine mammal management is one example. Scientific support for this policy includes the Scenario Barents Sea (SBS) models. These modelled interactions between cod, Gadus morhua , herring, Clupea harengus , capelin, Mallotus villosus and northern minke whales, Balaenoptera acutorostrata . Adding harp seals Phoca groenlandica into this top-down modelling approach resulted in unrealistic model outputs. Another set of models of the Barents Sea fish–fisheries system focused on interactions within and between the three fish populations, fisheries and climate. These model key processes of the system successfully. Continuing calls to support the SBS models despite their failure suggest a belief that marine mammal predation must be a problem for fisheries. The best available scientific evidence provides no justification for marine mammal culls as a primary component of an ecosystem-based approach to managing the fisheries of the Barents Sea.

scholarly journals Direct and indirect effects of minke whale abundance on cod and herring fisheries: A scenario experiment for the Greater Barents Sea

2000 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tore Schweder ◽  
Gro S Hagen ◽  
Einar Hatlebakk
Keyword(s):  
Gadus Morhua ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Minke Whale ◽  
Clupea Harengus ◽  
Prey Abundance ◽  
Balaenoptera Acutorostrata ◽  
Time Step ◽  
Minke Whales ◽  
Spawning Stock ◽  
Capelin Mallotus Villosus

To study the pattern of interaction between minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) abundance and the main fisheries in the Greater Barents Sea, a simulation experiment was carried out. The population model involves 4 species interconnected in a food web: cod (Gadus morhua), capelin (Mallotus villosus), herring (Clupea harengus) and minke whales. Minke whales are preying on cod, capelin andherring; cod are preying on (young) cod, capelin and herring; herring in the Barents Sea are preying on capelin; while capelin is a bottom prey in the model. The consumption function for minke whales is non-linear in available prey abundance, and is estimated from stomach content data and prey abundance data. The model is dynamic, with a time step of one month, and there are two areas: the BarentsSea and the Norwegian Sea. Minke whale abundances are kept on fixed levels, while recruitment in fish is stochastic.Cod and herring fisheries are managed by quotas targeting fixed fishing mortalities, while capelin is managed with a view to allow the cod to have enough food and leaving a sufficient spawning stock of capelin. The model is simulated over a period of 100 years for a number of fixed levels of minke whaleabundance, and simulated catches of cod, herring and capelin are recorded.The experiment showed interactions between whale abundance and fish catches to be mainly linear. For cod catches, both the direct effect of whales consuming cod, and the indirect effect due to whales competing with cod for food and otherwise altering the ecosystem, are linear and of equal importance. The net effect on the herring fishery is of the same magnitude as the net effect on the cod fishery, witheach extra whale reducing the catches of both species by some 5 tonnes. These conclusions are conditional on the model and its parameterisation.

An ecosystem element added to the assessment of Norwegian spring-spawning herring: implementing predation by minke whales

2005 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
pp. 285-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sigurd Tjelmeland ◽  
Ulf Lindstrøm
Keyword(s):  
Working Group ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Natural Mortality ◽  
Bioenergetic Model ◽  
The Barents Sea ◽  
Minke Whales ◽  
Predation Mortality ◽  
Annual Consumption ◽  
Size Estimates

Abstract Predation by minke whales is incorporated in the assessment model of the Norwegian spring-spawning herring stock (SeaStar) used by the ICES Working Group. Three assessment scenarios are performed and evaluated: (1) Default historic assessment where the natural mortality (M) is fixed, (2) assessment where natural mortality is estimated both for adult and juvenile herring, (3) assessment where consumption by minke whales is modelled and the predation and residual natural mortalities are estimated. The annual consumption of juvenile herring in the Barents Sea is estimated exogenously using diet data and a bioenergetic model. The estimated consumption is included in the objective function and the parameters determining the modelled consumption are estimated together with other free parameters of the model in a single operation. The estimated total natural mortality of juvenile herring is lower than the value assumed by the working group (M = 0.9) when either minke whales are included in the model (M = 0.49) or the parameter is estimated directly (M = 0.48). Assessment 3 generates 19% and 34% lower adult and juvenile stock sizes, respectively, than assessment 1, whereas assessments 2 and 3 generate relatively similar stock size estimates. The predation mortality constituted 45% and 10% of the total natural mortality of adult (M = 0.15) and juvenile herring (M = 0.49), respectively.

Prey partitioning between cod (Gadus morhua) and minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) in the Barents Sea

2006 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steffen P. Sivertsen ◽  
Torstein Pedersen ◽  
Ulf Lindstrøm ◽  
Tore Haug
Keyword(s):  
Gadus Morhua ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Minke Whale ◽  
Balaenoptera Acutorostrata ◽  
The Barents Sea

Corneal anatomy of marine mammals

1993 ◽  
Vol 71 (11) ◽  
pp. 2282-2290 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. T. Pardue ◽  
J. G. Sivak ◽  
K. M. Kovacs
Keyword(s):  
Marine Mammals ◽  
Equatorial Region ◽  
Balaenoptera Acutorostrata ◽  
Marine Habitat ◽  
Corneal Surface ◽  
Balaenoptera Physalus ◽  
Phoca Groenlandica ◽  
Minke Whales ◽  
Transmission Electron ◽  
Ultrathin Sections

The corneal anatomy of fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus), minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata), harp seals (Phoca groenlandica), ringed seals (Phoca hispida), and bearded seals (Eriganthus barbatus) was examined to determine if marine mammals have evolved specialized corneas for life in a marine habitat. One to seven eyes of each species were analyzed: paraffin sections stained with haematoxylin and eosin for light microscopy; and ultrathin sections for transmission electron microscopy. All corneas contain the five typical mammalian layers: epithelium, Bowman's layer, stroma, Descemet's membrane, and endothelium. The corneas of these marine mammals are thicker than human corneas because of a thicker stromal layer. The other layers are thinner than those found in humans, except for the epithelial layer in the bearded seal and the cetaceans where it may provide extra protection for the eye during feeding behaviour. The epithelial cells in all corneas studied have an abundance of tonofilaments, which may strengthen the cells and distribute force across the corneal surface. No special organization of collagen fibrils was found in the stroma that would offer protection from ultraviolet radiation or glare for pinnipeds when on ice. The thickness of the sclera in the cetaceans may serve to hold the inner globe of the eye in an elliptical shape, while the thinning of the sclera in the equatorial region in pinnipeds may flatten the eye in air to reduce aerial myopia.

scholarly journals Estimated food consumption of minke whales Balaenoptera acutorostrata in Northeast Atlantic waters in 1992-1995

2000 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars P Folkow ◽  
Tore Haug ◽  
Kjell T Nilssen ◽  
Erling S Nordøy
Keyword(s):  
Barents Sea ◽  
Regional Distribution ◽  
Clupea Harengus ◽  
Mortality Factor ◽  
Point Estimate ◽  
Melanogrammus Aeglefinus ◽  
Balaenoptera Acutorostrata ◽  
Northeast Atlantic ◽  
Minke Whales ◽  
Prey Items

Data on energy requirements, diet composition, and stock size were combined to estimate the consumption of various prey species by minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) in Northeast Atlantic waters. In the period 1992-1995, the stock of 85,000 minke whales appeared to have consumed more than 1.8 million tonnes of prey per year in coastal waters off northern Norway, in the Barents Sea and around Spitsbergen during an assumed 6 month stay between mid-April and mid-October.Uncertainties in stock estimates suggest a 95% confidence range of 1.4 - 2.1 million tonnes. The point estimate was composed of 602,000 tonnes of krill Thysanoessa spp., 633,000 tonnes of herring Clupea harengus, 142,000 tonnes of capelin Mallotus villosus, 256,000 tonnes of cod Gadus morhua, 128,000 tonnes of haddock Melanogrammus aeglefinus and 54,500 tonnes of other fish species, including saithe Pollaehius virens and sand eel Ammodytes sp. Consumption of various prey items by minke whales may represent an important mortality factor for some of the species. For example, the estimated annual consumption of herring corresponds to about 70% of the herring fisheries in the Northeast Atlantic in 1995. Minke whale diets are subject to year-to-year variations due to changes in the resource base in different feeding areas. Thus, the regional distribution of consumption of different prey items is highly dynamic.

Do abiotic mechanisms determine interannual variability in length-at-age of juvenile Arcto-Norwegian cod?

2002 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geir Ottersen ◽  
Kristin Helle ◽  
Bjarte Bogstad
Keyword(s):  
Growth Rates ◽  
Gadus Morhua ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Water Masses ◽  
Inverse Relation ◽  
Lower Growth ◽  
Density Dependent ◽  
The Barents Sea ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Dependent Growth

For the large Arcto-Norwegian stock of cod (Gadus morhua L.) in the Barents Sea, year-to-year variability in growth is well documented. Here three hypotheses for the observed inverse relation between abundance and the mean length-at-age of juveniles (ages 1–4) are suggested and evaluated. Based on comprehensive data, we conclude that year-to-year differences in length-at-age are mainly determined by density-independent mechanisms during the pelagic first half year of the fishes' life. Enhanced inflow from the southwest leads to an abundant cohort at the 0-group stage being distributed farther east into colder water masses, causing lower postsettlement growth rates. We can not reject density-dependent growth effects related to variability in food rations, but our data do not suggest this to be the main mechanism. Another hypothesis suggests that lower growth rates during periods of high abundance are a result of density-dependent mechanisms causing the geographic range of juveniles to extend eastwards into colder water masses. This is rejected mainly because year-to-year differences in mean length are established by age 2, which is too early for movements over large distances.

scholarly journals Comparison of the biophysical and trophic characteristics of the Bering and Barents Seas

2005 ◽  
Vol 62 (7) ◽  
pp. 1245-1255 ◽  
Author(s):  
George L. Hunt ◽  
Bernard A. Megrey
Keyword(s):  
Bering Sea ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Single Species ◽  
Atlantic Water ◽  
Walleye Pollock ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
Eastern Bering Sea ◽  
The Barents Sea ◽  
Shelf Seas ◽  
Bottom Waters

Abstract The eastern Bering Sea and the Barents Sea share a number of common biophysical characteristics. For example, both are seasonally ice-covered, high-latitude, shelf seas, dependent on advection for heat and for replenishment of nutrients on their shelves, and with ecosystems dominated by a single species of gadoid fish. At the same time, they differ in important respects. In the Barents Sea, advection of Atlantic Water is important for zooplankton vital to the Barents Sea productivity. Advection of zooplankton is not as important for the ecosystems of the southeastern Bering Sea, where high levels of diatom production can support production of small, neritic zooplankton. In the Barents Sea, cod are the dominant gadoid, and juvenile and older fish depend on capelin and other forage fish to repackage the energy available in copepods. In contrast, the dominant fish in the eastern Bering Sea is the walleye pollock, juveniles and adults of which consume zooplankton directly. The southeastern Bering Sea supports considerably larger fish stocks than the Barents. In part, this may reflect the greater depth of much of the Barents Sea compared with the shallow shelf of the southeastern Bering. However, walleye pollock is estimated to occupy a trophic level of 3.3 as compared to 4.3 for Barents Sea cod. This difference alone could have a major impact on the abilities of these seas to support a large biomass of gadoids. In both seas, climate-forced variability in advection and sea-ice cover can potentially have major effects on the productivity of these Subarctic seas. In the Bering Sea, the size and location of pools of cold bottom waters on the shelf may influence the likelihood of predation of juvenile pollock.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document