Ocean life - This Side Of paradisethissideofparadise.nl/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/ocean-life.pdf · Steller [sSea Cow Hydrodamalis gigas, weighing ± 10 tons or more, ate mostly

Ocean life

Kees Camphuysen Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Texel

Theatrum orbis terrarum, Abraham Ortelius, 1590

Giant oarfish Regalecus glesne

Steller’s Sea Cow Hydrodamalis gigas, weighing ± 10 tons or more, ate mostly kelp. became known to science in 1741, inhabited kelp beds of the Commander Islands,

W Bering Sea.

Its meat was considered “as good as the best cut beef”, which led to its extermination at the hands of whalers.

Species was slaughtered to extinction soon after its discovery, the last known live individual was taken in

1768.

Steller’s Sea Cow Hydrodamalis gigas,

1741-1768

• discovered 1741, Bering Sea

• no pelt, no tusks, non-aggressive

• very tasty meat (beef), easy to ‘harvest’

• extinct 1768

Castro & Huber 1997. Marine Biology. WC Brown Publishers

© CJ Camphuysen Northern Gannet

© CJ Camphuysen Sooty Shearwater

8

storm-petrels 32cm span, 30g mass (Halocyptena microsoma)

White-faced Storm-petrel

Blue Whale 33m length max, 190,000kg (Balaenoptera musculus)

Magnificient Frigatebird

Gentoo Penguin

© CJ Camphuysen Southern Elephant Seal

© CJ Camphuysen Great Black-backed Gulls

Contents

• habitats & resources

• scale & transitions

• foraging techniques

• foraging interactions

towards a deeperunderstanding of distribution patterns of marine apex predators

charismatic megafauna

10m high North Sea waves

Marine resources

Phytoplankton

Benthic invertebrates

Zooplankton

Small fish

Squids

Predatory fish

whales

dolphins

seals

seabirds

http://www.arcodiv.org/watercolumn/pteropod/Clione_limacina-best_750x750.jpg

http://www.arcodiv.org/watercolumn/pteropod/Clione_limacina-best_750x750.jpg

Trophic level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1

2 3

1

2

piscivorous fish and dolphins (salmon, sharks, dolphins)

4

8

5

4

planktivorous whales (baleen whales)

3

19

5-6 64-5Food webs

Open oceans

Continental shelves

Upwelling regions

Bathypelagic

21

The basic ecological divisions of the ocean

BENTHIC ENVIRONMENTS(benthos)

PELAGIC ENVIRONMENTS(plankton & nekton)

0m

200m

1000m

2-3000m

4000m

6000m

10000m

high waterlow water

littoral sublittoralbathyal

abyssal

hadal

Neritic Oceanic

Hadalpelagic

Epipelagic

Mesopelagic

Abyssopelagic

Shelfbreak

supralittoral

Glossary:plankton = passive against currentsnekton = active against currentsbenthos = sessile

22

Strictly areal

Surface feeders

Shallow divers

Deep divers

no water contact

not underwater or shallow

plunging, <1.5m

deepplunging, pursuit

plunging, pursuit diving

<25m

pursuitplunging,

pursuit diving<250m

pursuit diving<500m

1600m

1775m

2130m2250m

3000m

Shelf break

Dive depth

23


0m

200m

1000m

2-3000m

4000m

6000m


abyssal

hadal

Neritic Oceanic

Hadalpelagic

Epipelagic

Mesopelagic

Bathypelagic

Abyssopelagic

Shelfbreak

shallow water species

shelf & oceanic ecotypes

shelf break assembly

deep diving, oceanic taxa

24


0m

200m

1000m

2-3000m

4000m

6000m


abyssal

hadal

Neritic Oceanic

Hadalpelagic

Epipelagic

Mesopelagic

Bathypelagic

Abyssopelagic

Shelfbreak

shallowwater assembly

deep diving, shelf & shelfbreakbreak assembly

surface feeding, oceanic assembly

25

0m

200m

1000m

2-3000m

Neritic OceanicEpipelagic

Mesopelagic

Bathypelagic

Cetaceans & seabirds utilise resources within the water column up to a depth of c. 3000m.

Oceanic seabirds, however, rarely dive particularly deep

27

Data visualization from MODIS on NASA’s AQUA spacecraft: a measure of global chlorophyll concentrations (data collected 2002-2004, 4-km resolution). Credit: NASA

© CJ Camphuysen Grey Phalarope

Grey Phalarope© H Verdaat

© CJ Camphuysen Sabine’s Gulls & White-capped Albatrosses

Cape Town, Feb 2001

Sooty shearwater tracks

From breeding grounds to rich foragingareas

Shaffer et al. 2006. Migratory shearwatersintegrate oceanic resources across the Pacific Ocean in an endless summer. PNAS 103: 12799-1280.

Shearwater megaflock in Unimak Pass, Alaska, Photo Kevin Bell 31

Seabird foraging techniques32

aerial

surface

subsurface

33

How to find food…..in an ‘empty’ environment with patchy resources?

• Visual cues detect prey or foraging flocks by eye

• Olfactory cues smell resources

• Auditory cues hear prey or produce/receive sound

• Habitat ‘understanding’ know situations that enhancefeeding opportunities

• Memory remember reliable locations

• Interpretation interpret other cues as likely feedinglocations

© CJ Camphuysen

35

• Visual cues go for any discontinuity in the greatemptiness of the ocean!

detection of any floating mattermonitor shippingvisit ripples and flotsam

• Visual cues

Scavenging at fishing vessel 37

• Visual cues

38

• Visual cues how to detect prey by eye

© CJ Camphuysen

Underwater prey is notoriously hard to detect and the field of vision of an overflying seabird is limited.Adverse weather will reduce the likelihood of preydetection.

39

• Visual cues go for conspecifics or competitors!

detect foraging flocks by eyemonitor the behaviour of conspecifics

off Schiermonnikoog, Aug 2013Harbour Porpoise (driver), Lesser Black-backed Gull, Northern Gannet, sandeels (prey) © H Verdaat

Natural feeding frenzy

40

Northern GannetNW Europe, Canada

• wintering • shelf break & shelf• widespread, abundant• c. 325,000 individuals• some fisheries

interactions• peak at low SST/SSS• natural feeding

frenzies• MSFA joiner

SSS SST

Depth

18.0N

18.5N

19.0N

19.5N

20.0N

20.5N

21.0N

18.0W 17.5W 17.0W 16.5W 16.0W

Northern Gannet per km2

10.00 +

5.00 - 9.99

2.00 - 4.99

1.00 - 1.99

0.01 - 0.99

No birds

Blank = not surveyed

Density (birds/km2)

18.0N

18.5N

19.0N

19.5N

20.0N

20.5N

21.0N

18.5W 18.0W 17.5W 17.0W 16.5W 16.0W

Northern Gannet / Fou de Bassan

26+

11-25

6-10

2-5

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

De

nsi

tie

s o

f b

ird

s (n

pe

r km

²)

Ob

serv

er

eff

ort

(km

²)

Effort

Gannet

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

De

nsi

tie

s o

f b

ird

s (n

pe

r km

²)

Ob

serv

er

eff

ort

(km

²)

Effort

Gannet

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0-50 50-100 100-200 200-300 300-400 400-500 500-600 600-700 700-800 800-900 900-1000 >1000

Den

sity

(n k

m-2

)

gannets

1469 Northern Gannets were seen in association with fishing vessels. Substantial flocks:

07 Dec 2012 18°52.6’N, 16°38.2’W (372 individuals).07 Dec 2012 18°52.6’N, 16°37.5’W ( 37 individuals).07 Dec 2012 18°52.6’N, 16°37.1’W (480 individuals).07 Dec 2012 18°52.6’N, 16°37.1’W ( 40 individuals).07 Dec 2012 18°52.6’N, 16°36.8’W (368 individuals).

07 Dec 2012 18°52.6’N, 16°36.0’W ( 99 individuals).

13,417 Northern Gannets in natural feeding frenzies. Most substantial flocks (>100) :

08 Dec 2012, 20°07.5’N, 17°36.6’W (2570 individuals).08 Dec 2012, 20°07.5’N, 17°38.1’W (1700 individuals).04 Dec 2012, 19°30.1’N, 16°55.6’W (1397 individuals).04 Dec 2012, 19°30.1’N, 16°54.9’W (1200 individuals).04 Dec 2012, 19°30.1’N, 16°53.5’W ( 900 individuals).04 Dec 2012, 19°30.1’N, 16°54.2’W ( 770 individuals).08 Dec 2012, 20°07.5’N, 17°34.4’W ( 602 individuals).08 Dec 2012, 20°07.4’N, 17°22.4’W ( 500 individuals).08 Dec 2012, 19°52.5’N, 17°21.3’W ( 425 individuals).08 Dec 2012, 20°12.0’N, 17°39.2’W ( 407 individuals).04 Dec 2012, 19°37.4’N, 16°58.1’W ( 289 individuals).08 Dec 2012, 20°07.4’N, 17°40.4’W ( 142 individuals).08 Dec 2012, 19°54.6’N, 17°37.7’W ( 122 individuals).08 Dec 2012, 20°07.5’N, 17°33.7’W ( 120 individuals).04 Dec 2012, 19°30.1’N, 16°57.0’W ( 115 individuals).08 Dec 2012, 20°07.5’N, 17°33.7’W ( 115 individuals).08 Dec 2012, 19°52.5’N, 17°21.3’W ( 110 individuals).03 Dec 2012, 20°30.4’N, 17°26.4’W ( 106 individuals).

43

• Olfactory cues smell resources

Grubb T.C. 1972. Smell and foraging in shearwaters and petrels. Nature 237: 404-405.

European Storm-Petrel Hydrobates pelagicus Stormvogeltje

© CJ Camphuysen

Wilsons Storm-Petrel Oceanites oceanicus Wilsons Stormvogeltje

Camphuysen C.J. 2007. Where two oceans meet: offshore interactions of Great-winged Petrels Pterodromamacroptera and Leach's Storm petrels Oceanodroma leucorhoa off southern Africa. J. Ornithol. 148: 333-346.

Great-winged Petrel

Leach’s Storm-petrel

Camphuysen C.J. 2007. Where two oceans meet: offshore interactions of Great-winged Petrels Pterodromamacroptera and Leach's Storm petrels Oceanodroma leucorhoa off southern Africa. J. Ornithol. 148: 333-346.

Great-winged Petrel

Leach’s Storm-petrel

Relationships between the distribution of great winged petrels and Leach’s storm petrels and meso-scalehydrographic features in the Agulhas current retroflectionregion. The map shows sea surface height anomalies (m)

48

• Habitat ‘understanding’• Memory• Interpretation

49


foto Bureau Waardenburg

50


deep ocean (>1000m) shelf break (100-1000m) shelf sea (<100m)

Eastern boundary upwelling ecosystems

Coastal upwelling occurs in regions where winds push surface water off-shore and is replaced by deeper water.

NW African coast

The main coastal upwelling systems are found on the eastern side of the ocean basins

• Canary Current upwelling system

• Benguela Current upwelling system

• California Current upwelling system

• Peru Current upwelling system

Upwelling areas support a rich ecosystem

• Upwelled water is rich in nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus.

• When upwelled water reaches the sun-lit zone, nutrients allow the growth of phytoplankton.

• Phytoplankton are grazed by zooplankton, small animals that are in turn eaten by fish

• Fish is eaten in turn by seabirds and marine mammals.

SST map across the Mauritania upwelling zone 15–17 July 2005.

The white dashed line shows the location of the shelf edge.

Source: Wynn &. Krastel 2012. Seabird 25: 47-53.

European Storm-petrelNW Europe, Mediterranean

• wintering, migrant • shelf sea, break• patchy distribution• c. 280,000 individuals• olfactory feeding,

communal?• low SST and SSS• at the periphery of

feeding frenzies

SSS SST

Depth

18.0N

18.5N

19.0N

19.5N

20.0N

20.5N

21.0N

18.0W 17.5W 17.0W 16.5W 16.0W

European Storm Petrels per km2

5.00 +

3.00 - 4.99

2.00 - 2.99

1.00 - 1.99

0.01 - 0.99

No birds

Blank no counts

Density (n/km2)

18.0N

18.5N

19.0N

19.5N

20.0N

20.5N

21.0N

18.5W 18.0W 17.5W 17.0W 16.5W 16.0W

European Storm-petrel / Océanite tempete

26+

11-25

6-10

2-5

1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

<1

7.5

°C

17

.5-1

8.0

°C

18

.0-1

8.5

°C

18

.5-1

9.0

°C

19

.0-1

9.5

°C

19

.5-2

0.0

°C

20

.0-2

0.5

°C

20

.5-2

1.0

°C

>2

1.0

°C

Bir

ds

pe

r km

² (d

en

siti

es)

Ob

serv

er e

ffo

rt (k

m²)

Effort

Eur Storm-p

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

35

.80

-36

.00

‰

36

.01

-36

.30

‰

36

.31

-36

.60

‰

36

.61

-36

.90

‰

36

.91

-37

.20

‰

37

.21

-37

.50

‰

37

.51

-37

.80

‰

37

.81

-38

.54

‰

Bir

ds

pe

r km

² (d

en

siti

es)

Ob

serv

er e

ffo

rt (k

m²)

Effort

Eur Storm-p

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0-50 50-100 100-200 200-300 300-400 400-500 500-600 600-700 700-800 800-900 900-1000 >1000

Den

sity

(n k

m-2

)

European Storm-petrel

Band-rumped Storm-petrelMacaronesiaLeach’s Storm-petrelCanada, NW Europe

• wintering, migrant • oceanic• widespread, scarce• c. 66,000 individuals• high SST/SSS• periphery of feeding

frenzies• olfactory feeding• non-communal?

SSS SST

Depth

18.0N

18.5N

19.0N

19.5N

20.0N

20.5N

21.0N

18.0W 17.5W 17.0W 16.5W 16.0W

Band-rumped Storm Petrels per km2

5.00 +

3.00 - 4.99

2.00 - 2.99

1.00 - 1.99

0.01 - 0.99

No birds

Blank no counts

Density (n/km2)

18.0N

18.5N

19.0N

19.5N

20.0N

20.5N

21.0N

18.5W 18.0W 17.5W 17.0W 16.5W 16.0W

Band-rumped Storm-petrel / Océanite de Castro

26+

11-25

6-10

2-5

1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

<1

7.5

°C

17

.5-1

8.0

°C

18

.0-1

8.5

°C

18

.5-1

9.0

°C

19

.0-1

9.5

°C

19

.5-2

0.0

°C

20

.0-2

0.5

°C

20

.5-2

1.0

°C

>2

1.0

°C

Bir

ds

pe

r km

² (d

en

siti

es)

Ob

serv

er e

ffo

rt (k

m²)

Effort

Band-r Stp

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

35

.80

-36

.00

‰

36

.01

-36

.30

‰

36

.31

-36

.60

‰

36

.61

-36

.90

‰

36

.91

-37

.20

‰

37

.21

-37

.50

‰

37

.51

-37

.80

‰

37

.81

-38

.54

‰

Bir

ds

pe

r km

² (d

en

siti

es)

Ob

serv

er e

ffo

rt (k

m²)

Effort

Band-r Stp

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

0-50 50-100 100-200 200-300 300-400 400-500 500-600 600-700 700-800 800-900 900-1000 >1000

De

nsi

ty (n

km

-2)

Band-rumped & Leach's Storm-petrel

H Verdaat

Grey PhalaropeHigh arctic

• wintering• shelf break• patchy distribution• c. 122,000 individuals• no fisheries

interactions• eddies/fronts (var SST)• at fronts and flotsam

concentrations• flock-feeder

SSS SST

Depth

18.0N

18.5N

19.0N

19.5N

20.0N

20.5N

21.0N

18.0W 17.5W 17.0W 16.5W 16.0W

Grey Phalarope per km2

5.00 +

3.00 - 4.99

2.00 - 2.99

1.00 - 1.99

0.01 - 0.99

No birds

Blank no counts

Density (n/km2)

18.0N

18.5N

19.0N

19.5N

20.0N

20.5N

21.0N

18.5W 18.0W 17.5W 17.0W 16.5W 16.0W

Grey Phalarope / Phalarope à bec large

26+

11-25

6-10

2-5

1

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

<1

7.5

°C

17

.5-1

8.0

°C

18

.0-1

8.5

°C

18

.5-1

9.0

°C

19

.0-1

9.5

°C

19

.5-2

0.0

°C

20

.0-2

0.5

°C

20

.5-2

1.0

°C

>2

1.0

°C

Bir

ds

pe

r km

² (d

en

siti

es)

Ob

serv

er e

ffo

rt (k

m²)

Effort

Phalaropes

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

35

.80

-36

.00

‰

36

.01

-36

.30

‰

36

.31

-36

.60

‰

36

.61

-36

.90

‰

36

.91

-37

.20

‰

37

.21

-37

.50

‰

37

.51

-37

.80

‰

37

.81

-38

.54

‰

Bir

ds

pe

r km

² (d

en

siti

es)

Ob

serv

er e

ffo

rt (k

m²)

Effort

Phalaropes

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0-50 50-100 100-200 200-300 300-400 400-500 500-600 600-700 700-800 800-900 900-1000 >1000

Den

sity

(n k

m-2

)

phalaropes

Observer effort (km²) Grey Phalaropes (n km-2) Band-rumped Petrels (n km-2) Europ Storm Petrels (n km-2)

°C\‰ 35 36 37 38 °C\‰ 35 36 37 38 °C\‰ 35 36 37 38 °C\‰ 35 36 37 38

16 3.9 0.4 16 0.0 0.0 16 0.0 0.0 16 0.0 0.0

17 0.8 50.4 17 0.0 0.1 17 0.0 0.0 17 0.0 5.0

18 1.6 40.4 16.0 1.1 18 0.0 1.3 11.2 0.0 18 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.0 18 0.6 1.7 0.1 0.0

19 13.2 35.4 19 9.6 7.0 19 0.0 0.2 19 0.2 0.9

20 21.3 20 14.7 20 1.1 20 2.0

21 1.1 21 0.0 21 6.1 21 0.9

H Verdaat

58


59© CJ Camphuysen

Foraging marine mammals &seabird – cetacean interactions

© L Meeuwisse

60

Surface feeding seabirds take advantage of fish driven to the surface by underwater predators

Herding

Most attacked prey fish willpromptly form a highly compact mass of animals,

a fish ball

Fish balls tend to intimidate predators and provide relative safetyfor individual fish

61

Herding

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01500/bait-ball-dolphins_1500165i.jpg

Effective predators drive fish towards a physical barrier (e.g. the sea surface)

62

63

64

65

66

68

Foraging tactics and multi-species feeding frenzies

69

from: Camphuysen & Webb 1999

Surface feeding seabirds take advantage

of fish driven to the surface by underwater predators

70

Camphuysen C.J. & A. Webb 1999. Multi-species feeding associations in North Sea seabirds: jointly exploitinga patchy environment. Ardea 87: 177-198.

71


72


73

Herding


Nottestad L. & B.E. Axelsen 1999. Herring schooling manoeuvres in response to killer whale attacks. Can. J. Zool. 77: 1540-1546.

The antipredator behaviour of herring was investigated during repeated attacks by killer whales in Tysfjord in northwestern Norway using a high-resolution (455 kHz) multibeam sonar.

Ten different types of predator-prey interactions were recorded.

Antipredator responses included "split," "hourglass," "vacuole," "bend," "dive," "herd," and "fountain."

Large attacked schools demonstrated a different repertoire of antipredatormanoeuvres than small ones and were less likely to be attacked.

Herring schools with a cross section exceeding 460 m² were not attacked by killer whales.

Attacked schools were significantly more circular (p < 0.0001) and had higher relative densities (p < 0.05) than schools that were not attacked.

74


Nottestad L. & B.E. Axelsen 1999. Herring schooling manoeuvresin response to killer whale attacks. Can. J. Zool. 77: 1540-1546.

75

Herding

Fish herding predators usually act in groups in close co-operation: simultaneous diving, concerted actionunder water

Herding

© CJ Camphuysen

76

Does being “baldly patterned” help….?Herding

Ryan P.G., Wilson R.P. & Cooper J. 1987. Intraspecific mimicry and status signals in

juvenile Africian penguins. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 20: 69-76.

Herding

poor fish-herding properties excellent fish herding properties

80© CJ Camphuysen

Trawling or Herding ?

Humpback Whale

Brydes Whale

Brydes Whale

© CJ Camphuysen

83

Humpback Whale

Spy-hopping whales have been found to actively search for seabird feeding frenzies and join the feast

84

85

15

The marine food web

The concept of central-place foraging

86

Simple rule of thumb:An animal should gain energy during a foraging trip,energy for maintenance, growth, and/or reproduction

The costs of travel (locomotion), handling, digestion and prey carrying should be outweighed by the food intake

Energy requirements: FMR + the needs for partner & offspring during breeding

87

Satellite tracks from 184 Northern Gannets show that foraging birds direct their movements away from neighboring colonies (colors correspond to different colonies).

Wakefield et al. 2013. Space partitioning without territoriality in Gannets. Science 341: 68-70.


The information centre hypothesis suggests that birds that breed in colonies may exchange information about the location of (ephemeral) food patches

Antarctic Prions © CJ Camphuysen

Ward & Zahavi 1973. The importance of certain assemblages of birds as "information-centres" for food-finding. Ibis 115: 517-534. 88


Climate change and shifts in resources

Extreme temperatures in the North Pacific are cancelling out El Niño and wreaking their own climate havoc

New Scientist October 2014

90

Anker-Nilssen T. 1987. The breeding performance of Puffins Fratercula arctica on Rost, northern Norway in 1979-1985. Fauna Norv. Ser. C., Cinclus10: 21-38.


Seabirds around Iceland have been declining in the last 10-15 years:Brünnich’s guillemot by 44% and there are 30% fewer guillemots and fulmars.

The main reason: changes in ocean currents which have led to a crash in sandeels


Norway was one of the countries that caught the highest numbers of bluefin tuna in Europe in the 1950s and 1960s, but the fishery was over by the mid-1980s.

In 2008, Norway issued on a ban on the fishery.



The world’s oceans: Never short of surprises

Atlantic Grey Whale Eschrichtius robustus

Extinct

Marine Sciences I (2013) Kees (CJ) Camphuysen Royal NIOZ Texel Marine Mammals 94

Marine biologists are scratching their heads this week, trying to figure out how a grey whale, normally found only in the Pacific Ocean, has been spotted off the coast of Israel, 10 May 2010.

The solitary whale, measuring some 12 metres (39 feet) and weighing around 20 tonnes, was first sighted off Herzliya on the coast of the Mediterranean, on Saturday.

A mysterious gray whale sighted off the coast of Israel in the Mediterranean Sea has been seen again off the north east coast of Spain.

The second sighting, made 23 days and 3000km after the first, has continued to perplex whale experts.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8672000/8672970.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8729000/8729064.stmMarine Sciences I (2013) Kees (CJ) Camphuysen Royal NIOZ Texel Marine Mammals 95

Hypothetical route

Atlantic Grey Whale overlooked odd 400 years?

Pacific Grey Whale of a lengthy journey?

Marine Sciences I (2013) Kees (CJ) Camphuysen Royal NIOZ Texel Marine Mammals 96

97

Thank you

Documents

Ocean life - This Side Of paradisethissideofparadise.nl/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/ocean-life.pdf · Steller [sSea Cow Hydrodamalis gigas, weighing ± 10 tons or more, ate mostly