Advertisement

Marine Biology

, 166:78 | Cite as

Indications of mesopelagic foraging by a small odontocete

  • Nynne H. NielsenEmail author
  • Jonas Teilmann
  • Mads Peter Heide-Jørgensen
Original paper

Abstract

The mesopelagic layer is represented in all oceans and is of crucial importance to the pelagic communities, and in this paper it is hypothesised that the Greenlandic harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) is seasonally dependent on mesopelagic prey when abandoning the ice-covered continental shelf areas and remains in offshore areas. Data from 15 harbour porpoises instrumented with satellite-linked transmitters in West Greenland were analysed with regard to foraging that may target mesopelagic prey. Contact with the porpoises was maintained for an average of 404 days where they conducted extensive offshore movements and spent an average of 90% of their time over deep waters (> 1000 m) in the North Atlantic. When entering deep water, they increased their daily travel rate significantly from 22.5 to 36.7 km d−1. Five of the 15 porpoises provided information on dive depth which suggested that dive depths > 100 m are important for these porpoises both day and night; however, the porpoises dove significantly more at nighttime compared to daytime. Harbour porpoises from West Greenland probably target vertically migrating species from the mesopelagic layer that are accessible at shallower depths at night and at lower energetic cost than during the day.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Mikkel V. Jensen is thanked for modifying the tags to instrument harbour porpoise, and the hunters Svend and Knud Heilmann are thanked for helping with capture and tagging of the porpoises. Mikkel Sinding and Bolethe Skifte Egede are thanked for helping with tagging of the porpoises. Michael Quaade from the Danish Society of Astronomy provided almanac data. The project was supported by the Greenland Ministry of Education, Church, Culture and Gender Equality, the Danish Cooperation for the Environment in the Arctic (Danish Ministry of the Environment), and the Greenland Institute of Natural Resources. Two anonymous reviewers are thanked for providing helpful comments on the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no actual or potential conflicts of interest in relation to this work.

Ethical approval

All work presented here complies with the current laws of the country in which they were performed (Greenland).

Research involving animals

The tagging of harbour porpoises in this study was performed with permission from the Government of Greenland, permit no. 2012-069733, Doc. 1265044.

Supplementary material

227_2019_3525_MOESM1_ESM.docx (34 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 34 kb)

References

  1. Andreasen H, Ross SD, Siebert U, Andersen NG, Ronnenberg K, Gilles A (2017) Diet composition and food consumption rate of harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in the western Baltic Sea. Mar Mammal Sci 33:1053–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baird RW, Ligon AD, Hooker SK, Gorgone AM (2001) Subsurface and nighttime behaviour of pantropical spotted dolphins in Hawai’i. Can J Zool 79:988–996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bertrand A, Bard F-X, Josse E (2002) Tuna food habits related to the micronekton distribution in French Polynesia. Mar Biol 140:1023–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Block BA, Jonsen ID, Jorgensen SJ et al (2011) Tracking apex marine predator movements in a dynamic ocean. Nature 475:86–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Catul V, Gauns M, Karuppasamy P (2011) A review on mesopelagic fishes belonging to family Myctophidae. Rev Fish Biol Fisher 21:339–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Doksæter L, Olsen E, Nøttestad L, Fernö A (2008) Distribution and feeding ecology of dolphins along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge between Iceland and the Azores. Deep Sea Res Pt II 55:243–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Estes JA, Terborgh J, Brashares JS et al (2011) Trophic downgrading of planet Earth. Science 333:301–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Freitas C, Lydersen C, Fedak MA, Kovacs KM (2008) A simple new algorithm to filter marine mammal Argos locations. Mar Mammal Sci 24:315–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Friday NA, Zerbini AN, Waite JM, Moore SE, Clapham PJ (2013) Cetacean distribution and abundance in relation to oceanographic domains on the eastern Bering Sea shelf, June and July of 2002, 2008 and 2010. Deep-Sea Res Pt II 94:244–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gjøsaeter J, Kawaguchi K (1980) A review of the world resources of mesopelagic fish. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 193, p 151Google Scholar
  11. Hammond P, Lacey C, Gilles A, et al (2017) Estimates of cetacean abundance in European Atlantic waters in summer 2016 from the SCANS-III aerial and shipboard surveys. Wageningen Marine ResearchGoogle Scholar
  12. Hansen RG, Heide-Jørgensen MP (2013) Spatial trends in abundance of long-finned pilot whales, white-beaked dolphins and harbour porpoises in West Greenland. Mar Biol 160:2929–2941CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hays GC (2003) A review of the adaptive significance and ecosystem consequences of zooplankton diel vertical migrations. Migrations and dispersal of marine organisms. Springer, Berlin, pp 163–170Google Scholar
  14. Heide-Jørgensen MP, Iversen M, Nielsen NH, Lockyer C, Stern H, Ribergaard MH (2011) Harbour porpoises respond to climate change. Ecol Evol 1:579–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heide-Jørgensen MP, Nielsen NH, Hansen RG, Blackwell SB (2014) Stomach temperature of narwhals (Monodon monoceros) during feeding events. Anim Biotelem 2:9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heide-Jørgensen M, Nielsen N, Hansen R, Schmidt H, Blackwell S, Jørgensen OA (2015) The predictable narwhal: satellite tracking shows behavioural similarities between isolated subpopulations. J Zool 297:54–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hersey J, Johnson H, Davis L (1952) Recent findings about the deep scattering layer. J Mar Res 11:1–9Google Scholar
  18. Heywood KJ (1996) Diel vertical migration of zooplankton in the Northeast Atlantic. J Plankton Res 18:163–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hoekendijk J, Spitz J, Read AJ, Leopold MF, Fontaine MC (2018) Resilience of harbor porpoises to anthropogenic disturbance: must they really feed continuously? Mar Mammal Sci 34:258–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Irigoien X, Klevjer TA, Røstad A et al (2014) Large mesopelagic fishes biomass and trophic efficiency in the open ocean. Nat Commun 5:3271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kaartvedt S, Staby A, Aksnes DL (2012) Efficient trawl avoidance by mesopelagic fishes causes large underestimation of their biomass. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 456:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Klevjer TA, Irigoien X, Røstad A, Fraile-Nuez E, Benítez-Barrios VM, Kaartvedt S (2016) Large scale patterns in vertical distribution and behaviour of mesopelagic scattering layers. Sci Rep 6:19873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Laidre KL, Heide-Jørgensen MP, Logdson ML et al (2003) Seasonal narwhal habitat associations in the high Arctic. Mar Biol 145:821–831Google Scholar
  24. Leopold MF (2015) Eat and be eaten: porpoise diet studies. PhD thesis, Wageningen University, p 232Google Scholar
  25. Linnenschmidt M, Teilmann J, Akamatsu T, Dietz R, Miller LA (2013) Biosonar, dive, and foraging activity of satellite tracked harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena). Mar Mammal Sci 29:E77–E97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lockyer C (2007) All creatures great and smaller: a study in cetacean life history energetics. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 87:1035–1045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lockyer C, Heide-Jørgensen MP, Jensen J, Walton MJ (2003) Life history and ecology of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) from West Greenland. NAMMCO Sci Publ 5:177–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Luo J, Ortner PB, Forcucci D, Cummings RS (2000) Diel vertical migration of zooplankton and mesopelagic fish in the Arabian Sea. Deep-Sea Res Pt II 47:1451–1473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nielsen NH, Laidre K, Larsen RS, Heide-Jørgensen MP (2015) Identification of potential foraging areas for bowhead whales in Baffin Bay and adjacent waters. Arctic 68:169–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nielsen NH, Teilmann J, Sveegaard S, Hansen RG, Sinding M-HS, Dietz R, Heide-Jørgensen MP (2018) Oceanic movements, site fidelity and deep diving in harbour porpoises from Greenland show limited similarities to animals from the North Sea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 597:259–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Otani S, Naito Y, Kawamura A, Kawasaki M, Nishiwaki S, Kato A (1998) Diving behavior and performance of harbor porpoises, Phocoena phocoena, in Funka Bay, Hokkaido, Japan. Mar Mammal Sci 14:209–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Otani S, Naito Y, Kato A, Kawamura A (2000) Diving behavior and swimming speed of a free-ranging harbor porpoise, Phocoena phocoena. Mar Mammal Sc 16:811–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pearcy WG, Laurs R (1966) Vertical migration and distribution of mesopelagic fishes off Oregon. Deep sea research and oceanographic abstracts. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 153–165Google Scholar
  34. Radchenko VI (2007) Mesopelagic fish community supplies “biological pump”. Raffles B Zool Suppl 14:265–271Google Scholar
  35. Read AJ (1999) Harbour porpoise Phocoena phocoena (Linnaeus, 1758). In: Ridgeway SH, Harrison R (eds) Handbook of marine mammals. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 323–355Google Scholar
  36. Read A, Westgate A (1997) Monitoring the movements of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) with satellite telemetry. Mar Biol 130:315–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Read AJ, Nicolas JR, Craddock JE (1996) Winter capture of a harbor porpoise in a pelagic drift net off North Carolina. Fish B NOAA 94:381–383Google Scholar
  38. Recchia CA, Read AJ (1989) Stomach contents of harbour porpoises, Phocoena phocoena (L.), from the Bay of Fundy. Can J Zool 67:2140–2146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rojano-Doñate L, McDonald BI, Wisniewska DM, Johnson M, Teilmann J, Wahlberg M, Højer-Kristensen J, Madsen PT (2018a) High fie ld metabolic rates of wild harbour porpoises. J Exp Biol 221:jeb185827.  https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.185827 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Rojano-Doñate L, McDonald BI, Wisniewska DM, Johnson M, Teilmann J, Wahlberg M, Højer-Kristensen J, Madsen PT (2018b) High field metabolic rates of wild harbour porpoises. J Exp Biol 221:jeb185827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sameoto D (1988) Feeding of lantern fish Benthosema glaciale off the Nova Scotia Shelf. Marine ecology progress series. Oldendorf 44:113–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sameoto D (1989) Feeding ecology of the lantern fish Benthosema glaciale in a subarctic region. Polar Biol 9:169–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Santos M, Pierce G (2003) The diet of harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) in the northeast Atlantic. In: Gibson RN, Atkinson RJA (eds) Oceanography and mar biol: an annual review. Taylor and Francis, New York, pp 355–390Google Scholar
  44. Spitz J, Rousseau Y, Ridoux V (2006) Diet overlap between harbour porpoise and bottlenose dolphin: an argument in favour of interference competition for food? Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 70:259–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stenson GB, Benjamins S, Reddin DG (2011) Using bycatch data to understand habitat use of small cetaceans: lessons from an experimental driftnet fishery. ICES J Mar Sci 68:937–946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sveegaard S, Teilmann J, Tougaard J, Dietz R, Mouritsen KN, Desportes G, Siebert U (2011) High-density areas for harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) identified by satellite tracking. Mar Mammal Sci 27:230–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sveegaard S, Nabe-Nielsen J, Stæhr KJ, Jensen TF, Mouritsen KN, Teilmann J (2012) Spatial interactions between marine predators and their prey: herring abundance as a driver for the distributions of mackerel and harbour porpoise. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 468:245–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Teilmann J, Larsen F, Desportes G (2007) Time allocation and diving behaviour of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in Danish and adjacent waters. J Cetacean Res Manage 9:201–210Google Scholar
  49. Van Haren H, Compton TJ (2013) Diel vertical migration in deep sea plankton is finely tuned to latitudinal and seasonal day length. PLoS ONE 8:E64435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Víkingsson GA, Ólafsdóttir D, Sigurjónsson J (2003) Geographical, and seasonal variation in the diet of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in Icelandic coastal waters. NAMMCO Sci Publ 5:243–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Volk T, Hoffert MI (1985) Ocean carbon pumps: Analysis of relative strengths and efficiencies in ocean‐driven atmospheric CO2 changes. In: Sundquist ET, Broecker WS (eds) The carbon cycle and atmospheric CO: natural variations archean to present. pp 99–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Watt C, Orr J, Ferguson SH (2017) Spatial distribution of narwhal (Monodon monoceros L.) diving for Canadian populations helps identify important seasonal foraging areas. Can J Zool 95:41–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Watwood SL, Miller PJ, Johnson M, Madsen PT, Tyack PL (2006) Deep-diving foraging behaviour of sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus). J Anim Ecol 75:814–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Westgate AJ, Head AJ, Berggren P, Koopman HN, Gaskin DE (1995) Diving behaviour of harbour porpoises, Phocoena phocoena. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 52:1064–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wisniewska DM, Johnson M, Teilmann J et al (2016) Ultra-high foraging rates of harbor porpoises make them vulnerable to anthropogenic disturbance. Curr Biol 26:1441–1446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wisniewska DM, Johnson M, Teilmann J, Siebert U, Galatius A, Dietz R, Madsen PT (2018) High rates of vessel noise disrupt foraging in wild harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena). Proc R Soc Lond 285:20172314CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Birds and MammalsGreenland Institute of Natural ResourcesNuukGreenland
  2. 2.Marine Mammal Research, Department of BioscienceAarhus UniversityRoskildeDenmark

Personalised recommendations