Marine aquaculture and bottlenose dolphins’ (Tursiops truncatus) social structure

  • Bruno Díaz López
  • Julia Andrea Bernal Shirai
Original Paper


In this study, we investigate association patterns of 249 bottlenose dolphin feeding groups off Sardinia Island (Italy) from January 2000–May 2007 and describe how their association behaviour is related to their response to food patches created by a marine fin fish farm. We also tested the hypothesis that dolphins have different social structures with different feeding activities: Associations should decrease during opportunistic feeding behaviours as it is easier to capture prey, and cooperation is not as necessary. Sixteen individually identified bottlenose dolphins were observed participating in both opportunistic and not opportunistic feeding activities, with a mean of 30 ± 8 times and 9.6 ± 1 times, respectively. Bottlenose dolphins show non-random social behaviour during feeding and this behaviour differs depending on their specific foraging activity. Dolphin associations during feeding can be divided into three categories: acquaintances, affiliates, and feeding associates. Association behaviour during fish farm feeding is consistent with our hypothesis that during opportunistic behaviours, benefits from cooperation decrease, as it is easier to capture prey. Group size homogeneity in both feeding activities demonstrates that the number of dolphins engaging in foraging is not necessarily related with cooperation levels. Moreover, an adult dolphin may prefer to associate with a specific individual, independent of the sex, who shares the same foraging priorities. This study is the first to show how aquaculture is not only directly affecting marine predators but could also indirectly affect their social structure and behaviour.


Social structure Fission-fusion societies Aquaculture Bottlenose dolphins Tursiops truncatus 



Funding for this research came from the Bottlenose Dolphin Research Institute—BDRI—and private donations. We give thanks to numerous friends, colleagues and volunteers at the Bottlenose Dolphin Research Institute for their assistance and support with data collection. The English grammar was improved by Collette Thogerson. We would also like to thank Jens Krause and one anonymous referee who provided valuable comments and critiques at various stages of this study. Data collection complies with the current laws of the country in which it was performed.


  1. Anthony LL, Blumstein DT (2000) Integrating behaviour into wildlife conservation: the multiple ways that behaviour can reduce Ne. Biol Conserv 95:303–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altmann SA (1974) Baboons, space, time, and energy. Am Zool 14:221–248Google Scholar
  3. Beddington JR, Beverton RJ, Lavigne DM (1985) Marine Mammals and Fisheries. George Allen and Unwin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Bejder L, Fletcher D, Brager S (1998) A method of testing association patterns of social animals. Anim Behav 56:719–725PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bel’kovich VM, Ivanova EE, Yefremenkova OV, Kozarovitsky LB, Kharitonov SP (1991) Searching and hunting behavior in the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) in the Black Sea. In: Pryor K, Norris KS (eds) Dolphin societies: Discoveries and puzzles. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 38–67Google Scholar
  6. Boesch C (1996) Social grouping in Tai chimpanzees. In: McGrew WC, Marchant LF, Nishida T (eds) Great Ape Societies. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 101–113Google Scholar
  7. Brown JL (1983) Cooperation—a biologist dilemma. Adv Stud Behav 13:1–37Google Scholar
  8. Cairns SJ, Schwager SJ (1987) A comparison of association indices. Anim Behav 35:1454–1469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clutton-Brock TH, Harvey PH (1977) Primate ecology and social organization. J Zool 183:1–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Connor RC (1995) The benefits of mutualism: a conceptual framework. Biol Rev 70:427–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Connor RC, Smolker RA, Richards AF (1992) Two levels of alliance formation among male bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops sp.). Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89:987–990PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Connor RC, Mann J, Tyack PL, Whitehead H (1998) Social evolution in toothed whales. Trends Ecol Evol 13:228–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Connor RC, Wells RS, Mann J, Read AJ (2000) The bottlenose dolphin: social relationships in a fission–fusion society. In: Cetacean societies: field studies of dolphins and whales. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 91–126Google Scholar
  14. de Waal FBM, Luttrell LM (1986) The similarity principle underlying social bonding among female rhesus monkeys. Folia Primatol 46:215–234PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Díaz López B (2006a) Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) predation on a marine fin fish farm: some underwater observations. Aquatic Mammals 32:305–310 DOI  10.1578/AM.32.3.2006.305 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Díaz López B (2006b) Interactions between Mediterranean bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and gillnets off Sardinia, Italy. ICES J Mar Sci 63:946–951 DOI  10.1016/j.icesjms.2005.06.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Díaz López B, Bernal Shirai JA (2007) Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) presence and incidental capture in a marine fish farm on the north-eastern coast of Sardinia (Italy). J Mar Biol Assoc UK 87:113–117 DOI  10.1017/S0025315407054215 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Díaz López B, Marini L, Polo F (2005) The impact of a fish farm on a bottlenose dolphin population in the Mediterranean Sea. Thalassas 21:53–58Google Scholar
  19. Durrell JL, Sneddon IA, O’Connell NE, Whitehead H (2004) Do pigs form preferential associations. Appl Anim Behav Sci 89:41–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dunbar RM (1992) Time: a hidden constraint on the behavioural ecology of baboons. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 31:35–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fertl D, Leatherwood S (1997) Cetacean interactions with trawls: a preliminary review. J Northw Atl Fish Sci 22:219–248Google Scholar
  22. FAO (2007) The state of world fisheries and aquaculture 2006. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department. Food and agriculture organization of the United Nations, Rome, 2007Google Scholar
  23. Gazda SJ, Connor RC, Edgar RK, Cox F (2005) A division of labour with role specialization in group-hunting bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) off Cedar Key, Florida. Proc R Soc B 272:135–140PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gero S, Bejder H, Whitehead J, Mann J, Connor RC (2005) Behaviourally specific preferred associations in bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops spp. Can J Zool 83:1566–1573 DOI  10.1139/Z05–155 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD (2001) PAST: Paleontological Statistics Software Package for Education and Data Analysis. Palaeo Electronica 4:1–9Google Scholar
  26. Hinde RA (1976) Interactions, relationships and social structure. Man (London) 11:1–17Google Scholar
  27. Kerth G, König B (1999) Fission, fusion and non-random associations in female Bechstein’s bats (Myotis bechsteinii). Behaviour 136:1187–1202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Leatherwood S (1975) Some observations of feeding behaviour of bottle-nosed dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in the Northern Gulf of Mexico and (Tursiops cf. T. gilli) off southern California, Baja California and Nayarit, Mexico. Mar Fisheries Review 37(9):10–16Google Scholar
  29. Lusseau D (2003) The emergent propierties of a dolphin social network. Proc R Soc Lond B 270(Suppl 2):S186–S188 DOI  10.1098/rsbl.2003.0057 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lusseau D, Schneider K, Boisseau OJ, Haase P, Slooten E, Dawson SM (2003) The bottlenose dolphin community of Doubtful Sound features a large proportion of long-lasting associations: can geographic isolation explain this unique trait. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 54:396–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mann J (1999) Behavioral sampling methods for cetaceans: a review and critique. Mar Mamm Sci 15:102–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mann J, Smuts BB (1999) Behavioural development in wild bottlenose dolphin newborns (Tursiops sp.). Behaviour, 136:529–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McComb K, Moss C, Durant SM, Baker L, Sayialel S (2001) Matriarchs as repositories of social knowledge in African elephants. Science 292:491–494PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McDonald DB, Potts WK (1994) Cooperative displays and relatedness among males in a lek-mating bird. Science (Washington, D.C.) 266(5187):1030–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mitani JC, Watts DP (1999) Demographic influences on the hunting behavior of chimpanzees. Am J Phys Anthropol 109:439–454PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mitani JC, Watts DP, Muller MN (2002) Recent developments in the study of wild chimpanzee behaviour. Evol Anthropol 11:9–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Myers JP (1983) Space, time, and the pattern of individual associations in a groups-living species: sanderlings have no friends. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 12:129–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ribeiro S, Viddi FA, Cordeiro JL, Freitas TO (2007) Fine-scale habitat selection of Chilean dolphins (Cephalorhynchus eutropia): interactions with aquaculture activities in southern Chiloé Island, Chile. J Mar Biol Ass UK 87:119–128 DOI  10.1017/S0025315407051594 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Smolker RS, Richards AF, Connor RC, Pepper JW (1992) Sex differences in patterns of association among Indian Ocean bottlenose dolphins. Behaviour 123(1–2):38–69Google Scholar
  40. Schnell GD, Watt DJ, Douglas ME (1985) Statistical comparison of proximity matrices: applications in animal behaviour. Anim Behav 33:239–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Takahata Y, Suzuki S, Okayasu N, Hill D (1994) Troop extinction and fusion in wild Japanese macaques of Yakushima Island, Japan. Am J Primatol 33:317–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. van Schaik CP (1999) The socioecology of fission–fusion sociality in orangutans. Primates 40:69–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Watson-Capps JJ, Mann J (2005) The effects of aquaculture on bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops sp.) ranging in Shark Bay, Western Australia. Biol Conserv 124:519–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Whitehead H (1995) Investigating structure and temporal scale in social organizations using identified individuals. Behav Ecol 6:199–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Whitehead H (1997) Analyzing animal social structure. Anim Behav 53:1053–1067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Whitehead H (1999) Testing association patterns of social animals. Anim Behav 57:F26–F29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Whitehead H (2006) Compiled version of SOCPROG 2.3 [computer program]. Available from
  48. Whitehead H, Dufault S (1999) Techniques for analyzing vertebrate social structure using identified individuals: review and recommendations. Adv Stud Behav 28:33–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Whitehead H, Bejder L, Ottensmayer A (2005) Testing association patterns: issues arising and extensions. Anim Behav 69:e1–e6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wrangham RW (1982) Mutualism, kinship and social evolution. In: Current problems in sociobiology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 269–289Google Scholar
  51. Wittemyer G, Douglas-Hamilton I, Getz WM (2005) The socioecology of elephants: analysis of the processes creating multitiered social structures. Anim Behav 69:1357–1371 DOI  10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.08.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Würsig B (1986) Delphinid foraging strategies. In: Schusterman RJ, Thomas JA, Wood FG (eds) Dolphin cognition and behaviour: A comparative approach Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hillsdale, NJ, pp 347–359Google Scholar
  53. Würsig B, Gailey GA (2002) Marine mammals and aquaculture: conflicts and potential resolutions. In: Stickney RR, McVay P (eds) Responsible marine aquaculture. CAP International Press, New York, pp 45–59Google Scholar
  54. Würsig B, Jefferson RA (1990) Methods of photo-identification for small cetaceans. Report of the International Whale Commission, Special Issue no 12:43–52Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bruno Díaz López
    • 1
  • Julia Andrea Bernal Shirai
    • 1
  1. 1.The Bottlenose Dolphin Research Institute BDRIGolfo AranciItaly

Personalised recommendations