Advertisement

Conservation Genetics Resources

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 343–352 | Cite as

Identifying prey items from New Zealand fur seal (Arctocephalus forsteri) faeces using massive parallel sequencing

  • Arsalan Emami-Khoyi
  • David A. Hartley
  • Adrian M. PatersonEmail author
  • Laura J. Boren
  • Robert H. Cruickshank
  • James G. Ross
  • Elaine C. Murphy
  • Terry-Ann Else
Methods and Resources Article

Abstract

The New Zealand fur seal (Arctocephalus forsteri) is one of many pinniped species that has shown a remarkable recovery from the brink of extinction after cessation of commercial sealing during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. It is commonly believed that this species competes with recreational and commercial fisheries. We identified prey items using massive parallel sequencing from New Zealand fur seal faecal samples that were collected throughout the species distribution. The data support generalist feeding behaviour for this species. The diet composition showed significant geographical and inter-seasonal variation. As many as 46 species of fish and 18 species of cephalopod were identified from a single colony. The data suggest cartilaginous species (sharks, rays, and skates) constitute an important part of the New Zealand fur seal diet. Approximately 10 % of the species identified in the seal diet were of significant commercial value, which indicates some qualitative food competition between New Zealand fur seals and commercial fisheries in exploiting marine species.

Keywords

New Zealand fur seal Diet Massive parallel sequencing DNA 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to New Zealand Department of Conservation and its local rangers. The contributions of all local i wi, Ngāi Tahu, Ngāti Mamoe, Ngāti Apa, Ngāti Koata, Ngāti Rārua, Ngāti Tama, Ngāti Kuia, Te Ati Awa, Waitaha, Ngāti Kahungunuki Wairarapa, Taranaki, Ngāti Mutunga, Ngā Ruahine, Ngā Ruanui, Ngā Rauru, and Te Āti Hau, are acknowledged. The contributions of Mehdi Mahjoob for graphical re-creation of the figures are acknowledged. We would also like to thank Thomas A. Gavin, Professor Emeritus, Cornell University, for help with editing. We are thankful to two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on the initial version of the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper. This work was supported by Lincoln University.

References

  1. Bailey AM, Sorensen JH (1962) Subantarctic Campbell Island. Denver Museum of Natural History, Proceedings 10, DenverGoogle Scholar
  2. Barros NB, Wells RS (1998) Prey and feeding patterns of resident bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in Sarasota Bay, Florida. J Mammal 79:1045–1059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bohmann K, Monadjem A, Noer CL, Rasmussen M, Zeale MR, Clare E, Jones G, Willerslev E, Gilbert MTP (2011) Molecular diet analysis of two African free-tailed bats (Molossidae) using high throughput sequencing. PLoS ONE 6:e21441CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Boren L (2010) Diet of New Zealand fur seal. In: DOC Research and development series 319. Department of Conservation, WellingtonGoogle Scholar
  5. Bowen W (1997) Role of marine mammals in aquatic ecosystems. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 158:74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carey PW (1992) Fish prey species of the New Zealand fur seal (Arctocephalus forsteri, Lesson). N Z J Ecol 16:41–46Google Scholar
  7. Casper RM, Jarman SN, Deagle BE, Gales NJ, Hindell MA (2007) Detecting prey from DNA in predator scats: a comparison with morphological analysis, using Arctocephalus seals fed a known diet. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 347:144–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crawley MC (1990) The hand book of New Zealand mammals. Oxford University Press, AucklandGoogle Scholar
  9. Deagle BE, Tollit DJ (2007) Quantitative analysis of prey DNA in pinniped faeces: potential to estimate diet composition? Conserv Genet 8:743–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Deagle B, Jarman S, Pemberton D, Gales N (2005a) Genetic screening for prey in the gut contents from a giant squid (Architeuthis sp.). J Hered 96:417–423CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Deagle BE, Tollit DJ, Jarman SN, Hindell MA, Trites AW, Gales NJ (2005b) Molecular scatology as a tool to study diet: analysis of prey DNA in scats from captive Steller sea lions. Mol Ecol 14:1831–1842CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Deagle BE, Kirkwood R, Jarman SN (2009) Analysis of Australian fur seal diet by pyrosequencing prey DNA in faeces. Mol Ecol 18:2022–2038CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Deagle BE, Chiaradia A, McInnes J, Jarman SN (2010) Pyrosequencing faecal DNA to determine diet of little penguins: is what goes in what comes out? Conserv Genet 11:2039–2048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dellinger T, Trillmich F (1988) Estimating diet composition from scat analysis in otariid seals (Otariidae): is it reliable? Can J Zool 66:1865–1870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dunshea G (2009) DNA-based diet analysis for any predator. PLoS ONE 4:e5252CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Fallows C, Benoît H, Hammerschlag N (2015) Intraguild predation and partial consumption of blue sharks Prionace glauca by Cape fur seals Arctocephalus pusillus pusillus. Afr J Mar Sci 37:125–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fea N, Harcourt R (1997) Assessing the use of fecal and regurgitate analysis as a means of determining the diet of New Zealand fur seals. Mar Mamm Res South Hemisph 1:143–150Google Scholar
  18. Fea NI, Harcourt RG, Lalas C (1999) Seasonal variation in the diet of New Zealand fur seals (Arctocephalus forsteri) at Otago Peninsula, New Zealand. Wildl Res 26:147–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gales NJ, Cheal AJ (1992) Estimating diet composition of the Australian sea-lion (Neophoca cinerea) from scat analysis: an unreliable technique. Wildl Res 19:447–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gordon DP (2009) New Zealand Inventory of Biodiversity: Radiata, Lophotrochozoa, Deuterostomia. Kingdom Animalia. Canterbury University Press, ChristchurchGoogle Scholar
  21. Harcourt RG, Bradshaw C, Dickson K, Davis LS (2002a) Foraging ecology of a generalist predator the female New Zealand fur seal. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 227:11–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Harcourt RG, Bradshaw CJA, Dickson K, Davis LS (2002b) Foraging ecology of a generalist predator, the female New Zealand fur seal. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 227:11–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Heupel MR, Carlson JK, Simpfendorfer CA (2007) Shark nursery areas: concepts, definition, characterization and assumptions. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 337:287–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Höss M, Kohn M, Pääbo S (1992) Excrement analysis by PCR. Nature 359:199CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Hume F, Hindell M, Pemberton D, Gales R (2004) Spatial and temporal variation in the diet of a high trophic level predator, the Australian fur seal (Arctocephalus pusillus doriferus). Mar Biol 144:407–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lalas C, Bradshaw CJA (2001) Folklore and chimerical numbers: review of a millennium of interaction between fur seals and humans in the New Zealand region. NZ J Mar Freshw Res 35:477–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lavenier D (2009) PLAST: parallel local alignment search tool for database comparison. BMC Bioinf 10:329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Macdonald DW, Norris S (2001) The encyclopedia of mammals. Facts On File, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Matejusová I, Doig F, Middlemas S, Mackay S, Douglas A, Armstrong J, Cunningham C, Snow M (2008) Using quantitative real-time PCR to detect salmonid prey in scats of grey Halichoerus grypus and harbour Phoca vitulina seals in Scotland–an experimental and field study. J Appl Ecol 45:632–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Murie DJ, Lavigne DM (1985) Digestion and retention of Atlantic herring otoliths in the stomachs of grey seals. In: Beddington JR, Beverton RJH, Lavigne DM (eds) Marine mammals and fisheries. George Allen and Unwin, London, pp 292–299Google Scholar
  31. Parsons KM, Piertney SB, Middlemas SJ, Hammond PS, Armstrong JD (2005) DNA-based identification of salmonid prey species in seal faeces. J Zool 266:275–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pauly D, Trites A, Capuli E, Christensen V (1998) Diet composition and trophic levels of marine mammals. ICES J Mar Sci 55:467–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pompanon F, Deagle BE, Symondson WO, Brown DS, Jarman SN, Taberlet P (2012) Who is eating what: diet assessment using next generation sequencing. Mol Ecol 21:1931–1950CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Purcell M, Mackey G, LaHood E, Huber H, Park L (2004) Molecular methods for the genetic identification of salmonid prey from Pacific harbor seal(Phoca vitulina richardsi) scat. Fish Bull 102:213–220Google Scholar
  35. Riedman M (1990) The pinnipeds: seals, sea lions, and walruses. Univ of California Press, Berkeley, CAGoogle Scholar
  36. Statistics NZ (2010) Fish Monetary Stock Account: 1996–2009. New Zealand Statistics. http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/environment/environmental-economic-accounts/fish-monetary-stock-account-1996-2009.aspx
  37. Street RJ (1964) Feeding habits of the New Zealand fur seal. New Zealand Marine Department of Fisheries Technical Report, 9, p 20Google Scholar
  38. Tollit DJ, Steward MJ, Thompson PM, Pierce GJ, Santos MB, Hughes S (1997) Species and size differences in the digestion of otoliths and beaks: implications for estimates of pinniped diet composition. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 54:105–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Trites AW, Christensen V, Pauly D (1997) Competition between fisheries and marine mammals for prey and primary production in the Pacific Ocean. J Northwest Atl Fish Sci 22:173–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Trites A, Christensen V, Pauly D (2006) Effects of fisheries on ecosystems: just another top predator? In: Boyd IL, Wanless S, Camphuysen CJ (eds) Top predatorsin marine ecosystems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 11–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wasser SK, Houston CS, Koehler GM, Cadd GG, Fain SR (1997) Techniques for application of faecal DNA methods to field studies of Ursids. Mol Ecol 6:1091–1097CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arsalan Emami-Khoyi
    • 1
  • David A. Hartley
    • 2
  • Adrian M. Paterson
    • 1
    Email author
  • Laura J. Boren
    • 3
  • Robert H. Cruickshank
    • 1
  • James G. Ross
    • 1
    • 4
  • Elaine C. Murphy
    • 1
    • 4
  • Terry-Ann Else
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of EcologyLincoln UniversityLincolnNew Zealand
  2. 2.Micro-Seq EnterprisesLas VegasUSA
  3. 3.New Zealand Department of ConservationWellington-TearoNew Zealand
  4. 4.Centre for Wildlife Management and ConservationLincoln UniversityLincolnNew Zealand
  5. 5.Touro University NevadaHendersonUSA

Personalised recommendations