Amaral, A. R.,Collins, T.,Minton, G.,Baldwin, R.,Willson, A.,Kershaw, Francine,Gray, H.,Findlay, K.,Brownell Jr, R.L.,Rosenbaum, H. C.
Update on Genetic Analyses of Arabian Sea Humpback Whales Technical Report
no. 9, 2016.
Abstract | BibTeX | Tags: Arabian Sea, breeding grounds, feeding grounds, genetics, Gulf of Masirah, Humpback Whale, megaptera novaeangliae, Microsatellite, sexing
@techreport{,
title = {Update on Genetic Analyses of Arabian Sea Humpback Whales},
author = {Amaral, A. R.,Collins, T.,Minton, G.,Baldwin, R.,Willson, A.,Kershaw, Francine,Gray, H.,Findlay, K.,Brownell Jr, R.L.,Rosenbaum, H. C.},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-01-01},
journal = {Working Paper presented to the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission},
number = {9},
pages = {6},
publisher = {IWC},
abstract = {From the 49 new samples, 44 were successfully genotyped at 10 microsatellite loci. We identified 27 males and 17 females. Within this dataset, 7 duplicate samples were found. Five samples representing 3 individuals in the 2015 dataset registered as genotypic matches with animals sampled in the 2004 dataset. An additional 9 samples involving 6 individuals that represent potential matches between the 2015 and 2004 dataset are being reviewed to determine if they represent inter-year recaptures. As the data were generated very recently, further checks to clarify issues with some microsatellite loci will be completed. Six samples failed to amplify consistently for sexing markers and need to be revisited.
Analysis of the combined genotypic dataset will be completed by the end of June/early July 2016. The genotypic matches and sexing data will be incorporated into the Oman Photo-ID database, and used to generate robust updated photo-ID and genotypic mark-recapture estimates of population abundance. These data have also been used to determine or confirm the sex of the 9 satellite tagged whales off the coast of Oman (see SH28), and a significant number of other whales identified photographically off the coast of Oman. This will prove highly valuable if future satellite tagging efforts are undertaken in Oman, as previous tagging work has been significantly male-biased (See SH28), and future tagging should target known females.
Preliminary assessment of the new sexing data (although not yet fully complete) is providing valuable insight into possible difference in habitat use between the two primary study sites off the coast of Oman (see Figure 1). Minton et al. (2011) documented a heavy bias toward males in Dhofar and a ratio near parity in the Gulf of Masirah. These results were based on the total number of photographic captures of known sex individuals. The combination of new and old sexing information allows for a more nuanced examination of this phenomenon: the male-female ratio based on individual whales for which sex was determined in each study site (regardless of how frequently they were observed) is 2:1 in Dhofar (n=30), whilst in the Gulf of Masirah this ratio is slightly biased toward females, with 45% of individuals of known sex observed in that study area being male, and 55% female (n=49). More detailed analysis of these sexing data in relation to survey effort and photographic identification data will yield further important insights into habitat use, behaviour, and social interactions, critical for the conservation of this population.},
keywords = {Arabian Sea, breeding grounds, feeding grounds, genetics, Gulf of Masirah, Humpback Whale, megaptera novaeangliae, Microsatellite, sexing},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
From the 49 new samples, 44 were successfully genotyped at 10 microsatellite loci. We identified 27 males and 17 females. Within this dataset, 7 duplicate samples were found. Five samples representing 3 individuals in the 2015 dataset registered as genotypic matches with animals sampled in the 2004 dataset. An additional 9 samples involving 6 individuals that represent potential matches between the 2015 and 2004 dataset are being reviewed to determine if they represent inter-year recaptures. As the data were generated very recently, further checks to clarify issues with some microsatellite loci will be completed. Six samples failed to amplify consistently for sexing markers and need to be revisited.
Analysis of the combined genotypic dataset will be completed by the end of June/early July 2016. The genotypic matches and sexing data will be incorporated into the Oman Photo-ID database, and used to generate robust updated photo-ID and genotypic mark-recapture estimates of population abundance. These data have also been used to determine or confirm the sex of the 9 satellite tagged whales off the coast of Oman (see SH28), and a significant number of other whales identified photographically off the coast of Oman. This will prove highly valuable if future satellite tagging efforts are undertaken in Oman, as previous tagging work has been significantly male-biased (See SH28), and future tagging should target known females.
Preliminary assessment of the new sexing data (although not yet fully complete) is providing valuable insight into possible difference in habitat use between the two primary study sites off the coast of Oman (see Figure 1). Minton et al. (2011) documented a heavy bias toward males in Dhofar and a ratio near parity in the Gulf of Masirah. These results were based on the total number of photographic captures of known sex individuals. The combination of new and old sexing information allows for a more nuanced examination of this phenomenon: the male-female ratio based on individual whales for which sex was determined in each study site (regardless of how frequently they were observed) is 2:1 in Dhofar (n=30), whilst in the Gulf of Masirah this ratio is slightly biased toward females, with 45% of individuals of known sex observed in that study area being male, and 55% female (n=49). More detailed analysis of these sexing data in relation to survey effort and photographic identification data will yield further important insights into habitat use, behaviour, and social interactions, critical for the conservation of this population.
Analysis of the combined genotypic dataset will be completed by the end of June/early July 2016. The genotypic matches and sexing data will be incorporated into the Oman Photo-ID database, and used to generate robust updated photo-ID and genotypic mark-recapture estimates of population abundance. These data have also been used to determine or confirm the sex of the 9 satellite tagged whales off the coast of Oman (see SH28), and a significant number of other whales identified photographically off the coast of Oman. This will prove highly valuable if future satellite tagging efforts are undertaken in Oman, as previous tagging work has been significantly male-biased (See SH28), and future tagging should target known females.
Preliminary assessment of the new sexing data (although not yet fully complete) is providing valuable insight into possible difference in habitat use between the two primary study sites off the coast of Oman (see Figure 1). Minton et al. (2011) documented a heavy bias toward males in Dhofar and a ratio near parity in the Gulf of Masirah. These results were based on the total number of photographic captures of known sex individuals. The combination of new and old sexing information allows for a more nuanced examination of this phenomenon: the male-female ratio based on individual whales for which sex was determined in each study site (regardless of how frequently they were observed) is 2:1 in Dhofar (n=30), whilst in the Gulf of Masirah this ratio is slightly biased toward females, with 45% of individuals of known sex observed in that study area being male, and 55% female (n=49). More detailed analysis of these sexing data in relation to survey effort and photographic identification data will yield further important insights into habitat use, behaviour, and social interactions, critical for the conservation of this population.
NOAA
Endangered and Threatened Species; Identification of 14 Distinct Population Segments of the Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) and Revision of Species-wide Listing
2016.
Abstract | BibTeX | Tags: Arabian Sea, breeding grounds, conservation status, feeding grounds, Humpback Whale, marine mammal, megaptera novaeangliae, population status, USA
@{,
title = {Endangered and Threatened Species; Identification of 14 Distinct Population Segments of the Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) and Revision of Species-wide Listing},
author = {NOAA},
issn = {Docket No. 130708594-6598-03},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-01-01},
number = {183},
pages = {247},
publisher = {Department of Commerce},
abstract = {We, NMFS, issue a final determination to revise the listing status of the
humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
We divide the globally listed endangered species into 14 distinct population segments
(DPS), remove the current species-level listing, and in its place list four DPSs as
endangered and one DPS as threatened. Based on their current statuses, the remaining
nine DPSs do not warrant listing. At this time, we find that critical habitat is not
determinable for the three listed DPSs that occur in U.S. waters (Western North Pacific,
Mexico, Central America); we will consider designating critical habitat for these three
DPSs in a separate rulemaking. },
keywords = {Arabian Sea, breeding grounds, conservation status, feeding grounds, Humpback Whale, marine mammal, megaptera novaeangliae, population status, USA},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {}
}
We, NMFS, issue a final determination to revise the listing status of the
humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
We divide the globally listed endangered species into 14 distinct population segments
(DPS), remove the current species-level listing, and in its place list four DPSs as
endangered and one DPS as threatened. Based on their current statuses, the remaining
nine DPSs do not warrant listing. At this time, we find that critical habitat is not
determinable for the three listed DPSs that occur in U.S. waters (Western North Pacific,
Mexico, Central America); we will consider designating critical habitat for these three
DPSs in a separate rulemaking.
humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
We divide the globally listed endangered species into 14 distinct population segments
(DPS), remove the current species-level listing, and in its place list four DPSs as
endangered and one DPS as threatened. Based on their current statuses, the remaining
nine DPSs do not warrant listing. At this time, we find that critical habitat is not
determinable for the three listed DPSs that occur in U.S. waters (Western North Pacific,
Mexico, Central America); we will consider designating critical habitat for these three
DPSs in a separate rulemaking.
Branch, T.A.,Stafford, K.M.,Palacios, D. M.,Allison, C.,Bannister, J.L,Burton, C.L.K.,Cabrera, E.,Carlson, C.A.,Galletti Vernazzani, B.,Gill, P.C.,Hucke-Gaete, R.,Jenner, K.C.S.,Jenner, M-N.,Matsuoka, K.,Mikhalev, Y.A.,Miyashita, T.,Morrice, M.G.,Nishiwaki, S.,Sturrock, V.J.,Tormosov, D.D.,Anderson, R.C.,Baker, A. N.,Best, P.B.,Borsa, P.,Brownell Jr, R.L.,Childerhouse, S.,Findlay, K.,Gerrodette, T.,Ilangakoon, A.,Joergensen, M.,Khan, B.,Ljungblad, D.K.,Maughan, B.,McCauley, R.D.,McKay, S.,Norris, T.F.,Oman Whale; Dolphin Research Group,Rankin, S.,Samaran, F.,Thiele, D.,Van Waerebeek, K.,Warneke, R.M.
Past and present distribution, densities and movements of blue whales Journal Article
In: Mammal Review, vol. 37, no. 332, pp. 116-175, 2007.
Abstract | BibTeX | Tags: balaenoptera musculus, Blue whale, breeding grounds, Distribution, feeding grounds, Indian Ocean, Oman, Southern Hemispher
@article{,
title = {Past and present distribution, densities and movements of blue whales },
author = {Branch, T.A.,Stafford, K.M.,Palacios, D. M.,Allison, C.,Bannister, J.L,Burton, C.L.K.,Cabrera, E.,Carlson, C.A.,Galletti Vernazzani, B.,Gill, P.C.,Hucke-Gaete, R.,Jenner, K.C.S.,Jenner, M-N.,Matsuoka, K.,Mikhalev, Y.A.,Miyashita, T.,Morrice, M.G.,Nishiwaki, S.,Sturrock, V.J.,Tormosov, D.D.,Anderson, R.C.,Baker, A. N.,Best, P.B.,Borsa, P.,Brownell Jr, R.L.,Childerhouse, S.,Findlay, K.,Gerrodette, T.,Ilangakoon, A.,Joergensen, M.,Khan, B.,Ljungblad, D.K.,Maughan, B.,McCauley, R.D.,McKay, S.,Norris, T.F.,Oman Whale and Dolphin Research Group,Rankin, S.,Samaran, F.,Thiele, D.,Van Waerebeek, K.,Warneke, R.M.},
year = {2007},
date = {2007-01-01},
journal = {Mammal Review},
volume = {37},
number = {332},
pages = {116-175},
abstract = {1. Blue whale locations in the Southern Hemisphere and northern Indian Ocean were
obtained from catches (303 239), sightings (4383 records of 8058 whales), strandings (103),
Discovery marks (2191) and recoveries (95), and acoustic recordings.
2. Sighting surveys included 7 480 450 km of effort plus 14 676 days with unmeasured effort.
Groups usually consisted of solitary whales (65.2%) or pairs (24.6%); larger feeding aggregations
of unassociated individuals were only rarely observed. Sighting rates (groups per
1000 km from many platform types) varied by four orders of magnitude and were lowest in
the waters of Brazil, South Africa, the eastern tropical Pacific, Antarctica and South Georgia;
higher in the Subantarctic and Peru; and highest around Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Chile,
southern Australia and south of Madagascar.
3. Blue whales avoid the oligotrophic central gyres of the Indian, Pacific and Atlantic
Oceans, but are more common where phytoplankton densities are high, and where there are
dynamic oceanographic processes like upwelling and frontal meandering.
4. Compared with historical catches, the Antarctic (‘true’) subspecies is exceedingly rare and
usually concentrated closer to the summer pack ice. In summer they are found throughout the
Antarctic; in winter they migrate to southern Africa (although recent sightings there are rare)
and to other northerly locations (based on acoustics), although some overwinter in the
Antarctic.
5. Pygmy blue whales are found around the Indian Ocean and from southern Australia to
New Zealand. At least four groupings are evident: northern Indian Ocean, from Madagascar
to the Subantarctic, Indonesia to western and southern Australia, and from New Zealand
northwards to the equator. Sighting rates are typically much higher than for Antarctic blue
whales.},
keywords = {balaenoptera musculus, Blue whale, breeding grounds, Distribution, feeding grounds, Indian Ocean, Oman, Southern Hemispher},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
1. Blue whale locations in the Southern Hemisphere and northern Indian Ocean were
obtained from catches (303 239), sightings (4383 records of 8058 whales), strandings (103),
Discovery marks (2191) and recoveries (95), and acoustic recordings.
2. Sighting surveys included 7 480 450 km of effort plus 14 676 days with unmeasured effort.
Groups usually consisted of solitary whales (65.2%) or pairs (24.6%); larger feeding aggregations
of unassociated individuals were only rarely observed. Sighting rates (groups per
1000 km from many platform types) varied by four orders of magnitude and were lowest in
the waters of Brazil, South Africa, the eastern tropical Pacific, Antarctica and South Georgia;
higher in the Subantarctic and Peru; and highest around Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Chile,
southern Australia and south of Madagascar.
3. Blue whales avoid the oligotrophic central gyres of the Indian, Pacific and Atlantic
Oceans, but are more common where phytoplankton densities are high, and where there are
dynamic oceanographic processes like upwelling and frontal meandering.
4. Compared with historical catches, the Antarctic (‘true’) subspecies is exceedingly rare and
usually concentrated closer to the summer pack ice. In summer they are found throughout the
Antarctic; in winter they migrate to southern Africa (although recent sightings there are rare)
and to other northerly locations (based on acoustics), although some overwinter in the
Antarctic.
5. Pygmy blue whales are found around the Indian Ocean and from southern Australia to
New Zealand. At least four groupings are evident: northern Indian Ocean, from Madagascar
to the Subantarctic, Indonesia to western and southern Australia, and from New Zealand
northwards to the equator. Sighting rates are typically much higher than for Antarctic blue
whales.
obtained from catches (303 239), sightings (4383 records of 8058 whales), strandings (103),
Discovery marks (2191) and recoveries (95), and acoustic recordings.
2. Sighting surveys included 7 480 450 km of effort plus 14 676 days with unmeasured effort.
Groups usually consisted of solitary whales (65.2%) or pairs (24.6%); larger feeding aggregations
of unassociated individuals were only rarely observed. Sighting rates (groups per
1000 km from many platform types) varied by four orders of magnitude and were lowest in
the waters of Brazil, South Africa, the eastern tropical Pacific, Antarctica and South Georgia;
higher in the Subantarctic and Peru; and highest around Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Chile,
southern Australia and south of Madagascar.
3. Blue whales avoid the oligotrophic central gyres of the Indian, Pacific and Atlantic
Oceans, but are more common where phytoplankton densities are high, and where there are
dynamic oceanographic processes like upwelling and frontal meandering.
4. Compared with historical catches, the Antarctic (‘true’) subspecies is exceedingly rare and
usually concentrated closer to the summer pack ice. In summer they are found throughout the
Antarctic; in winter they migrate to southern Africa (although recent sightings there are rare)
and to other northerly locations (based on acoustics), although some overwinter in the
Antarctic.
5. Pygmy blue whales are found around the Indian Ocean and from southern Australia to
New Zealand. At least four groupings are evident: northern Indian Ocean, from Madagascar
to the Subantarctic, Indonesia to western and southern Australia, and from New Zealand
northwards to the equator. Sighting rates are typically much higher than for Antarctic blue
whales.