Changes in the behavior of individual animals in response to environmental characteristics can provide important information about habitat preference, as well as the relative risk that animals may face based on the amount of time spent in hazardous areas. We analyzed movement and habitat affinities of ten loggerhead turtles (Caretta caretta) tagged with satellite transmitters in the spring and fall of 1998 near Madeira, Portugal for periods of 2-10 months. We analyzed the behavior of these individuals in relation to the marine environment they occupied. As a measure of behavior we calculated the straightness index (SI), the ratio of the displacement of the animal to the total distance traveled, for individual weekly segments of the 10 tracks. We then extracted information about chlorophyll a concentration, sea-surface temperature (SST), bathymetry, and geostrophic current of the ocean in a 20-km buffer surrounding the tracks, and examined their relationship to the straightness index using generalized linear models. Chlorophyll a value, bathymetry and SST were significantly related to the straightness index of the tracks of all ten animals, as was the circular standard deviation of the geostrophic current (Wald's test: p = 0.001, p = 0.008, p = 0.025, and p = 0.049, respectively). We found a significant negative relationship between straightness index and chlorophyll, and positive relationships with ocean depth and SST indicating that animals are spending more time and searching more thoroughly in areas with high chlorophyll concentrations and in areas that are shallower, while moving in straight paths through very warm areas. We also found a positive relationship between straightness index and the circular standard deviation of surrounding geostrophic currents suggesting that these turtles are more likely to move in a straight line when in the presence of diffuse, less-powerful currents. Based on these relationships, we propose that conservation planning to reduce overlap of turtles with fishing operations should take into account the locations of bathymetric features such as seamounts and upwelling locations where chlorophyll concentrations are high. This analysis is an effective way to characterize areas of high-use habitat for satellitetagged marine vertebrates, and allows for comparisons of these characteristics between species and among individuals.Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Fin Balaenoptera physalus and humpback Megaptera novaeangliae whales share foraging areas and may compete for the same prey, but little is known about the extent to which they partition prey resources. Visual cetacean surveys and simultaneous acoustic-trawl surveys of prey were conducted around 2 submarine canyons off Kodiak Island, Alaska, in 2004 and 2006. Statistical models were used to examine the associations between sightings of fin and humpback whales and measures of their potential prey and environment. Observations and models indicate that fin whales were disproportionately abundant in areas with the highest observed euphausiid concentrations, while humpback whales were abundant at lower euphausiid concentrations and in areas where juvenile walleye pollock were abundant. Fin whales were abundant in the areas where euphausiid biomass was deepest and in the deepest areas surveyed (>150 m depth). In contrast, humpback whales primarily occurred in shallower areas and near more shallowly distributed euphausiids. The different depth and prey affinities of fin and humpback whales suggest niche and habitat partitioning between these 2 co-occurring species. Abundance models built using acoustic estimates of prey density are a useful tool to further understanding of the abundance, distribution, and behavior of these animals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.