Distribution,abundance, and movements of the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) in the Pelagos Sanctuary MPA (north‐west Mediterranean Sea)

相似文献   

Dolphins in a bottle: abundance,residency patterns and conservation of bottlenose dolphins Tursiops truncatus in the semi‐closed eutrophic Amvrakikos Gulf,Greece

• 1. Boat surveys were conducted between 2002 and 2005 to study bottlenose dolphins living in the 400 km² Amvrakikos Gulf, western Greece. During 116 survey days, 4705 km of total effort resulted in the individual photo‐identification of 106 animals, through long‐term natural markings on their dorsal fins.
• 2. Mark–recapture analyses based on the M_th model provided estimates of 82 marked individuals in 2003 (95% CI=80–91), 92 in 2004 (95% CI=86–108) and 98 in 2005 (95% CI=94–110). To include the unmarked portion of the population, the proportion of unmarked individuals was computed based on the number of photographs of marked and unmarked dorsal fins. The mean proportion of unmarked animals in the population was 0.338 (95% CI=0.288–0.389). By adding this to the estimate for marked animals in 2005, considered as the most robust, a total population estimate of 148 individuals (95% CI=132–180) was obtained.
• 3. Dolphin encounter rates in 2003–2005 did not show significant variations, and averaged 7.2 groups per 100 km or 72.5 individuals per 100 km. Encounter rates within the Gulf were about one order of magnitude greater than those found for bottlenose dolphins in nearby eastern Ionian Sea coastal waters.
• 4. Mean dolphin density in the Gulf was 0.37 animals km^?2. This relatively high density, together with high levels of site fidelity shown by most individuals, was thought to be related primarily to prey availability, particularly of epipelagic schooling fish.
• 5. The importance of the semi‐closed Amvrakikos Gulf for bottlenose dolphins and other threatened species encourages the adoption of measures aimed to conserve its valuable ecosystems and raise the naturalistic profile of the area, while promoting environment‐conscious development. Meaningful action includes restoring natural hydrology (e.g. freshwater input from rivers), curtailing pollution from various sources, responsible fisheries and aquaculture management, and control of illegal fishing. Interactions between dolphins and fisheries also deserve careful quantitative investigation.

Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Occurrence of common dolphins (Delphinus delphis) in the Gulf of Trieste and the northern Adriatic Sea

1. The Mediterranean common dolphin (Delphinus delphis), considered to have been very common in the past, had undergone a dramatic decline across most of the basin by the end of 1970s. In the northern Adriatic Sea, one of the regions with most available historical information, the common dolphin is thought to have been the most common and abundant cetacean throughout most of the 20th century. However, by the end of 1970s, it had virtually disappeared from the region and is now considered generally absent from the entire Adriatic Sea.
2. This contribution summarizes the occurrence of common dolphins in the Gulf of Trieste and provides a brief review of published records in other parts of the Adriatic Sea.
3. Systematic boat surveys in the wider area of the Gulf of Trieste between 2002 and 2019 confirmed that the common bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) is the only regularly occurring cetacean species in this area. Despite this, several records of common dolphins were documented in the Gulf of Trieste between 2009 and 2012, through sightings of live animals or recovery of dead stranded animals.
4. Dorsal fin markings allowed the photo-identification of some of these, suggesting that at least four different live individuals (three adults and one calf) occurred here in recent times. Most cases involved single adult individuals, but one included a mother-calf pair that was temporarily resident in a port for several months, a behaviour atypical for this species. Photo-identification showed that the presumed mother had previously been sighted in the Ionian Sea in Greece, over 1,000 km from the Gulf of Trieste, making this the longest documented movement for this species worldwide.
5. At present, the common dolphin continues to be rare in the region.

     

Dolphins and coastal fisheries within a marine protected area: mismatch between dolphin occurrence and reported depredation

• 1. Dolphins are often blamed for reducing fisheries catches and may be killed in retaliation. Depredation of fishing gear in coastal Mediterranean waters is normally caused by bottlenose dolphins. Economic impact, however, may be modest even within areas of reportedly acute conflict.
• 2. Boat surveys and interviews were conducted to investigate dolphin occurrence and interactions with fisheries within the 167 km² Porto Cesareo Marine Protected Area (MPA) in southern Italy. Based on 69 interviews with fishermen using bottom‐set trammel and gill nets, there was reportedly a high occurrence of depredation by bottlenose dolphins. Depredation was reported by 92% of the fishermen operating in or near the MPA, and 67% of them claimed an economic cost in excess of €1000 per year, with a mean reported cost of €2561: a higher impact than in other Mediterranean studies.
• 3. According to local fishermen, dolphin occurrence and depredation peaked in spring and autumn, coincident with the study's surveys at sea. Dedicated visual surveys totalling 1255 km of effort, however, resulted in no encounters with cetaceans. Information from interviews and boat surveys was therefore contradictory, suggesting that reports of acute depredation do not imply a constant presence of dolphins within the MPA.
• 4. While depredation in the MPA might be caused by wide‐ranging dolphins or incursions occurring overnight, damage may well be overestimated or over‐reported. As local fishermen had previously benefited from subsidies, interviews made during this study could be perceived by some as an opportunity to influence future decision‐making regarding monetary compensation for the impact of depredation.
• 5. Evidence from interviews also indicated that species and factors other than dolphins were responsible for part of the damage. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

     

Modelling dolphin distribution within an Important Marine Mammal Area in Greece to support spatial management planning

相似文献   

Biomass removal by dolphins and fisheries in a Mediterranean Sea coastal area: do dolphins have an ecological impact on fisheries?

• 1. Dolphins are often claimed to compete with fisheries, including through removal of substantial biomass. To calculate the biomass removed by fisheries and the degree of resource overlap with dolphins in a coastal area of Greece, estimates of dolphin abundance based on photographic capture–recapture were combined with an assessment of fishing effort and catch.
• 2. The estimated total biomass consumed annually by local dolphin populations – 15 short‐beaked common dolphins and 42 common bottlenose dolphins – was 15.5 and 89.8 tonnes, respectively. The total biomass removed by the local fishing fleet (307 fishing boats) was 3469.2 tonnes, i.e. about 33 times greater than that removed by dolphins.
• 3. Dolphins removed 2.9% of the total biomass, fisheries 97.1%. Nine purse seiners (representing only 3% of the active fishing fleet) were responsible for 31.9% of biomass removal. Similarity of biomass composition between dolphins and fisheries was expressed by a Pianka index of 0.46 for common dolphins and 0.66 for bottlenose dolphins.
• 4. Overlap differed according to fishing gear. Common dolphin overlap was higher with purse seiners (0.82), and lower with beach seiners (0.31), bottom trawlers (0.11) and trammel boats (0.06). There was virtually no overlap with longliners (0.02). Bottlenose dolphin overlap was higher with trammel boats (0.89) and bottom trawlers (0.75), and lower with longliners (0.38), purse seiners (0.24) and beach seiners (0.18). There was minimal overlap (0.12) between the two dolphin species.
• 5. This study suggests that ecological interactions between dolphins and fisheries in this coastal area have minor effects on fisheries. Conversely, prey depletion resulting from overfishing can negatively affect dolphins. Fisheries management measures consistent with national and EU legislation are proposed to ensure sustainability and to protect marine biodiversity. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

     

Linking small pelagic fish and cetacean distribution to model suitable habitat for coastal dolphin species,Delphinus delphis and Tursiops truncatus,in the Greek Seas (Eastern Mediterranean)

相似文献   

Present distribution of common dolphin Delphinus delphis in French Mediterranean and adjacent waters as obtained from small boat surveys

1. Common dolphin distribution in the western Mediterranean is still poorly known, with the exception of the Alboran Sea. In French waters, the species occurrence is suspected to have strongly decreased during the 20th century.
2. Small boat dedicated surveys from 1988 to 2012 were undertaken to describe common dolphin distribution in five regions of French waters and three southern regions of the western basin. A total survey effort of 38,561 km resulted in sightings of 25 common dolphin groups in the western basin.
3. Common dolphins were rarely observed off the French continental coast, more frequently around Corsica, and were quite frequent in waters off western Sardinia. Their most favoured habitat was found to be in neritic or upper slope waters.
4. The analysis of stranding records suggested that common dolphins were more abundant in French inshore waters prior to 1980.
5. A major increase of pelagic fish landings occurred from the beginning of the 1960s in the western part of French waters. Local populations of common dolphins may have declined as a consequence of prey depletion.

     

The role of historical dolphin takes and habitat degradation in shaping the present status of northern Adriatic cetaceans

• 1. Nine cetacean species have been reliably reported to occur in the shallow northern Adriatic Sea since the 17th century. However, only two species were considered regular there until the 1970s: the short‐beaked common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) and the common bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus).
• 2. Short‐beaked common dolphins have progressively disappeared from the northern Adriatic and are now rare in the region. The systematic culling campaigns and other takes that occurred between the second half of the 18th century and the 1960s, and habitat degradation in subsequent years are the most likely causes of their decline.
• 3. Today, common bottlenose dolphins are the only regular component of the northern Adriatic cetacean fauna; however, they now occur at low densities, and their fragmented groups are facing significant anthropogenic threats.
• 4. The future of northern Adriatic dolphins will depend on precautionary action to prevent further decline and on intensified research effort aimed at identifying the most effective mitigation strategies.

Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Common dolphins,common in neritic waters off southern Israel,demonstrate uncommon dietary habits

1. During the last decade, the common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) has become the second most sighted species in Israeli coastal waters, after the common bottlenose dolphin. Documentation mostly relies on opportunistic, photo and/or video-backed second-party reports, delimited within a 10 km near-shore strip.
2. Sightings occur year round, are confined to the southern part of the Israeli coast and typically comprise relatively large groups (mean ± SD: 21.5 ± 13.3), often with young calves.
3. Strandings are relatively scarce, typically one per year, and have so far yielded five upper digestive tract contents for diet analysis.
4. Cephalopods comprised 1.2% of the estimated number of prey items in the combined content. Surprisingly, by far the most abundant and prevalent prey item found (57% of pooled prey items; present and dominant in four out of five tracts) was the Balearic eel (Ariosoma balearicum), a sand burrower which is also a major dietary component of the common bottlenose dolphins.
5. Bottlenose dolphins in Israel are known to forage in association with bottom trawlers, leading to the notion that common dolphins also make use of this foraging mode. Indeed, in addition to their association with purse seiners, they have been documented accompanying bottom trawlers, by both day and night. The slender Balearic eels are frequently found protruding from the net's eyes, presumably making easy prey for both dolphin species.
6. Information gaps on common dolphins include range extension to the south/south-west, abundance estimation and genetic flow/isolation. Even so, its unusual diet and the fact that the closest known populations to the north/north-west are from the Aegean Sea, were major considerations in the recent designation of the ‘Coastal Shelf Waters of the South-east Levantine Sea’ as a Mediterranean Important Marine Mammal Area.

     

Fine‐scale population structure and connectivity of bottlenose dolphins,Tursiops truncatus,in European waters and implications for conservation

相似文献   

Distribution and habitat characteristics of three sympatric cetacean species in the coastal waters of Matang,Perak, Peninsular Malaysia

相似文献   

Assessing common bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) population structure in Mississippi Sound and coastal waters of the north central Gulf of Mexico

1. Population structure of highly mobile marine organisms can be complex and difficult to study, but it is important to understand how populations partition themselves within their environment for accurate assessment of both natural and anthropogenic impacts and successful management. The 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill negatively impacted common bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) within Mississippi Sound and the surrounding north central Gulf of Mexico (GOMx); however, little was known about their underlying population structure in these waters. Thus, it was unclear how many demographically independent populations were affected by the spill.
2. Common bottlenose dolphin samples were collected throughout inshore waters of Mississippi Sound and coastal waters of the north-central GOMx. Mitochondrial DNA control region sequence data and 19 nuclear microsatellite loci were analysed to determine how many populations are present and characterize their range throughout these waters.
3. Bayesian clustering and migration analyses identified two genetically distinct and demographically independent populations: one predominantly inhabiting Mississippi Sound and adjacent coastal waters, and a second population extending generally from offshore of Mobile Bay, Alabama, east along the Florida Panhandle. Neither of these populations align with the currently delineated management stocks previously used to estimate impacts from the oil spill on common bottlenose dolphins in this portion of the GOMx.
4. These results suggest that revisions may be necessary so that management stocks accurately represent the demographically independent populations present in these waters. Furthermore, better comprehension of underlying population structure will enhance impact assessments on common bottlenose dolphins and provide more appropriate baseline data to support future restoration and conservation objectives.

     

Interactions between fisheries and cetaceans in the Thracian sea (Greece) and management proposals

Greek fisheries (purse seine, trawling and small‐scale coastal, by order of importance) mostly operate in the Thracian Sea, which despite its relatively small size relative to the Aegean Sea (≈4.4%) is the most productive region in Greek waters due to its elevated nutrient concentration. The Thracian Sea is also vital to several species of cetaceans, mainly bottlenose dolphin, Tursiops truncatus (Montagu), and common dolphin, Delphinus delphis L. The area has been proposed as a potential cetacean conservation hotspot. For this reason, the interactions between fishing activities and local cetacean populations have been investigated through reports of stranded dolphins, interviews with fishers, surveys and detailed dolphin stomach content analysis. Reports of stranded cetaceans and interviews with fishers revealed cases of cetacean entanglement in fishing nets, as well as frequent dolphin damage to fishing nets. Necropsy stomach analysis of stranded dolphins revealed a preference for fish and cephalopods of low commercial value, indicating a low trophic overlap between cetaceans and commercial fisheries. Recommendations for the management of fisheries–cetacean interactions in the Thracian Sea are provided.     

Population genetic structure of common bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in the Adriatic Sea and contiguous regions: implications for international conservation

相似文献   

Population abundance and habitat utilization of bottlenose dolphins in the Mississippi Sound

相似文献   

Habitat use of a coastal delphinid population investigated using passive acoustic monitoring

相似文献   

Using T‐PODs to assess variations in the occurrence of coastal bottlenose dolphins and harbour porpoises

• 1. Assessments of anthropogenic impacts on cetaceans are often constrained by limited data on the extent to which these species use particular areas.
• 2. Timing porpoise detectors (T‐PODs) are autonomous data recorders for detecting cetacean echolocation clicks, potentially providing cost‐effective opportunities for monitoring cetacean occurrence.
• 3. The performance of T‐PODs was assessed in three areas off the Scottish east coast, where the relative occurrence of bottlenose dolphins and harbour porpoises was known to differ. Land‐based observations in one area compared visual and acoustic detections of dolphins, while direct hydrophone recordings of dolphin echolocation clicks were compared with T‐POD detections during boat surveys.
• 4. Land‐based surveys recorded 89 groups of dolphins within 900 m of the T‐POD. All groups spending >30 min in the area were detected on the T‐POD, and the probability of detection declined in relation to distance from the recording site.
• 5. The number of dolphin clicks recorded on the independent hydrophone system was significantly related to the number detected by a T‐POD. Between pairs of T‐PODs, there was also significant correlation with the numbers of clicks recorded in each hour, both for channels set to detect bottlenose dolphins and for channels set to detect harbour porpoises.
• 6. Year‐round deployments of paired T‐PODs detected significant geographical variation in detections for both bottlenose dolphins and harbour porpoises. This pattern reflected published data from visual surveys, where dolphins occurred most regularly within the Moray Firth Special Area of Conservation, and porpoises were sighted more regularly in offshore waters.
• 7. T‐PODs do not detect all cetaceans in the area, and care must be taken when interpreting data from mixed species communities. Nevertheless, these results confirm that T‐PODs provide an effective method for monitoring the occurrence of bottlenose dolphins and harbour porpoises, and provide excellent potential for collecting baseline data from poorly studied areas and monitoring long‐term temporal change in key areas of interest. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

     

Natural and anthropogenic drivers of foraging behaviour in bottlenose dolphins: Influence of shellfish aquaculture

相似文献