Abstract

Understanding how closely related, sympatric species distribute themselves relative to their environment is critical to understanding ecosystem structure and function and predicting effects of environmental variation. The Antarctic Peninsula supports high densities of krill and krill consumers; however, the region is warming rapidly, with unknown consequences. Humpback whales Megaptera novaeangliae and Antarctic minke whales Balaenoptera bonaerensis are the largest krill consumers here, yet key data gaps remain about their distribution, behavior, and interactions and how these will be impacted by changing conditions. Using satellite telemetry and novel spatial point-process modeling techniques, we quantified habitat use of each species relative to dynamic environmental variables and determined overlap in core habitat areas during summer months when sea ice is at a minimum. We found that humpback whales ranged broadly over continental shelf waters, utilizing nearshore bays, while minke whales restricted their movements to sheltered bays and areas where ice is present. This presents a scenario where minke whale core habitat overlaps substantially with the broader home ranges of humpback whales. While there is no indication that prey is limiting in this ecosystem, increased overlap between these species may arise as climate-driven changes that affect the extent, timing, and duration of seasonal sea ice decrease the amount of preferred foraging habitat for minke whales while concurrently increasing it for humpback whales. Our results provide the first quantitative assessment of behaviorally based habitat use and sympatry between these 2 krill consumers and offers insight into the potential effects of a rapidly changing environment on the structure and function of a polar ecosystem.

Highlights

  • Related species tend to have high diet overlap and similar foraging strategies

  • Studies of resource partitioning among related species that forage on individual prey items show that smaller animals typically forage on smaller prey (e.g. Dixon 2007), whereas studies on grazers, which feed on non-mobile vegetation, show that metabolic demands, rather than body size alone, may affect resource selection and habitat use (e.g. Arsenault & Owen-Smith 2008)

  • Humpback whales are seasonally present around the Antarctic Peninsula, spending summer months feeding before migrating in winter to low-latitude breeding grounds thousands of kilometers away (Rasmussen et al 2007)

Read more

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Related species tend to have high diet overlap and similar foraging strategies. Humpbacks are medium-sized baleen whales averaging ~15 m in length, whereas AMWs are among the smallest baleen whales, averaging ~8 m in length Both species are rorqual whales, which are characterized by a unique suite of morphological adaptations for high-speed engulfment filter-feeding on small-bodied prey. Humpback whales are seasonally present around the Antarctic Peninsula, spending summer months feeding before migrating in winter to low-latitude breeding grounds thousands of kilometers away (Rasmussen et al 2007) They generally inhabit continental shelf waters, associating primarily with areas. AMWs are most closely associated range broadly and use a combination of oceanowith sea ice that accretes each winter, and are only graphic and physical features that likely aggregate secondarily associated with areas of higher prey krill, whereas AMWs will associate primarily with availability Sea ice is thought to provide some level diminish, and that those areas that do remain will of protection from killer whales that are known to lead to increased sympatry (and potential competifeed on AMWs in this region (Fearnbach et al 2019). tion) between these 2 species

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Habitat covariates
Continuous-time correlated random walk models
SPP models
Movement behavior
DISCUSSION
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call