Dear MARMAM community,
On behalf of my coauthors, I am pleased to announce our recent publication in
PeerJ:
Torres LG, Barlow DR, Chandler TE, Burnett JD. 2020. Insight into the kinematics of blue whale surface foraging through drone observations and prey data. PeerJ 8:e8906
http://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.8906
ABSTRACT: To understand how predators optimize foraging strategies, extensive knowledge of predator behavior and prey distribution is needed. Blue whales employ an energetically demanding lunge feeding method
that requires the whales to selectively feed where energetic gain exceeds energetic loss, while also balancing oxygen consumption, breath holding capacity, and surface recuperation time. Hence, blue whale foraging behavior is primarily driven by krill patch
density and depth, but many studies have not fully considered surface feeding as a significant foraging strategy in energetic models. We collected predator and prey data on a blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus brevicauda) foraging ground in New Zealand in February
2017 to assess the distributional and behavioral response of blue whales to the distribution and density of krill prey aggregations. Krill density across the study region was greater toward the surface (upper 20 m), and blue whales were encountered where prey
was relatively shallow and more dense. This relationship was particularly evident where foraging and surface lunge feeding were observed. Furthermore, New Zealand blue whales also had relatively short dive times (2.83 ± 0.27 SE min) as compared to other blue
whale populations, which became even shorter at foraging sightings and where surface lunge feeding was observed. Using an unmanned aerial system (UAS; drone) we also captured unique video of a New Zealand blue whale’s surface feeding behavior on well-illuminated
krill patches. Video analysis illustrates the whale’s potential use of vision to target prey, make foraging decisions, and orient body mechanics relative to prey patch characteristics. Kinematic analysis of a surface lunge feeding event revealed biomechanical
coordination through speed, acceleration, head inclination, roll, and distance from krill patch to maximize prey engulfment. We compared these lunge kinematics to data previously reported from tagged blue whale lunges at depth to demonstrate strong similarities,
and provide rare measurements of gape size, and krill response distance and time. These findings elucidate the predator-prey relationship between blue whales and krill, and provide support for the hypothesis that surface feeding by New Zealand blue whales
is an important component to their foraging ecology used to optimize their energetic efficiency. Understanding how blue whales make foraging decisions presents logistical challenges, which may cause incomplete sampling and biased ecological knowledge if portions
of their foraging behavior are undocumented. We conclude that surface foraging could be an important strategy for blue whales, and integration of UAS with tag-based studies may expand our understanding of their foraging ecology by examining surface feeding
events in conjunction with behaviors at depth.
The full article is open access, and available online:
https://peerj.com/articles/8906/
Please feel free to contact
Leigh.Torres@oregonstate.edu with any questions or to request a PDF copy.
Cheers,
Dawn
Dawn Barlow
PhD Student
Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Marine Mammal Institute
Oregon State University, Hatfield Marine Science Center
Geospatial
Ecology of Marine Megafauna Lab
dawn.barlow@oregonstate.edu