Trend changes in southern fur seal pup populations at Marion Island

A Subantarctic fur seal mother and her pup (Picture: M. WEGE)

A Subantarctic fur seal mother and her pup (Picture: M. WEGE)

For scientists and conservationists to make judicious decisions about the conservation practices of any population we need to know what the current status of the population is - is the population increasing or decreasing in numbers? Continued monitoring allows us to understand how various external or internal factors influence a population’s growth. Internal factors could include competition between individuals, whereas external factors could be human disturbance, climate change or disease.

 

Like all fur seals globally, the fur seals of Marion Island (46° 5.25’ S & 37° 51.46’ E; Figure 1) were hunted from the 17th century onwards for their furs. Sealing continued intermittently until 1931 when only a handful of seals remained on Marion Island. These were all Subantarctic fur seals (Arctocephalus tropicalis).


Today, Marion Island is home to the largest sympatric population (different species co-occur) of Subantarctic and Antarctic fur seals (Arctocephalus gazella) in the world. Both these species recovered spectacularly after the era of sealing had ended and by 2004 ~15 000 Subantarctic and ~700 Antarctic fur seal pups were born on Marion Island. We present our most recent pup population estimates for both species breeding here.


Antarctic fur seals:

Between 2004 and 2013 the Antarctic fur seal population was still increasing, but the rate of change has decreased from 17% in 2004 to 4% in 2013. We suspect this reduced growth in pup production is the result of saturation at the main breeding beach where more than 75% of all pups are born. Over the last 12 years several new breeding beaches have been established around the island. We postulate that with time these new breeding beaches will start to thrive and population growth will increase. We are also currently exploring other counting methods to improve potential error around our estimates.


Subantarctic fur seals:

Surprisingly, the Subantarctic fur seal pup population declined by 46% (95% credible interval 43%–48%) between 2004 (mean = 15,260, credible interval: 14,447– 16,169 pups) and 2013 (mean = 8,312, credible: 7,983–8,697; Figure 2). Your first question might be whether this was perhaps just an anomalous year with exceptionally low pup production. This is where annual counts done on a subsection of the island's coastline come in handy. From 2007 until 2011 we have seen a consistent drop in pup numbers at the beaches counted annually and between 2012 and 2015 it seems pup numbers have stabilised (Figure 3). Furthermore, the biggest decline in pup numbers were at the highest density beaches on the west coast of Marion Island. The first logical explanation is that the number of seals have just grown too numerous that bulls tend to crush pups or females fail to bond with their pups after birth and subsequently abandon them. However, all the dead pups on the beaches are also counted and between 2004 and 2013 there was no mentionable change in pup mortality on the beaches. This suggests other forces are at play.

 

What these forces are, we are currently unsure about. However, it is most likely not just one contributing factor but a combination of several. Population dynamics are never simple. The Marion Island Marine Mammal Programme has an intensive fur seal programme aimed at asking various questions to solve this mystery. This includes tracking fur seal females of both species to see where they are foraging and how hard they are working while foraging (inferred from diving behaviour), what they eat (diet) and how long they are staying away from their pups. Lastly, we then also weigh these females’ pups to see how successful the female has been at obtaining food.

 

Lastly, it should be stressed that a reduction in numbers does not necessarily mean that animals are dying. Emigration to other colonies could also contribute to population reduction. That means, populations elsewhere in the Southern Ocean could perhaps be growing due to an influx of animals. However, to determine whether this is in fact the case we need to know what is happening to the entire Southern Ocean population of Subantarctic and Antarctic fur seals, not just on Marion Island, before we can make assumptions on the growth of the species.

Written by: Mia Wege [mwege@zoology.up.ac.za]

Reference:

Wege, M., Etienne, M.-P., Oosthuizen, W.C. , Reisinger, R.R., Bester, M.N. & de Bruyn, P.J.N. (2016) Trend changes in sympatric Subantarctic and Antarctic fur seal pup populations at Marion Island, Southern Ocean. Marine Mammal Science, DOI: 10.1111/mms.12306

The full scientific article can be obtained from the Journal of Marine Mammal Science or by contacting the authors directly.

Acknowledgements:

This work would not have been possible without logistical support provided Department of Environmental Affair, funding provided by the National Research Fund's South African National Antarctic Programme. Greg Hofmeyr helped plan the 2013 total island count, gave valuable insight and passed on a wealth of experience. Dawn Cory-Toussaint, Cheryl Tosh, Santjie du Toit, Mashudu Phalanndwa, Paul Visser, Derek van der Merwe, Hugh Purdon, Christiaan Conradie, Shadrack Podile, Thomas Mufanadzo, Johan van der Vyver, Nadia Hansa, Daniël Kotzé and Liezl Pretorius were instrumental in either helping with or doing counts themselves.

Field Assistant Positions on Marion Island: 2016-2017 - NOW CLOSED

Sealer Christiaan Conradie weighing an Antarctic fur seal (Arctocephalus gazella) pup at Marion Island. © Ryan Reisinger.

Sealer Christiaan Conradie weighing an Antarctic fur seal (Arctocephalus gazella) pup at Marion Island. © Ryan Reisinger.

Three field assistant positions (2 x "Sealers" and 1 x "Whaler") are once again available at Marion Island, April 2015 - May 2016. All three positions are within the research programme "Marion Island Marine Mammals - sensitivity to global drivers of environmental change".

For instructions and more information:
Mammalogist - Seals
Mammalogist - Killer Whales

Read the advertisments carefully and follow the application instructions therein. An overview of the programme can be found here, and by looking at our publications. Further information about the positions and a background to the programme can be found on our programme history, 'working with us' and FAQ pages.

Enquiries and cover letters may be sent to Dr Nico de Bruyn (pjndebruyn at zoology.up.ac.za).

DEADLINE: 5 October 2015
 

MIMMP fellow comment on animal telemetry in SCIENCE

MIMMP research fellow, Trevor McIntyre, has published a letter in Science cautioning researchers to continuously be aware of the potential effects of placing tracking devices on animals. While he does not argue the value of tracking studies, these should be done with due ethical consideration. He includes some examples from our Marion Island efforts in his comment on a review published earlier in Science by Kays et al. ("Terrestrial animal tracking as an eye on life and planet"). 

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/349/6248/596.2.full?utm_campaign=email-sci-toc&utm_src=email 

An elephant seal at Marion Island with a satellite linked tracking device.

An elephant seal at Marion Island with a satellite linked tracking device.

Introducing the 2015/16 Marion Island SEAL AND KILLER WHALE field personnel

The 2015 5-week Relief voyage (Takeover) ended a couple of weeks ago, with the SA Agulhas II bringing home the 2014/2015 killer whale and seal field personnel, as well as the Principal Investigator and colleagues. The latter mentioned assisted with debriefing of the returning field personnel and training of the 'newbies'. 

The 'new' killer whale and seal field scientists for the 2015/16 thirteen-month long expedition to Marion Island are almost entering their second month alone since the ship departed with all the Takeover - and previous expedition team members.

THE MARION ISLAND 72ND EXPEDITION (2015/16) SEALERS AND KILLER WHALERS; LEFT TO RIGHT: JOHN DICKENS, BENOIT MORKEL, MICHAEL MOLE 

THE MARION ISLAND 72ND EXPEDITION (2015/16) SEALERS AND KILLER WHALERS; LEFT TO RIGHT: JOHN DICKENS, BENOIT MORKEL, MICHAEL MOLE 

Official Youtube video of seal-penguin sexual behaviour

Scientists Capture Unique Footage Of Seals Attempting To Mate With Penguins SUBSCRIBE: http://bit.ly/Oc61Hj We upload a new incredible video every weekday. Subscribe to our YouTube channel so you don't miss out ASTONISHING footage reveals an enormous seal forcing itself onto a king penguin.

Featuring some exclusive video footage of Antarctic fur seals mating with king penguins including an interview with Dr Nico de Bruyn discussing these events. Originally published by this group in the journal Polar Biology 

Marion fur seals featured on BBC... again!

Marion's Antarctic fur seals are sexually harassing king penguins.... again! Check out the latest feature in BBC EARTH:

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141117-why-seals-have-sex-with-penguins

 

....regarding our latest paper in Polar Biology: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00300-014-1618-3

 

This follows on an initial paper in 2008 reporting on the first such observed case in 2006:

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10164-007-0073-9#page-1 , which also caused somewhat of a media storm.

The Effect of Satellite Tagging and Biopsy Sampling on Killer Whales

Satellite Tagging and Biopsy Sampling of Killer Whales at Subantarctic Marion Island: Effectiveness, Immediate Reactions and Long-Term Responses
PLOS ONE 9(11): e111835

Cetaceans spend the vast majority of their lives under water and are highly mobile and often wide-ranging, which makes them a challenging taxon to study. Two field methods – tissue biopsy sampling and satellite-linked telemetry (or satellite tagging) – are becoming widely used in cetacean studies because they allow the collection of data which are difficult or impossible to obtain by other means. Tissues obtained by biopsy sampling can be used for a range of analyses including genetics, stable isotopes, fatty acids, contaminants, hormones and trace elements and can so address aspects such as population structure, diet and animal health. Satellite tagging can elucidate the movement, distribution, behaviour and habitat use of cetaceans in relation to their physical environment. Such data are critical to understanding the ecology of a species and its environmental role and, consequently, are vital to conservation or management efforts. The need for such information is particularly acute given the anthropogenic pressures many such populations and species face.

However, researchers must carefully consider their methods not only from an animal welfare perspective, but also to ensure the scientific rigour and validity of their results. The latter point is critical where methods may affect the subsequent behaviour or performance of individuals, thereby biasing the results obtained. From an ethical perspective researchers have an onus to assess the tradeoffs between the ‘importance’ of research, its likely benefit and its effect on animals before conducting work; from a scientific perspective the responsibility is to design robust and valid studies. Researchers should further evaluate animal effects and research methods post-hoc, refine these where needed and, importantly, publish such results.

We have been satellite tagging and biopsy sampling killer whales at Marion Island since 2011 and in our new paper in PLOS ONE we looked at the immediate reactions of the animals to being tagged or sampled and whether killer whales showed any longer term responses.

We never observed severe reactions to tagging or biopsy sampling, there was typically no observable reaction or a flinch, shake of the body, some acceleration and/or an immediate dive. We analysed individual sighting histories over several years, and we could detect no significant mid- (1 month) or long-term (<24 months) changes in killer whale occurrence where we tagged and biopsy sampled.

However, we will continue long-term monitoring of individuals after biopsy sampling and tagging to provide continuous assessment of potential impacts on the study animals. We recommend that such monitoring should be implemented in other studies where animals are biopsied or tagged, especially considering the increased use of these methods.

Read the full paper in PLOS ONE:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111835

This is an emotive issue which is likely to elicit some strong responses.

New paper reveals a widespread historical killer whale population bottleneck

MSc student Charlene Janse van Rensburg, principal investigator Nico de Bruyn and our collaborator Rus Hoelzel are among the authors of a new study examing the historical population structure of killer whales worldwide:

Killer whale nuclear genome and mtDNA reveal widespread population bottleneck during the last glacial maximum
Moura AE, Janse van Rensburg C, Pilot M, Tehrani A, Best PB, Thornton M, Plön S, de Bruyn PJN, Worley KC, Gibbs RA, Dahlheim ME, Hoelzel AR
Molecular Biology and Evolution 31(5): 1121-1131
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msu058

Joseph Caspermeyer, of the journal's press office wrote:

"In the ocean, the killer whale rules as a top predator, feeding on everything from seals to sharks. Being at the apex of the food chain, killer whales’ geographic distribution and population size can also serve as a sentinel species regarding past and future ocean ecosystems and environmental change.

In a recent study in Molecular Biology and Evolution, Moura et al. (2014) assembled 2.23 Gb of northern hemisphere killer whale genomic data and mitochondrial DNA from 616 samples worldwide. Would the data analysis reveal patterns of past climate change that may have impacted food availability? Also, what happened to the diversity of killer whales over time during the last great ice age?

From this data set, the authors used an evolutionary coalescent model to conclude that killer whales were stable in population size during most of the Pleistocene (2.5 million–11,000 years ago) followed by a rapid decline and bottleneck during the last great period of ice age (110,000–12,000 years ago). Although most populations declined, a population off of southern Africa remained stable. Consistent with the population bottleneck, they also showed low genetic diversity, with the exception of a refuge population off the coast of South Africa.

“Our data supports the idea of a population bottleneck affecting killer whales over a wide geographic range and leading to the loss of diversity,” said Moura et al. (2014). “The South African population stands out as an exception, which may be due to local conditions that were productive and stable over the last million years or so.”

Thus, the recent ice age may have been detrimental to the ocean’s top predator and significantly affected diversity among living populations."

From doi: 10.1093/molbev/msu066