Visitors Now: | |
Total Visits: | |
Total Stories: |
Story Views | |
Now: | |
Last Hour: | |
Last 24 Hours: | |
Total: |
Well, since my own institute beat me to the punch on announcing our latest whale shark paper (really, far too keen, ladies & gents), I thought I’d better follow up with a post of my own.
We’ve mentioned our previous whale shark research before (see here and here for previous posts, and see the end of this post for a full list of our whale shark publications), but this is a lovely extension of that work by my recently completed PhD student, Ana Sequeira.
Her latest contribution, Inferred global connectivity of whale shark Rhincodon typus populations just published online in Journal of Fish Biology, describes what a lot of whale shark punters & researchers alike have suspected for a long time – global connectivity of all the oceans’ whale shark populations. The problem hasn’t been a lack of ‘evidence’ for this per se; there is now sufficient evidence from genetic studies that at least on the generational scale (a single generation could be up to 37 years long), populations among the major ocean basins are connected via migration (Castro et al. 2007; Schmidt et al. 2009). The problem instead is that no one has ever observed a shark voyage between ocean basins, nor has anyone really suggested how and over what time scales this (must) happen.
Until now, that is.
The paper outlines a novel ‘global connectivity’ model that explains, based on existing tracking, observational and genetic data, the most likely migration pathways of whale sharks within and between major oceans. In other words, it’s the first time that someone has formalised what we’ve all been thinking about for decades (yes, I am proud of Ana).
Whale shark migration patterns depicting possible whale shark populations (red circles) considering that even though they are highly migratory animals at some part of their life-cycle they just perform shorter migrations within geographically close locations. A possible time link between those “aggregation” sites and distant locations that would allow the inter-ocean populations to mix is shown by doted arrows inblue. Black arrows denote movements revealed by tagging studies and dashed lines indicate no current evidence for a possible migratory path (except the existence of tracked shark that performed a 13,000 km migration on a east to west intra Pacific ocean migration – Eckert and Stewart, 2001, shown by the back dotted line). Question marks in red indicate areas where further studies are needed.
I’m not going to go in great detail here (that’s what the paper does) as you can easily download or request a copy from me. But I will highlight one other thing we mention that has bothered me and many others for years. Some of the original satellite tracking work by Eckert & Stewart suggested an amazing trans-Pacific journey of one tagged female shark based on a some rather questionable data. The track in question can be viewed in our paper (or the original) – it is clearly an artefact of a detached tracker that floated passively on ocean currents and is unlikely to reflect any real whale shark migration patterns. We finally had to say something about it.
–
References
Filed under: connectivity, conservation, fish, genetics, marine Tagged: Fish, Indian Ocean, Marine biology, migration, Ningaloo Reef, Pacific, satellite tracking, Whale shark
2013-02-06 18:45:32
Source: http://conservationbytes.com/2013/02/07/whither-goest-the-biggest-fish/