Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-tbj44 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T03:05:41.116Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dead useful; methods for quantifying baseline variability in stranding rates to improve the ecological value of the strandings record as a monitoring tool

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2017

Mariel T.I. ten Doeschate ,
Andrew C. Brownlow ,
Nicholas J. Davison  and
Paul M. Thompson
Mariel T.I. ten Doeschate*
Affiliation:
Scottish Marine Animal Stranding Scheme, SRUC Veterinary Services, Drummondhill, Inverness IV2 4JZ, Scotland, UK Lighthouse Field Station, Institute of Biological & Environmental Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Cromarty IV11 8YL, Scotland, UK
Andrew C. Brownlow
Affiliation:
Scottish Marine Animal Stranding Scheme, SRUC Veterinary Services, Drummondhill, Inverness IV2 4JZ, Scotland, UK
Nicholas J. Davison
Affiliation:
Scottish Marine Animal Stranding Scheme, SRUC Veterinary Services, Drummondhill, Inverness IV2 4JZ, Scotland, UK
Paul M. Thompson
Affiliation:
Lighthouse Field Station, Institute of Biological & Environmental Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Cromarty IV11 8YL, Scotland, UK
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: M.T.I. ten Doeschate, Scottish Marine Animal Stranding Scheme, SRUC Veterinary Services, Drummondhill, Inverness IV3 5SZ, Scotland, UK email: marieltdoeschate@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The ecological value of the stranding record is often challenged due to the complexity in quantifying the biases associated with multiple components of the stranding process. There are biological, physical and social aspects that complicate the interpretation of stranding data particularly at a population level. We show how examination of baseline variability in the historical stranding record can provide useful insights into temporal trends and facilitate the detection of unusual variability in stranding rates. Seasonal variability was examined using harbour porpoise strandings between 1992 and 2014 on the east coast of Scotland. Generalized Additive Mixed modelling revealed a strong seasonal pattern, with numbers increasing from February towards a peak in April. Profiling seasonality this way facilitates detection of unusual variations in stranding frequencies and permits for any change in the incidence of strandings to be quantified by evaluation of the normalized model residuals. Consequently, this model can be used to identify unusual mortality events, and quantify the degree to which they deviate from baseline. With this study we demonstrate that a described baseline in strandings allows the detection of abnormalities at an early stage and can be used as a regional framework of reference for monitoring. This methodology provides means to quantify and partition the variability associated with strandings data and is a useful first step towards improving the stranding record as a management resource.

Keywords

Harbour porpoisestrandingsScotlandcetaceansstranding processmonitoringGeneralized Additive Mixed ModelUnusual Mortality Event

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 98 , Special Issue 5: Marine Mammals , August 2018 , pp. 1205 - 1209
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Akaike, H. (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 19, 716–723.Google Scholar
Bennett, P.M., Jepson, P.D., Law, R.J., Jones, B.R. and Kuiken, T. (2001) Exposure to heavy metals and infectious disease mortality in harbour porpoises from England and Wales. Environmental Pollution 112, 33–40.Google Scholar
Bubb, P., Jenkins, M. and Kapos, V. (2005) Biodiversity indicators for national use. Cambridge: The United Nations Environment Programme's World Conservation Monitoring Centre.Google Scholar
Dailey, M. and Stroud, R. (1978) Parasites and associated pathology observed in cetaceans stranded along the Oregon coast. Journal of Wildlife Disease 14, 503–551.Google Scholar
Epperly, S., Braun, J., Chester, A., Cross, F., Merriner, J., Tester, P. and Churchill, J.H. (1996) Beach strandings as an indicator of at-sea mortality of sea turtles. Bulletin of Marine Science 59, 289–297.Google Scholar
Flint, P.L. and Fowler, A.C. (1997) A drift experiment to assess the influence of wind on recovery of oiled seabirds on St Paul Island, Alaska. Marine Pollution Bulletin 36, 165–166.Google Scholar
Fraser, F.C. (1977) Royal fishes: the importance of the dolphin. In Harrison, R.J. (ed.) Functional anatomy of marine mammals. Volume 3. London: Academic Press, pp. 1–44.Google Scholar
Hammond, P.S., Berggen, P., Benke, H., Borchers, D.L., Collet, A., Heide-Jørgensen, M.P., Heimlich, S., Hiby, A.R., Leopold, M.F. and Øien, N. (2002) Abundance of harbour porpoise and other cetaceans n the North Sea and adjacent waters. Journal of Applied Ecology 39, 361–376.Google Scholar
Hammond, P.S., Macleod, K., Berggren, P., Borchers, D.L., Burt, L., Cañadas, A., Desportes, G., Donovan, G.P., Gilles, A., Gillespie, D., Gordon, J., Hiby, L., Kuklik, I., Leaper, R., Lehnert, K., Leopold, M., Lovell, P., Øienm, N., Paxton, C.G.M., Ridoux, V., Rogan, E., Samarra, F., Scheidat, M., Sequeira, M., Siebert, U., Skov, H., Swift, R., Tasker, M.L., Teilmann, J., Van Canneyt, O. and Vázquez, J.A. (2013) Cetacean abundance and distribution in European Atlantic shelf waters to inform conservation and management. Biological Conservation 164, 107–122.Google Scholar
Hart, K.M., Mooreside, P. and Crowder, L.B. (2006) Interpreting the spatio-temporal patterns of sea turtle strandings: going with the flow. Biological Conservation 129, 283–290.Google Scholar
Hohn, A.A., Rotstein, D.S. and Byrd, B.L. (2013) Unusual mortality events of harbour porpoise strandings in North Carolina, 1997–2009. Journal of Marine Biology 2013, 1–14. Article ID 289892.Google Scholar
Hoyt, E. (2005) Marine protected areas for whales, dolphins and porpoises. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
International Whaling Commission (2016) Report of an IWC workshop developing practical guidance for the handling of cetacean stranding events. In Paper IWC/66/WKM&WIRep02, presented to the Meeting of the International Whaling Commission, October 2016, Portoroz, Slovenia (unpublished), 23 pp.Google Scholar
Jepson, P.D. (ed.) (2005) Cetacean strandings investigation and co-ordination in the UK. Report to DEFRA for the period 1st January 2000–31st December 2004. London: NHM consulting, environment: coastal and marine sector.Google Scholar
Jepson, P.D., Deaville, R., Barber, J.L., Aguilar, A., Borell, A., Murphy, S., Barry, J., Brownlow, A., Barnett, J., Berrow, S., Cunningham, A.A., Davison, N.J., ten Doeschate, M.T.I., Esteban, R., Ferreira, M., Foote, A.D., Genov, T., Gimenez, J., Loveridge, J., Llavona, A., Martin, V., Maxwell, D.L., Papachlimitzou, A., Penrose, R., Perkins, M.W., Smith, B., de Stephanis, R., Tregenza, N., Verborgh, P., Fernandez, A. and Law, R.J. (2016) PCB pollution continues to impact populations of orcas and other dolphins in European waters. Scientific Reports 6, 18573.Google Scholar
Kirkwood, J.K., Bennet, P.M., Jepson, P.D., Kuiken, T., Simpson, V.R. and Baker, J.R. (1997) Entanglement in fishing gear and other causes of death in cetaceans stranded on the coasts of England and Wales. Veterinary Record 141, 94–98.Google Scholar
Leeney, R.H., Amies, R., Broderick, A.C., Witt, M.J., Loveridge, J., Doyle, J. and Godley, B.J. (2008) Spatio-temporal analysis of cetacean strandings and bycatch in a UK fisheries hotspot. Biodiversity Conservation 17, 2323–2338.Google Scholar
Leopold, M.F. (2015) Eat or be eaten: porpoise diet studies. PhD thesis. Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Lockyer, C. (1995) Aspects of the morphology, body fat condition and biology of the harbour porpoise, Phocoena phocoena, in British waters. Reports of the International Whaling Commision (Special Issue) 16, 199–209.Google Scholar
Lockyer, C. and Kinze, C. (2003) Status, ecology and life history of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in Danish waters. NAMMCO Scientific Publications 5, 143–176.Google Scholar
Magera, A.M., Mills Flemming, J.E., Kaschner, K., Christensen, L.B. and Lotze, H.K. (2013) Recovery trends in marine mammal populations. PLoS ONE 8, e77908.Google Scholar
McFee, W.E., Hopkins-Murphy, S.R. and Schwacke, L.H. (2006) Trends in bottlenose dolphin strandings in South Carolina, USA, in 1997–2003: implications for the Southern North Carolina and South Carolina Management Units. Journal of Cetacean Research Management 8, 195–201.Google Scholar
Nemiroff, L., Wimmer, T., Daoust, P-Y. and McAlpine, D.F. (2010) Cetacean strandings in the Canadian maritime provinces, 1990–2008. Canadian Field Naturalist 124, 32–44.Google Scholar
Norman, S.A., Bowlby, C.E., Brancato, M.S., Calambokidis, J., Duffield, D., Gearin, P.J., Gornall, T.A., Gosho, M.E., Hanson, B., Hodder, J., Jeffries, S.J., Lagerquist, B., Lambourn, D.M., Mate, B., Norberg, B., Osborne, R.W., Rash, J.A., Riemer, S. and Scordino, J. (2004) Cetacean strandings in Oregon and Washington between 1930 and 2002. Journal of Resource Management 6, 87–99.Google Scholar
Peltier, H., Baagoe, H.J., Camphuijsen, C.J., Czeck, R., Dabin, W., Danie, P., Deaville, R., Haelters, J., Jauniaux, T., Jensen, L.F., Jepson, P.D., Keijl, G.O., Siebert, U., van Canneyt, O. and Ridoux, V. (2013) The stranding anomaly as population indicator: the case of harbour porpoise Phocoena phocoena in north-western Europe. PLoS ONE 8, 1–14.Google Scholar
R Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Santos, M.B., Pierce, G.J., Learmonth, J.A., Reid, R.J., Ross, H.M., Patterson, J.A.P., Reid, D.G. and Beare, D. (2004) Variability in the diet of harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in Scottish waters 1992–2003. Marine Mammal Science 20, 1–27.Google Scholar
Taylor, B.L., Martinez, M., Gerrodett, T., Barlow, J. and Hrovat, Y.N. (2007) Lessons from monitoring trends in abundance of marine mammals. Marine Mammal Science 23, 157–175.Google Scholar
Venables, W. N. and Ripley, B. D. (2002) Modern applied statistics with R. 4th edition. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Williams, R., Gero, S., Bejder, L., Calambokidis, J., Kraus, S.D., Lusseau, D., Read, A.J. and Robbins, J. (2011) Underestimating the damage: interpreting cetacean carcass recoveries in the context of the Deepwater Horizon/BP incident. Conservation Letters 4, 1–6.Google Scholar
Wood, S.N. (2004) Stable and efficient multiple smoothing parameter estimation for generalized additive models. Journal of the American Statistical Association 99, 673–686.Google Scholar
Wood, S.N. (2006) Generalized additive models: an introduction with R. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC.Google Scholar
Zuur, A.F., Ieno, E.N., Walker, N., Saveliev, A.A. and Smith, G.M. (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R: statistics for biology and health. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar