research – ODYSSEA – Marine research and awareness

31May

Une expédition océanographique autour de la Géorgie du Sud

Par Joséphine Anselin

Fin 2022, j’ai eu l’occasion de participer à une croisière de recherche océanographique en Géorgie du Sud, une île située dans l’océan Austral à mi-chemin entre la côte argentine et le continent antarctique. L’expédition était dirigée par l’Institut Alfred Wegener pour la recherche polaire et marine et impliquait 50 scientifiques de 14 institutions différentes, dont le British Antarctic Survey, où je poursuis actuellement un doctorat. Ensemble, nous avons passé un peu plus de quatre semaines en mer sur notre maison flottante, le navire de recherche Polarstern.

Arriving in South Georgia onboard the RV Polarstern

L’objectif principal de la croisière était d’étudier les sources et les voies de transport du fer et d’autres micronutriments autour de la Géorgie du Sud. La raison pour laquelle il est important de comprendre ces processus est que les micronutriments comme le fer sont nécessaires pour alimenter la productivité primaire, qui à son tour joue un rôle clé dans l’absorption du CO2 par l’océan Austral. On sait que de vastes efflorescences de phytoplancton (c’est-à-dire des zones de forte productivité primaire) se produisent à proximité de la Géorgie du Sud, mais nous ne comprenons pas encore parfaitement les processus qui fournissent les micronutriments nécessaires au maintien de ces efflorescences. Les processus potentiels peuvent être divisés en “processus de la mer épicontinentale” se produisant près de la côte, et en “processus de l’océan ouvert” se produisant plus au large. L’objectif de cette expédition était d’étudier les processus provenant de l’île, comme par exemple l’ébullition des bulles de méthane, l’altération des roches et la fonte des glaciers.

L’un des aspects que je préfère dans cette expédition est qu’elle a impliqué une collaboration entre de nombreuses disciplines différentes. Au total, 13 disciplines différentes étaient représentées à bord. Chaque équipe recueillait des données pour soutenir le même objectif global de la croisière, mais nous l’examinions tous d’un point de vue légèrement différent. Par exemple, les équipes de biogéochimie et d’océanographie physique se sont concentrées sur l’échantillonnage de la colonne d’eau, d’autres équipes comme celles de géologie et de biologie marines ont collecté des échantillons de sédiments au fond de la mer, et une équipe de géophysiciens marins a effectué des relevés continus pour cartographier la topographie des fonds marins autour de la Géorgie du Sud.

Nordensjskold glacier in Cumberland Bay, South Georgia

A snapshot from our hand-held CTD deployment next to Nordenskjold Glacier terminus

Je faisais partie de l’équipe d’océanographie physique et notre objectif principal était de collecter des échantillons d’eau et de prendre des mesures hydrographiques. Nous avons utilisé trois instruments différents pour collecter les données dont nous avions besoin. Le premier était un système CTD Rosette standard. Un CTD mesure la conductivité de l’eau (qui aide à déterminer la salinité), la température et la profondeur depuis la surface de la mer jusqu’au fond marin et recueille des échantillons d’eau en cours de route. Nous avons également déployé un CTD “ultra-propre”. Ce système était très similaire au CTD standard en termes de déploiement, mais la principale différence était que le cadre en acier avait été remplacé par du titane et du plastique pour permettre le traçage de très faibles concentrations de métaux dans les échantillons d’eau. Le troisième instrument que nous avons utilisé était un CTD déployé à la main à partir de zodiacs plutôt qu’à partir du Polarstern. La raison principale du déploiement des zodiacs était d’échantillonner l’eau de fonte glaciaire près du bord du glacier. Ces zones étaient inaccessibles par bateau en raison de la faible profondeur de l’eau. Les déploiements en zodiac ont été ma partie préférée de la croisière parce qu’ils m’ont permis d’apprécier l’environnement étudié et de comprendre à quel point il peut être difficile de générer des ensembles de données d’observation de bonne qualité.

Posing with my favourite instrument on the ship, the CTD Rosette

CTD deployment on a calm sunny day

Enfin, lors de la collecte de données dans la baie de Cumberland, à l’est de l’île, nous avons eu l’occasion unique de monter à terre pendant quelques heures pour visiter l’ancienne station baleinière de Grytviken. C’est là que l’explorateur polaire Shackleton est arrivé après avoir traversé la Géorgie du Sud à pied pour aller chercher de l’aide afin de sauver son équipage. Shackleton est mon explorateur polaire préféré, c’est pourquoi la visite de cet endroit a été une expérience très spéciale.

Je suis très reconnaissante d’avoir eu l’opportunité de faire partie de l’expédition et je voudrais remercier Odyssea pour leur généreuse bourse de voyage qui m’a permis de participer à ce voyage inoubliable.

The old Grytviken whaling station

Penguin encounters in Grytviken

Joséphine Anselin est originaire du Luxembourg et poursuit actuellement un doctorat en océanographie polaire à l’université de Cambridge, en collaboration avec le British Antarctic Survey. Ses recherches actuelles portent sur l’amélioration de la représentation de la fonte des plates-formes glaciaires de l’Antarctique induite par l’océan dans les modèles océaniques à grande échelle utilisés pour les projections de l’évolution du niveau de la mer à l’échelle mondiale. Suivez-la sur Twitter @joanselinocean

Toutes les photos sont de Joséphine Anselin. Photo de couverture : Le navire de recherche Polarstern par une belle journée ensoleillée dans la baie de Cumberland, en Géorgie du Sud.
15April

Ecotourism is coming

Article written by Mel Cosentino.

Seeing animals in their natural environment is full of enjoyment and learning opportunities. Whalewatching, defined by the International Whaling Commission as “any commercial enterprise which provides for the public to see cetaceans in their natural habitat”, is my favourite example. The activity started in the 1950s in the coasts of California observing migrating gray whales from shore. The industry has grown incessantly since, and today over 13 million people go whale and dolphin watching in more than 100 countries around the world.

The experience of observing and interacting with a powerful and beautiful animal at sea is enriched when led by a skilled captain and a knowledgeable guide. Moreover, it has the potential to educate the public about the animals as well as to change their attitude towards the environment. Furthermore, the local communities also benefit from the increase in tourists visiting the area. Indeed, the revenues generated by the whalewatching industry is currently over US$2.1 billion in both direct and indirect expenses, much of which ends up in the local communities such as through hospitality and catering as well as other expenses (e.g., souvenirs).

Whalewatching is a profitable and sustainable form of cetacean exploitation. However, most cetacean observations are currently boat-based and the increased interest in watching whales and dolphins up close has raised concerns over the sustainability of the activity. In fact, short-term effects have been reported for many cetacean species and populations worldwide, impacting from common and bottlenose dolphins to humpback and sperm whales. These effects include changes in the respiration pattern and dynamics, speed and direction of travel, and changes in activity and energy budgets, such as a reduction in the time spent resting or foraging. Changes in behaviour leading to reduced energy intake (or increased energy use) can negatively affect the energy budget, which in turn can affect the reproductive success of individuals, and, potentially, the survival of the population. Studying the impact of whalewatching is important to the understanding of cetaceans’ behavioural response to disturbance and thus has implications for the management of the activity, both in the study area and beyond.

During my undergraduate studies I developed a strong interest in the impact of human activities on cetaceans. I then gained experience as a whalewatching guide and research assistant during the summer times and later on, for my master’s project, I studied the impact of whale watching vessels on sperm whales in Andenes, in northern Norway (Fig. 1).

Mel's study area in northern Norway.

Sperm whales

Sperm whales visiting Andenes waters are adult, solitary individuals. They are present every summer season and likely year-round. Some individuals are re-sighted, within and between years, such as Glenn, who was first identified in 1996 and continues to visit the area even to these days. The diving cycle of sperm whales consists of a long, deep foraging dives (~ 30 min) and a resting period at the surface (~ 8 min). Foraging dives start when the whale flukes (Fig. 2) and soon produces clicks that they use to find their prey.

The vessel from which I conducted my study has two mounted directional hydrophones which allows to track and approach the whales while they are still underwater. I monitored the duration of the foraging dives and surface periods, as well as the respiration pattern and dynamics, and the occurrence of “near surface events” (NSE – previously known as “shallow dives”). NSE are easily recognised, as the whale does not fluke and simply disappears. These NSE are short underwater periods (~ 2 min) that do not involve foraging (i.e., the whales are not clicking) and appear to interrupt resting and normal oxygen intake. They also appear to entail an unnecessary increase in energy expenditure, especially when accompanied by an avoidance behaviour (i.e., moving away). These NSE hadn’t been studied before.

I found that that neither the foraging dive or surface periods, nor the respiration pattern and dynamics were directly affected by the presence of whalewatching vessels. However, sperm whales were almost seven times more likely to perform a NSE in the presence of whalewatching vessels, and when these occur, the surface time increased a 75% (6 min), which was also associated with changes in the respiration pattern and dynamics. It is unknown whether the observed associated behavioural responses are due to NSEs, or if NSEs are a consequence of disturbing a whale that is already distressed.

As the sperm whale plunges back into the depth, it flukes up high.

The results also suggested that sperm whales might need time to recover from a NSE before engaging in a new foraging dive. Interestingly, the duration of the foraging dive was independent of water depth or the previous surface period (i.e., duration and presence of whalewatching vessels). This means that the occurrence of NSE led to an increase in surface time that was not followed by longer foraging dives. Sperm whales have a low cost of living, low diet quality, and one of the highest diving efficiencies for a diving animal. Their foraging strategies are related to their specific energetic requirements and the behaviour of their prey; therefore, performing longer dives might not be worth the effort. This means that the additional time spent at the surface represents time that will no longer be available for other activities, such as foraging or resting.

The risk-disturbance hypothesis argues that animals perceive human disturbance in a similar manner to nonlethal predation risk, and thus an animal’s response should follow the same economic principles as if encountering a predator, as observed, for example, in elk and birds. Sperm whales do not seem to follow this principle, exhibiting various acoustic and behavioural reactions (and sometimes no reaction at all) to natural and anthropogenic underwater sounds, to the presence of whalewatching platforms and to killer whale presence/sounds (i.e., predators) and attacks. Also, it appears that sperm whales may react less to the presence of tour vessels than other cetacean species, with recent studies only reporting changes in the inter-breath intervals.

This low level of response has also been reported for sperm whales in other areas, such as off Kaikoura, in New Zealand and off the Azores in Portugal. However, the level of exposure should also be considered. In Andenes, under the current level of exposure, the observed short-term effects likely have no biological consequences for the individuals. However, larger number of whalewatching vessels could increase the exposure levels and some individuals may be targeted several times a day by more than one whalewatching vessel, likely increasing the occurrence of the observed short-term effects and potentially leading to long-term consequences.

Near surface events are an easy to identify indicator of likely disturbance, and thus they should be included in regulations or protocols for whalewatching targeting sperm whales. Individuals that show signs of disturbance should be avoided, minimizing or preventing the adverse consequences of cumulative effects. The use of hydrophones as well as increased collaboration between companies, especially with the use of land-based stations to detect whales, can help avoid vessels targeting the same individual. Understanding the occurrence of NSE may well help explain, and avoid, the circumstances under which obvious and subtle responses occur in the presence of whalewatching vessels or other potential stressors.

Ecotourism and you

The International Ecotourism Society defines ecotourism as “Responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment and improves the well-being of local people.” (TIES, 1990). Ecotourism is wildlife tourism, such as whalewatching, that minimises human impact, while building environmental and cultural awareness, providing financial benefits for conservation.

Whalewatching trips are offered in almost every country where cetaceans (including river dolphins) are present. In the era of internet and social media, it is easy for you to find information in advance about the company you plan to use to provide you with an experience of a lifetime. Many countries have developed or adopted whalewatching guidelines and best practices (also see IWC) to minimise the impact of the activity. These provide recommendations on the behaviour of the vessels around the animals as well as the number of boats that can be targeting a given animal or group of animals at the same time. Do not hesitate to ask your guide or captain to show you the guidelines they follow and how they apply and comply with them. Your satisfaction depends on it, and remember that the trip has to be good for you and for the animals too!

As a matter of fact, your satisfaction will not be the result of how close you are to the animals but of the overall experience around wild animals. Each trip is different, and as we interrupt their natural behaviour when we approach them, they will not always be willing to interact with us. A good guide and a responsible captain are key for an exceptional experience, both for you and the animals. And how much better if you can learn about the whales’ biology, behaviour, and conservation concerns, as well as about area while helping local communities? Be an ecotourist!
15April

The Aquatic Wild Meat Database

Why monitoring small cetaceans and other aquatic mammals illegally exploited for food and other purposes is necessary

Mel Cosentino, Lucrecia Souviron-Priego

When people hear about the consumption of small cetaceans such as dolphins and porpoises, the first thing that normally comes to their minds are the well-known dolphin hunts that still occur in some coastal areas of Japan or the “Grindadráp”, name given in the Faroe Islands to the hunt of pilot whales and other dolphin species. However, the exploitation of small cetaceans and other aquatic mammals for food and other purposes is not an isolated event that takes place in a few countries, but is a common activity in many countries worldwide and, in most cases, is illegal or unregulated.

The products derived from big aquatic animals are known as ‘aquatic wild meat’. These products are used for food as well as bait, traditional medicine, and religious ceremonies, and are obtained through illegal or unregulated hunts, although they can be obtained opportunistically as well, from stranded animals and those accidentally caught in fishing gears. In general, this utilisation begins by chance, however, the demand in some areas has expanded and it is growing leading to deliberate hunts, putting some populations at risk.

Collecting data on aquatic wild meat is intrinsically difficult given that much of the processing occurs offshore, illicitly, or away from centralised food markets. The Aquatic Wild Meat Database aims to centralise available data on aquatic mammal utilisation at a global scale. The idea emerged from a group of scientist and then carried out by Mel Cosentino, a conservation biologist who has a special interest in the impact of human activities on marine mammals. Mel joined forces with Lucrecia Souviron Priego, a biologist currently finishing her PhD on the International wildlife trade at the University of Málaga.

Aquatic Wild Meat Database home page. The picture shows a world map colour-coded by number of records per country.

The database contains data of different types or quality that have been collected opportunistically or systematically and the final goal is use these data to answer different questions. The Aquatic Wild Meat Database was presented by Mel at the 70th annual meeting of the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission Scientific Committee, which was held in Bled, Slovenia, earlier this year. The idea was discussed with scientists specialised in this field from around the world, who will work with us to continue to improve and populate the database.

The development of the application was possible thanks to the support of the Cetacean Society International and ODYSSEA, which funded the application in its early stages; the project was also supported by Oceancare and the Animal Welfare Institute. The alpha version was posted online last year, and it has been updated and improved since then. Technical support is provided by Momchil Vasilev.
07January

Good things come in small packages!

Article written by Mel Cosentino.

Humans have been fascinated by whales and dolphins for thousands of years, evidenced by the numerous paintings, sculptures, and myths that have existed about them throughout history. Maybe it is because they spend most of their lives underwater and far from shore that we are so attracted to them. But that is also why there is still so much we don’t know about their biology, ecology, and natural behaviour.

To study these evasive creatures, we scientists make the most of each encounter with them, collecting a wide range of data. The standard method is to collect ‘visual’ data, anything we see: species, group size, behaviour, and, if lucky, photographs of their dorsal fins and/or tails to be used for individual identification purposes. Relying solely on visual data, however, is limiting. Detecting cetaceans at sea is a difficult task in itself, and detection rates are highly affected by weather conditions, particularly sea state, which is especially problematic when studying inconspicuous species, such as the harbour porpoise. And clearly it is not possible to conduct visual surveys at night, or during heavy fog or rain.

Whales and dolphins produce a wide range of sounds that researchers study to learn more about the animals.

Luckily for us, cetaceans produce a wide range of sounds that we can study to help us understand of how they interact with the environment, as well as how anthropogenic activities that produce underwater noise affect their natural behaviour. For example, baleen whales can vocalise at frequencies < 10 Hz, while toothed whales can vocalise at frequencies above 130 kHz, and we can hear none of them! Cetaceans use these sounds for foraging, navigation, and finding predators, as well as to communicate with each other. For communication purposes they use many different sounds, including whistles, moans, shrieks, knocks, thumps, creaks, buzzes, pulses, up or down calls, ratchets, and trumpets. A whole range that are species and context specific. Odontocetes (i.e. toothed whales) also produce another type of sound: echolocation clicks. These clicks are used to obtain an assessment of its environment by listening to echoes as the sound waves reflect on different objects.

Harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) (©Solvin Zankl)

Harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena)

The harbour porpoise is one of the six extant porpoise species in the world. It is dark grey (lighter on the belly) and has a small, rounded head with no noticeable beak. The dorsal fin is small and triangular. They are quite small, and although there are variations between populations, they reach a maximum of 189 cm in length and 72 kg in weight, females being larger and heavier than males. Harbour porpoises in Norway and Sweden are smaller than in the rest of the North Atlantic, reaching a maximum of 153 cm, while in Scottish waters, they reach a maximum of 173 cm in length and 50 kg in weight.

There is high variation in the maximum longevity for harbour porpoises in the North Atlantic. In Canada, they do not live longer than 10 years, while in the UK they can reach up to 24 years of age, living a mean of about 12 years. Males reach sexual maturity at 6 years, while females at 3.5 years of age, and become pregnant every 2.5 and 3 years, which is more often than other cetacean species, such as killer whales that give birth every 5 years or more. Gestation lasts between 10 and 11 months, and the baby porpoise is less than 80 cm and 7 kg at birth, which takes place between May and August.

The harbour porpoise occurs exclusively in the northern hemisphere, in coastal and offshore waters in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Depth and slope are the most important variables determining harbour porpoise distribution, which are related to the distribution of their prey, such as sandeels that dwell at the sea floor Harbour porpoises are mostly found in waters between 50 and 200m deep. Other factors affecting harbour porpoise distribution are salinity, tidal state, and distance from land. Porpoises move within the same geographic area, and although individual movements vary greatly, as some porpoises travel dozens of km a day moving to far areas, while others stay in the same area for weeks, no coordinated migrations have been identified.

The harbour porpoise is one of the six extant porpoise species in the world.

As a species, their main predator is the killer whale, and it has been suggested that harbour porpoises produce high frequency vocalisations to them, as these frequencies are way above killer whale hearing. In UK waters, the killer whale population is very small and therefore likely of little concern for harbour porpoises. In recent years, a new, unexpected predator has been reported for the North Sea and adjacent waters: the grey seal (Halichoerus grypus). Observations of grey seals feeding on harbour porpoises have been made in many European countries, including Belgium, France, the Netherlands, and the UK. These observations include reports of scavenging as well as active predation!

Listed under ‘Least Concern’ on the IUCN Red List of Endangered Species, the harbour porpoise faces nonetheless considerable threats due to anthropogenic activities, especially in certain regions. The main threat is being caught in fishing nets, which is driving the Baltic Sea population to extinction. Other threats include anthropogenic noise, pollution, and marine debris. Additionally, these little critters are being killed by bottlenose dolphins in coastal waters off California, in the US, and off Scotland, in the UK. The reasons for these non-predatory deadly interactions remain unknown for the scientific community, although several hypotheses have been postulated.

The main threat to harbour porpoises is incidental catches in fishing gear.

Harbour porpoises are protected by international legislation throughout their distribution range. In Europe, for example, the parties of the Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans in the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas (ASCOBANS) are obliged to develop and adopt measures to protect harbour porpoises, as well as to acquire knowledge about their occurrence, abundance, and distribution. Additionally, the harbour porpoise is listed in the Annex II of the Habitats Directive (Council Directive, 1992) and member states are required to set up Special Areas for Conservation (SACs) for listed species.

Studying harbour porpoises, however, is not easy. They are especially difficult to observe at sea, even at short distances and in good weather conditions. They are quite small, approximately 1.5 m long, and surface only a few seconds at a time, typically travelling in groups of 3 or fewer animals, or alone. However, they are highly vocal, producing entirely stereotyped narrow-band high-frequency (NBHF) echolocation clicks. Because of this, Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) systems are increasingly used alongside visual methods as well as independently to study cetaceans that are difficult to detect visually, such as the harbour porpoises. PAM systems have several advantages over visual surveys as they can be used during bad weather conditions (e.g., high waves, fog) and at night.

Their vocal activity can be used to detect them acoustically, even when visual detection is not possible.

a)

b)

Temporal (a) and spectral (b) characteristics of a typical click of a harbour porpoise click (approximate duration: 100µs, peak frequency: ~131kHz)

What are they talking about?

Harbour porpoises can be easily detected using PAM systems as their echolocation clicks are quite singular. These echolocation clicks emitted in click trains are used for foraging as well as communication purposes, and they do so by altering the amplitude and inter-click intervals (ICI).

Acoustic behaviour and communication in odontocetes have been studied using two main methods: fixed PAM that are moored to the seabed and acoustic tags that are attached to individuals. To date, studies on acoustic behaviour of wild harbour porpoises have focussed on foraging, using both fixed PAM and acoustic tags. Acoustic tags are the most reliable tool for acoustic behaviour studies, especially when carrying other sensors. However, these are invasive and can only be deployed on a small number of individuals, for short periods of time.

Harbour porpoises emit characteristic echolocation clicks in click trains to forage and communicate.

Communication, on the other hand, has only been studied in captive or semi-captive individuals. These studies confirmed that harbour porpoises communicate and transmit information using only echolocation clicks, through variations of the ICI within a series of clicks, known as a click train. By studying the patterns of these variations we can understand their behaviours. An amazing study conducted recently, studying the interaction between a female and her calf, as well as between adults, found that some behaviours can be easily identified when plotting clicks per second (estimated as the inverse of ICI) versus time. For example, contact calls click trains look like a long S, while for aggressions they look like a vertical line. The duration of the click trains also varies markedly, for example contact calls are less than 1 second long, while clicks trains during grooming can last up to 16 seconds. Moreover, the duration of the click itself also varies, although not significantly. There are also indications that the temporal (e.g., duration) and spectral (e.g., peak frequency) characteristics of calves differ to that of adults, yet it remains widely understudied.

Our understanding of wild harbour porpoise communication is virtually unknown. The aim of my project is to develop a methodology that can help us detect and identify different acoustic behaviours and thus increase our understanding of harbour porpoise ecology.
10August
Whale Research and Conservation in the St Lawrence
Text written by Félix Feider, 22-year-old final year undergrad studying Marine Sciences at the National University of Ireland, Galway. He participated in a 2-week research programme at the Mingan Islands Cetacean Study in Longue-Pointe-de-Mingan, Québec, Canada.

My whale research adventure in Canada started in late July. I boarded a Dash from Montreal to Sept-Iles, said goodbye to the big city life and hello to the Canadian wilderness. After a 2-hour drive, I arrived in small, but charming, Longue-Pointe-de-Mingan on the North Shore. It was immediately clear that this region is a hidden gem, with little tourists coming here and a lot of people never even having heard of it (including me until a few months ago). On the north side of the town is vast, seemingly endless dense forest and on the south side is the Mingan Islands Archipelago and the St. Lawrence, sprawling with life. The weather in this region is very volatile, with cloudless skies suddenly turning stormy and rainy. Only good weather conditions allowed us to go out on sea to look for whales. On a good day we would get up at 6am and prepare the 2 inflatable boats to be ready to leave Mingan at 7:30. The archipelago itself hosts a range of smaller marine mammals, such as seals, porpoises and even minke whales. However, the main focus of the research station lies on blue whales, fin whales and humpback whales in the St. Lawrence, which use the highly productive waters closer to Anticosti Island in the south as feeding grounds. After a 1.5-hour drive, the first whales could be spotted. The very first whale that I saw was a right whale, which are relatively new to this area and have encountered hazardous events here in the last weeks, with close to two percent (10 individuals) of the North Atlantic population (estimated to be slightly higher than 500 individuals) having died due to anthropogenic reasons, such as ship collisions and fishing gear entanglements. The North Atlantic right whale is listed as critically endangered, meaning that the species is at risk of going extinct if more animals keep dying than entering the population.

The research station mainly uses two means of monitoring the cetacean populations. The first and most abundantly used method is photo identification (photo-ID), where pictures are taken of the whale’s unique ¨fingerprint¨ to allow identification. This fingerprint refers to a body part of the whale that has a shape and/or pigmentation pattern unique to each individual and that can be used to identify individual whales just using a few pictures. The defining features used for photo-ID changes from species to species. The humpback whale is the easiest to identify: a picture from the right and left side of the dorsal fin and the ventral side of the fluke show highly distinctive shapes and pigmentation patterns. Fin whale identification is based on pictures of the right side dorsal fin and the area behind the blowholes, which hosts what is called the blaze and chevron, pigmentation patterns that are unique to an individual, but much more complicated to differentiate to an untrained eye such as mine. The blue whale was once abundant in this region, but since the early 1990s their numbers in this region have shriveled and only a handful of individuals are nowadays seen here every season. Sadly I did not have the chance to see one myself. Photos are also used to investigate how many animals have been entangled in fishing gear, particularly by examining the number of animals with scars around their peduncle, which is the area where the tailstock meets the fluke.

The second most used method of monitoring the populations is biopsy sampling. An arrow with a 3 cm long hollow metal tube as tip is placed at the region below the dorsal fin, at a perpendicular angle, using a crossbow. The tip only pierces the skin and the top layer of the fat layer, or blubber, which probably feels like a small mosquito bite to the whale. The skin and blubber are later separated in the lab and used for different analyses. The skin is used to extract the DNA, which is in turn used to genetically determine the sex of the individual and to learn more about the population structure and gene pool by defining relationships among individuals. The blubber is used for studies on toxicity load, hormones and pregnancy rates. All these data sets become even more valuable over long term study and since the station is now operating for 38 years, the amount of data collected to date is huge and has already helped us understand a lot about migration, behaviour, life cycle, sexual maturity and much more. Whenever the opportunity arises, researchers also collect fecal (poo!) samples which hold valuable information on the diet and body condition of the animals. That way we can learn what the whales feed on and how healthy they are.

On top of the two above stated methods, the station also uses several tagging methods to monitor the behaviour of the animals underwater. It is important to remember that most of the research here focuses on the brief moments that whales spend on the sea surface, however our knowledge about their behaviour below the surface is very limited at best. Tagging can tell us about the depths they travel to, their feeding behaviours, their diving patterns, migration pathways, important feeding grounds and much more. The problem about tags are numerous though; they are quite expensive (some cost 25.000$), it is difficult and time consuming to place them, they can sometimes hold for just a few minutes and rarely longer than a month and new studies show that the whales’ behaviour is influenced by the tags and therefore the data could be misleading. Despite these problems, certain individual cases in which the tags have stayed put over a long period of time have shed light on some of the many question that are still unanswered. For instance two tagged blue whales have been monitored to stop north of the New England Seamounts to feed over a few days before continuing their migration, the assumed importance of this region to this species was previously not known.

After a long day at sea, having seen and photographed a lot of whales and sampled a few biopsies if possible, we returned to the pier in Mingan. Dinner was always provided at the only restaurant in Longue-Pointe, Le Macareux Dodu, and breakfast at La Chicoutée, both of which had amazing food and the service was always extremely friendly. Everybody whom I’ve met in town was extremely welcoming and it was very interesting to get to know their stories and way of life. On rainy, foggy or windy days we could not go out to sea. Instead I visited the station’s museum, I got presentations about the history of the station, their work, future plans, I went to an Innu Cultural Centre or simply helped at the station, identifying and matching whales that were photographed on previous days or helped wherever else I could. One of the best parts of my experience here was the team. It was an international melting pot of scientists from all around the world, with different backgrounds and each and every one was very welcoming, friendly and helpful. I got to know a lot of amazing, fascinating characters that became friends and who I am hoping to meet again sometime in the future.

To conclude, the 2 weeks that I spent at the Mingan Islands Cetacean Study were fascinating. I learned a lot about marine mammology that I am looking forward to implementing into my future academic career choices. I got spoilt with the diversity and amount of marine life on the St. Lawrence, having sighted numerous fin, humpback, minke and right whales, porpoises, seals and even a few basking sharks, on a good day I saw more than 20 whales. Since my major interest is in marine conservation, I now know the hard work that is required to gather population data for conservation efforts to be possible. My days at the station and time outside working hours were very informative and interesting as well. Long story short, I had an absolutely great time. Since there are still more questions than answers regarding cetaceans and every answer reveals new questions, their work here is far from done and there are many future research opportunities still available. I highly recommend this experience to anybody who wants to know more about whales, cetacean study, the methods of research and the life at a remote research station, I can promise you that you will not regret coming here.
09August
Odyssea à la conférence ECS
Du 1er au 3e mai, la conférence annuel de la Société Européenne des Cétacés a eu lieu dans la ville de Middelfart, Danemark. L’évènement permet aux chercheurs sur les mammifères marins, aux étudiants, et aux amateurs de partager les plus récents résultats de leurs études, de discuter les problèmes actuels, et, bien sûr, de rejoindre les collègues venant de partout du monde. Odyssea a aussi participé cet année à la conférence avec 2 de ses chercheuses, Amandine Gillet et Anna Schleimer, présentant des résultats de leurs doctorats en forme de poster. Anna a reçu le prix pour le meilleur poster dans la catégorie ‘postgraduate student’ pour sa recherche de modélisation de l’habitat des rorquals communs dans le Golfe du St Laurent. La prochaine conférence sera à La Spezia, Italie!
08January

RTL Documentary “Odyssea”

A small team from the Luxembourgish TV station RTL (Deborah Ceccacci, Sam Bouchon and Marc Aragones) joined Pierre Gallego this summer during his field work in Mozambique, where he studied humpback whales. The result was a great documentary that was aired on TV on 3 January 2017.

The documentary describes Pierre Gallego’s work and gives an insight into the daily life of a marine biologist during the field season: boat surveys, photo-identification, biopsy collection, interaction with volunteers, acoustics, and much more. When asked about where he sees Odyssea in a couple of years, Pierre replied that he would love to see Odyssea grow more by establishing more collaborations in Luxembourg, helping to secure our ongoing research and conservation projects.

We hope the documentary made people rethink the apparent incompatibility between “Luxembourg” and “marine biology” and that they will join us on future expeditions.

You can watch the documentary (only in Luxembourgish) on the RTL website.

A big thank you to the RTL team for their terrific work!

Pierre Gallego (left) with RTL team Sam Bouchon (middle) and Deborah Ceccacci (right).
19November

Research Project: Whale Shark Tourism in the Philippines

Over a period of six months, Odyssea researcher Anna Schleimer joined the Large Marine Vertebrates Project in the Philippines to study the behaviour of the world’s largest fish: the wale shark. The project was located in the small town of Oslob on Cebu, which has become a popular destination for whale shark watchers since an amateur video in 2011 had shown fishermen luring whale sharks away from their fishing nets with food. Along with the growing number of tourists came changes in the local economy as the tourist industry created many new jobs in resorts, restaurants, scuba diving companies and tourist tours. Now many locals rely on whale shark tourism as their primary source of income. When talking to locals, you soon realise how proud the community is about their ‘butanding’, the local term for whale shark, and that they care about their whale sharks.

However, the whale shark aggregation in Oslob is maintained through provisioning, a highly controversial method where the whale sharks are being fed by humans to create an incentive for the animals to stay in the area. Possible consequences of provisioning include the disruption of natural behaviour, aggressive behaviour towards humans, and increased stress levels. In order to understand how provisioning is affecting the whale sharks of Oslob, researchers and volunteers from the Large Marine Vertebrates Project spent hundreds of hours in water to study and document the behaviour of the provisioned whale sharks in Oslob. By taking pictures of the spot pattern on the sharks (photo-identification), the researchers were able to recognise individual whale sharks and describe changes in their behaviour over time. The study showed that the sharks had learnt to associate the area with food and that frequently returning sharks had synchronised their arrival to the feeding area with the schedule of the feeding boats, both arriving around 6 am every morning. The researchers also noticed that the whale sharks changed the way they fed over time: while initially the new sharks swam around hectically, with some experience they learnt to approach the boats with the feeders providing little handfuls of shrimp. Experienced sharks were often observed in a stationary vertical position engulfing the food next to the boats. The study also revealed that frequently returning sharks became less skittish over time and reacted progressively less to touches from other sharks and tourists (which were documented despite a no-touch policy).

In addition to the animal behaviour, researchers also recorded compliance to the code of conduct, particularly whether regulations on the minimum distances between swimmers and whale sharks and the maximum number of people allowed per whale shark were followed. The study clearly showed that overcrowding was the norm and that people were not respecting the minimum distance limits to the sharks. That is why a stricter enforcement of the code of conduct is required in order to prevent potentially negative impacts on the animals.

While this study clearly showed that provisioning lead to changes in behaviour of the whale sharks, it remains unclear to what extent the observed changes reflected a mere adaptation to increase feeding efficiency or an actual disruption of natural behaviour. Oslob is currently the only place in the Philippines where an artificial whale shark aggregation is maintained through provisioning. Donsol and Southern Leyte are known to have natural seasonal aggregations of whale sharks (no provisioning) and should be considered as an alternative to Oslob.

The full study can be found here: https://peerj.com/articles/1452.pdf

Tag : research

Whales and dolphins produce a wide range of sounds that researchers study to learn more about the animals.

The harbour porpoise is one of the six extant porpoise species in the world.

The main threat to harbour porpoises is incidental catches in fishing gear.

Their vocal activity can be used to detect them acoustically, even when visual detection is not possible.

Harbour porpoises emit characteristic echolocation clicks in click trains to forage and communicate.