Skip to main content

Context

The MaRRS lab is working on new approaches to study ocean organisms and the roles they play in marine ecosystems. This includes the integration of several technologies, including the use of biologging instruments and quantitative echosounders.

Baleen whale prey consumption based on high-resolution foraging measurements

Abstract

Baleen whales influence their ecosystems through immense prey consumption and nutrient recycling. It is difficult to accurately gauge the magnitude of their current or historic ecosystem role without measuring feeding rates and prey consumed. To date, prey consumption of the largest species has been estimated using metabolic models based on extrapolations that lack empirical validation. Here, we used tags deployed on seven baleen whale (Mysticeti) species (n = 321 tag deployments) in conjunction with acoustic measurements of prey density to calculate prey consumption at daily to annual scales from the Atlantic, Pacific, and Southern Oceans. Our results suggest that previous studies have underestimated baleen whale prey consumption by threefold or more in some ecosystems. In the Southern Ocean alone, we calculate that pre-whaling populations of mysticetes annually consumed 430 million tonnes of Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba), twice the current estimated total biomass of E. superba, and more than twice the global catch of marine fisheries today. Larger whale populations may have supported higher productivity in large marine regions through enhanced nutrient recycling: our findings suggest mysticetes recycled 1.2 × 104 tonnes iron yr−1 in the Southern Ocean before whaling compared to 1.2 × 103 tonnes iron yr−1 recycled by whales today. The recovery of baleen whales and their nutrient recycling services could augment productivity and restore ecosystem function lost during 20th century whaling.

Citation

Savoca, M.S., Czapanskiy, M.F., Kahane-Rapport, S.R. et al. Baleen whale prey consumption based on high-resolution foraging measurements. Nature 599, 85–90 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03991-5

Context

Explanations for why the largest animals are filter feeders often highlight how gigantism enables the efficient exploitation of large, dense, heterogeneously distributed patches of prey. The flip side of this question is less often explored: what is the minimum body size at which a specific filter-feeding modality is still efficient?

Minke whale feeding rate limitations suggest constraints on the minimum body size for engulfment filtration feeding

Abstract

Bulk filter feeding has enabled gigantism throughout evolutionary history. The largest animals, extant rorqual whales, utilize intermittent engulfment filtration feeding (lunge feeding), which increases in efficiency with body size, enabling their gigantism. The smallest extant rorquals (7–10 m minke whales), however, still exhibit short-term foraging efficiencies several times greater than smaller non-filter-feeding cetaceans, raising the question of why smaller animals do not utilize this foraging modality. We collected 437 h of bio-logging data from 23 Antarctic minke whales (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) to test the relationship of feeding rates (λf) to body size. Here, we show that while ultra-high nighttime λf (mean ± s.d.: 165 ± 40 lunges h−1; max: 236 lunges h−1; mean depth: 28 ± 46 m) were indistinguishable from predictions from observations of larger species, daytime λf (mean depth: 72 ± 72 m) were only 25–40% of predicted rates. Both λf were near the maxima allowed by calculated biomechanical, physiological and environmental constraints, but these temporal constraints meant that maximum λf was below the expected λf for animals smaller than ~5 m—the length of weaned minke whales. Our findings suggest that minimum size for specific filter-feeding body plans may relate broadly to temporal restrictions on filtration rate and have implications for the evolution of filter feeding.

Citation

Cade, D.E., Kahane-Rapport, S.R., Gough, W.T. et al. Minke whale feeding rate limitations suggest constraints on the minimum body size for engulfment filtration feeding. Nat Ecol Evol 7, 535–546 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-023-01993-2