Aggregative and feeding thresholds of sympatric rorqual whales within a fjord system

• Published in: Ecosphere
• Main Author: Keen, Eric M.
• Other Authors: Gitga'at First Nation Guardian Watchmen, Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Cascadia Research Collective, NSF Graduate Research Fellowship program, Lewis and Clark Fund, National Geographic Society - Waitt Grant, Watson, Ayres, Cunningham, Barlow, Keen families
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Wiley 2017
• Subjects: Balaenoptera physalus; Megaptera novaeangliae
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1702; https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1002%2Fecs2.1702; https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ecs2.1702

Abstract Rorqual whales (f. Balaenopteridae) supposedly respond to increases in prey supply according to both aggregative and feeding thresholds. With the former, they gather in areas above a minimum prey density set by their basal metabolic needs. With the latter, feeding occurs only above a prey density set by the energetic cost of lunge feeding. To compare prey preferences and the two threshold types in sympatric rorquals, I conducted systematic transect surveys and behavioral observations of humpback whales ( Megaptera novaeangliae ) and fin whales ( Balaenoptera physalus ) in a British Columbia fjord system. While multiple prey features were found to influence whale aggregation and feeding, both threshold types were observed in each species' response to krill volume. Humpback response to prey features was less predictable and influenced by more factors than that of fin whales, which appeared to be exclusively euphausivorous and interested in the deepest high‐volume krill patches within the deepest channels. Compared with fin whales, humpbacks found higher‐volume krill patches and had higher aggregative thresholds, but had lower feeding thresholds. Findings aligned overall with the expectations that aggregative behavior is responsive to local prey supply, while feeding thresholds are governed by less mutable energetic constraints imposed by body size and feeding mode. Both aggregative and feeding threshold responses appeared to be a function of local conditions: As total krill‐like backscatter increased, feeding thresholds stabilized (became more nonlinear and more nonrandom), while aggregative thresholds destabilized. All results emphasized the importance of incorporating observations of feeding effort in studies of prey preference and habitat use.