Search for: All records

Understanding the distribution of marine organisms is essential for effective management of highly mobile marine predators that face a variety of anthropogenic threats. Recent work has largely focused on modelling the distribution and abundance of marine mammals in relation to a suite of environmental variables. However, biotic interactions can largely drive distributions of these predators. We aim to identify how biotic and abiotic variables influence the distribution and abundance of a particular marine predator, the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus), using multiple modelling approaches and conducting an extensive literature review.

Western North Atlantic continental shelf.

We combined widespread marine mammal and fish and invertebrate surveys in an ensemble modelling approach to assess the relative importance and capacity of the environment and other marine species to predict the distribution of both coastal and offshore bottlenose dolphin ecotypes. We corroborate the modelled results with a systematic literature review on the prey of dolphins throughout the region to help explain patterns driven by prey availability, as well as reveal new ones that may not necessarily be a predator–prey relationship.

We find that coastal bottlenose dolphin distributions are associated with one family of fishes, the Sciaenidae, or drum family, and predictions slightly improve when using only fish versus only environmental variables. The literature review suggests that this tight coupling is likely a predator–prey relationship. Comparatively, offshore dolphin distributions are more strongly related to environmental variables, and predictions are better for environmental‐only models. As revealed by the literature review, this may be due to a mismatch between the animals caught in the fish and invertebrate surveys and the predominant prey of offshore dolphins, notably squid.

Incorporating prey species into distribution models, especially for coastal bottlenose dolphins, can help inform ecological relationships and predict marine predator distributions.

 

Landscapes are frequently delineated by nested watersheds and river networks ranked via stream orders. Landscapes have only recently been delineated by their interfluves and ridge networks, and ordered based on their ridge connectivity. There are, however, few studies that have quantitatively investigated the connections between interfluve networks and landscape morphology and environmental processes. Here, we ordered hillsheds using methods complementary to traditional watersheds, via a hierarchical ordering of interfluves, and we defined hillsheds to be landscape surfaces from which soil is shed by soil creep or any type of hillslope transport. With this approach, we demonstrated that hillsheds are most useful for analyses of landscape structure and processes. We ordered interfluve networks at the Calhoun Critical Zone Observatory (CZO), a North American Piedmont landscape, and demonstrated how interfluve networks and associated hillsheds are related to landscape geomorphology and processes of land management and land-use history, accelerated agricultural gully erosion, and bedrock weathering depth (i.e., regolith depth). Interfluve networks were ordered with an approach directly analogous to that first proposed for ordering streams and rivers by Robert Horton in the GSA Bulletin in 1945. At the Calhoun CZO, low-order hillsheds are numerous and dominate most of the observatory’s ∼190 km2 area. Low-order hillsheds are relatively narrow with small individual areas, they have relatively steep slopes with high curvature, and they are relatively low in elevation. In contrast, high-order hillsheds are few, large in individual area, and relatively level at high elevation. Cultivation was historically abandoned by farmers on severely eroding low-order hillsheds, and in fact agriculture continues today only on high-order hillsheds. Low-order hillsheds have an order of magnitude greater intensity of gullying across the Calhoun CZO landscape than high-order hillsheds. In addition, although modeled regolith depth appears to be similar across hillshed orders on average, both maximum modeled regolith depth and spatial depth variability decrease as hillshed order increases. Land management, geomorphology, pedology, and studies of land-use change can benefit from this new approach pairing landscape structure and analyses.