| Literature DB >> 30361482 |
Massimiliano Drago1, Valentina Franco-Trecu2, Angel M Segura3,4, Meica Valdivia4, Enrique M González4, Alex Aguilar5, Luis Cardona5.
Abstract
Here, we analyse changes throughout time in the isotopic niche of the FranciscanaEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30361482 PMCID: PMC6202337 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-34100-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Study area and sampling locations. The dashed lines show the sampling location of Franciscana dolphin, South American sea lion and fur seal skulls from Uruguay; the red asterisk shows the location of 92% of the Franciscana dolphin skulls collected; the red dot shows the sampling location of mussel shells (Mytilus edulis).
Length-frequency distribution of prey species found in stomach contents of Franciscana dolphins from Uruguay. TL: total body length (mm); OL: Otolith length (mm); ML: Mantle length (mm); LRL: lower rostral length (mm); n: sample size for each species; Size range: length range of the prey species found in stomach contents; bold frequency values: frequency for each length range.
| Scientific name | Frequency (%) | Regressions |
| Size range (cm) | Source | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Length range (cm) | ||||||||
| <5 | 5–12 | 12–20 | >20 | |||||
|
| ||||||||
|
| 0% | 10.8% | 89.2% | 0% | 37 | 9–17 |
[ | |
|
| 0% | 5.9% | 29.4% | 64.7% | 34 | 9–29 |
[ | |
|
| 39.1% | 15.2% | 28.3% | 17.4% | 46 | 2–28 |
[ | |
|
| 4.9% | 2.4% | 82.9% | 9.8% | 41 | 4–23 |
[ | |
|
| 0% | 0% | 60.9% | 39.1% | 23 | 13–34 |
[ | |
|
| 0% | 13.8% | 65.5% | 20.7% | 29 | 7–27 |
[ | |
|
| ||||||||
|
| 0% | 48.3% | 51.7% | 0% | 29 | 8–15 |
[ | |
|
| 8.1% | 91.9% | 0% | 0% | 62 | 4–11 |
[ | |
|
| ||||||||
|
| 0% | 0% | 0% | 100% | 16 | 28–45 |
[ | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
Stable isotope values (mean ± SD) of Franciscana dolphins during the three major periods in the recent history of marine resource exploitation in Uruguay (see Supplementary Fig. S1). n1: sample size for period; n2: sample size for sex; δ13C and δ15N: values not corrected for isotopic baseline shifts; δ13Ccor and δ15Ncor: values corrected for isotopic baseline shifts. Unknown: individuals of unknown sex.
| Period |
| δ15N (‰) | δ13C (‰) | δ15Ncor (‰) | δ13Ccor (‰) | Sex |
| δ15N (‰) | δ13C (‰) | δ15Ncor (‰) | δ13Ccor (‰) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1953–1969 | 16 | 19.2 ± 0.7 | −13.3 ± 0.6 | 17.9 ± 0.8 | −16.0 ± 0.8 | Male | 3 | 19.1 ± 1.0 | −13.4 ± 0.4 | 17.9 ± 1.1 | −16.1 ± 0.8 |
| Female | 2 | 18.8 ± 1.2 | −13.1 ± 0.3 | 17.4 ± 1.3 | −16.0 ± 0.5 | ||||||
| Unknown | 11 | 19.3 ± 0.5 | −13.3 ± 0.7 | 18.0 ± 0.6 | −16.0 ± 0.9 | ||||||
| 1971–1983 | 80 | 20.1 ± 0.8 | −13.3 ± 0.8 | 19.3 ± 0.9 | −15.3 ± 0.7 | Male | 42 | 20.1 ± 0.7 | −13.4 ± 0.9 | 19.2 ± 0.7 | −15.4 ± 0.8 |
| Female | 38 | 20.2 ± 1.0 | −13.2 ± 0.7 | 19.4 ± 1.0 | −15.1 ± 0.6 | ||||||
| Unknown | 0 | ||||||||||
| 1992–2015 | 33 | 21.0 ± 0.7 | −14.5 ± 1.1 | 20.8 ± 0.7 | −15.0 ± 1.0 | Male | 12 | 20.8 ± 0.8 | −14.1 ± 0.7 | 20.6 ± 0.9 | −14.8 ± 0.7 |
| Female | 5 | 21.2 ± 0.9 | −14.1 ± 0.2 | 21.0 ± 1.0 | −14.6 ± 0.2 | ||||||
| Unknown | 16 | 21.0 ± 0.5 | −14.9 ± 1.3 | 20.9 ± 0.5 | −15.2 ± 1.2 |
Figure 2Palate breadth of males (M) and females (F) of South American sea lion (Of), Franciscana dolphin (Pb) and South American fur seal (Aa) from Río de la Plata. Species and sexes with different superscript (lower case letters) are statistically different in their mean values according to the Tukey post-hoc test. Box represents first and third quartile, line the median and whiskers 95% confidence interval of median.
Figure 3Bivariated isotopic signals (mean ± SD) of the potential prey species for Franciscana dolphins from Uruguay. In-shore pelagic fish (□), Off-shore pelagic fish (○), In-shore demersal fish (●), In-shore demersal crustaceans (◊), In-shore pelagic cephalopods (▲), Off-shore pelagic cephalopods (■). In brackets the species size range. (see original data and sample size in Supplementary Table S3).
Linear models for standard length (sl) of male and female Franciscana dolphins over time. Estimates and p-values (in brackets) are shown for each variable. In bold we show the selected model by the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC).
| Model | Intercept | Sex (male) | Year | Sex * year | AIC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| sl~sex * year | 221.37 (0.45) | 75.76 (0.80) | −0.03 (0.79) | −0.04 (0.82) | 756.89 |
| sl~sex + year | 276.14 (0.13) | −12.69 (<0.001) | −0.06 (0.47) | 754.80 | |
|
|
|
|
Figure 4Boxplots for standard length of male and female Franciscana dolphins. Box represents first and third quartile, line the median and whiskers 95% confidence interval of median.
Linear models for bone δ13Ccor and δ15Ncor values of male and female Franciscana dolphins over time. Estimates and p-values (in brackets) are shown for each variable. In bold we show the selected model by the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC).
| Stable Isotope | Model | Intercept | Year | Sex (male) | Standard length (sl) | Sex * year | AIC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| δ15N | δ15Ncor~sex * year + sl | −140.00 (<0.001) | 0.08 (<0.001) | 23.23 (0.46) | 0.004 (0.60) | −0.01 (0.46) | 250.42 |
| δ15Ncor~sex + year + sl | −126.00 (<0.001) | 0.07 (<0.001) | −0.08 (0.65) | 0.004 (0.59) | 249.01 | ||
| δ15Ncor~sex + year | −1.24 (<0.001) | 7.26 (<0.001) | −1.44 (0.36) | 247.30 | |||
|
|
| ||||||
| δ13C | δ13Ccor~sex * year + sl | −61.32 (<0.001) | 0.02 (0.03) | 7.28 (0.79) | 0.002 (0.79) | −0.01 (0.78) | 227.67 |
| δ13Ccor~sex + year + sl | −56.70 (<0.001) | 0.02 (0.003) | −0.16 (0.35) | 0.002 (0.78) | 225.74 | ||
| δ13Ccor~sex + year | −56.15 (<0.001) | 0.02 (0.001) | −0.18 (0.18) | 223.82 | |||
|
|
|
Linear models for bone δ13Ccor and δ15Ncor values of males, females and individuals of unknown sex of Franciscana dolphins over time. Estimates and p-values (in brackets) are shown for each variable. In bold we show the selected model by the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC).
| Stable Isotope | Model | Intercept | Year | Standard length (sl) | AIC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| δ15N | δ15Ncor~year + sl | −1.08 (<0.001) | 0.06 (<0.001) | 0.01 (0.92) | 300.20 |
|
|
| ||||
| δ13C | δ13Ccor~year + sl | −44.10 ( | 0.01 (0.006) | 0.01 (0.42) | 322.04 |
|
|
|
Figure 5Trends of bone δ13Ccor (A) and δ15Ncor (B) values for males, females and individuals of unknown sex of Franciscana dolphins over time, once corrected in accordance with the isotopic baseline shifts, showing the fitted lines for each stable isotope (see Table 5).
Bayesian standard ellipse areas (SEAB) and their respective 95% credibility intervals (CI) for Franciscana dolphin (Pb), South American fur seals (Aa) and South American sea lions (Of) during the three major periods in the recent history of marine resource exploitation in Uruguay (see Supplementary Fig. S1). Isotopic overlap areas between species were calculated with SEAC, and the respective percentage of overlap surface for each species was estimated from overlap areas (see isotopic niche areas in Fig. 6).
| Period | Species | SEAB (‰2) | 95% CI (‰2) | Species | Overlap area (‰2) | % Overlap area for species | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1953–1969 | Pb | 2.10 | 1.18–3.19 | Pb vs. Aa | 0.56 | 31.12 | 39.03 |
| Aa | 1.82 | 0.97–2.86 | Aa vs. Of | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Of | 1.13 | 0.50–1.91 | Pb vs. Of | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 1971–1983 | Pb | 1.88 | 1.49–2.30 | Pb vs. Aa | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Aa | 1.28 | 0.89–1.69 | Aa vs. Of | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Of | 1.88 | 0.89–3.08 | Pb vs. Of | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 1992–2015 | Pb | 2.27 | 1.54–3.08 | Pb vs. Aa | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Aa | 1.76 | 1.22–2.35 | Aa vs. Of | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Of | 2.35 | 1.57–3.21 | Pb vs. Of | 0.02 | 0.74 | 0.71 | |
Figure 6Isotopic niche areas calculated with SEAC (see Table 6 for the ellipse area, credibility interval and overlap area values) for Franciscana dolphin (Pb), South American fur seals (Aa) and South American sea lions (Of) during the three major periods in the recent history of marine resource exploitation in Uruguay (see Supplementary Fig. S1). δ13Ccor and δ15Ncor: values corrected for isotopic baseline shifts (see original data and sample size in Table 2 and Supplementary Table S1).