Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T14:12:15.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Population structure of harbour porpoises in the Baltic region: evidence of separation based on geometric morphometric comparisons

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 June 2012

Anders Galatius ,
Carl Christian Kinze  and
Jonas Teilmann
Anders Galatius*
Affiliation:
Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Frederiksborgvej 399, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark
Carl Christian Kinze
Affiliation:
Rosenørns Allé 55 2. tv., 1970 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
Jonas Teilmann
Affiliation:
Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Frederiksborgvej 399, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: A. Galatius, Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Frederiksborgvej 399, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The harbour porpoise is seriously depleted and threatened with extinction in the Baltic Sea. It is usually assumed that Baltic porpoises form a separate population unit, although the evidence for this has been disputed lately. Here, a 3-D geometric morphometric approach was employed to test a number of hypotheses regarding population structure of the harbour porpoise in the Baltic region. 277 porpoise skulls from Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Germany and Poland were measured with a suite of 3-D landmarks. Statistical analyses revealed highly significant shape differences between porpoises from the North Sea, Belt Sea and the inner Baltic Sea. A comparison of the directionalities of the shape vectors between these units found differences that cannot be attributed to a general, continual shape trend going from the North Sea to the inner Baltic Sea. These vectors indicate a morphological adaptation to the specific sub-areas. Such adaptation may be the result of the topographic peculiarities of the area with variable topography and shallow waters, e.g. in the Belt Sea porpoises, there may be a greater reliance on benthic and demersal prey. The present results show that isolation by distance alone is an unlikely explanation for the differences found within the Baltic region and thus support previously reported molecular indications of a separate population within the inner Baltic Sea.

Keywords

harbour porpoisepopulation structuregeometric morphometricsskullBaltic SeaBelt SeaNorth Seaconservationmorphological adaptation
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 92 , Issue 8: Marine Mammals , December 2012 , pp. 1669 - 1676
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aarefjord, H., Kinze, C.C. and Lindstedt, I. (1995) Diet of the harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) in Scandinavian waters. Reports of the International Whaling Commission Special Issue 16, 211–222.Google Scholar
Adams, D.C., Rohlf, F.J. and Slice, D.E. (2002) Geometric morphometrics: ten years of progress following the ‘Revolution'. Italian Journal of Zoology 71, 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, L.W. (1993) The population structure of the harbour porpoise, Phocoena phocoena, in Danish waters and part of the North Atlantic. Marine Biology 116, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, S.H. and Clausen, B. (1983) By-catches of the harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) in Danish fisheries 1980–81, and evidence of over-exploitation. Paper SC/35/SM14 presented to the International Whaling Commission Scientific Committee.Google Scholar
Andersen, L.W., Holm, L.E., Siegismund, H.R., Clausen, B., Kinze, C.C. and Loeschcke, V. (1997) A combined DNA-microsatellite and isozyme analysis of the population structure of the harbour porpoise in Danish waters and West Greenland. Heredity 78, 270–276.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andersen, L.W., Ruzzante, D.E., Walton, M., Berggren, P., Bjørge, A. and Lockyer, C. (2001) Conservation genetics of the harbour porpoise, Phocoena phocoena, in eastern and central North Atlantic. Conservation Genetics 2, 309–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ASCOBANS (2003) ASCOBANS recovery plan for harbour porpoises in the Baltic Sea (Jastarnia plan). Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy 6, 105–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berggren, P. and Arrhenius, F. (1995) Sightings of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in the Swedish waters before 1990. Reports of the International Whaling Commission Special Issue 15, 99–107.Google Scholar
Börjesson, P. and Berggren, P. (1997) Morphometric comparisons of skulls of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) from the Baltic, Kattegat, and Skagerrak Seas. Canadian Journal of Zoology—Revue Canadienne de Zoologie 75, 280–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Börjesson, P., Berggren, P. and Ganning, B. (2003) Diet of harbour porpoises in the Kattegat and Skagerrak Seas: accounting for individual variation and sample size. Marine Mammal Science 19, 38–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galatius, A., Berta, A., Frandsen, M.S. and Goodall, R.N.P. (2011) Inter-specific variation of ontogeny and skull shape among porpoises (Phocoenidae). Journal of Morphology 272, 136–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaskin, D.E. (1984) The harbour porpoise Phocoena phocoena (L): regional population, status and information on direct and indirect catches. Reports of the International Whaling Commission 34, 569–586.Google Scholar
Gillespie, D., Berggren, P., Brown, S., Kuklik, I., Lacey, C., Lewis, T., Matthews, J., McLanaghan, R., Moscrop, A. and Tregenza, N. (2005) Relative abundance of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) from acoustic and visual surveys of the Baltic Sea and adjacent waters during 2001 and 2002. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 7, 51–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huggenberger, S., Benke, H. and Kinze, C.C. (2002) Geographical variation in harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) skulls: support for a separate non-migratory population in the Baltic proper. Ophelia 56, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinze, C.C. (1985) Intraspecific variation in Baltic and North Sea harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena L., 1758). Videnskabelige Meddelelser Dansk Naturhistorisk Forening 146, 63–74.Google Scholar
Kinze, C.C. (1990) The harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena (L.)): stock identification and migration patterns in Danish and adjacent waters. PhD thesis. University of Copenhagen, 39 pp.Google Scholar
Kinze, C.C. (2008) Marsvinefangsten ved Middelfart—en naturhistorisk nyfortolkning. Vends 08 Årbog for Lokal—og Kulturhistorie på Nordvestfyn 55–65.Google Scholar
Klingenberg, C.P., Barluenga, M. and Meyer, A. (2002) Shape analysis of symmetric structures: quantifying variation among individuals and asymmetry. Evolution 56, 1909–1920.Google ScholarPubMed
Klingenberg, C.P. (2011) MorphoJ: an integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Molecular Ecology Resources 11, 53–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koschinski, S. (2002) Current knowledge on harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in the Baltic Sea. Ophelia 55, 167–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koslowski, G. and Schmelzer, N. (2007) Ice winter severity in the western Baltic Sea in the period 1301–1500. Berichte des BSH 42, 47–56.Google Scholar
Lachenbruch, P.A. (1967) An almost unbiased method of obtaining confidence intervals for probability of misclassification in discriminant analysis. Biometrics 23, 639–645.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marcus, L.F., Hingst-Zaher, E. and Zaher, H. (2000) Application of landmark morphometrics to skulls representing the orders of living mammals. Hystrix 11, 27–47.Google Scholar
Møhl-Hansen, U. (1954) Investigations of reproduction and growth of the porpoise (Phocoena phocoena, L.) from the Baltic. Videnskabelige Meddelelser fra fra Dansk Naturhistorisk Forening 116, 369–396.Google Scholar
Palmé, A., Laikre, L., Utter, F. and Ryman, N. (2008) Conservation genetics without knowing what to conserve: the case of the Baltic harbour porpoise Phocoena phocoena. Oryx 42, 305–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohlf, F.J. and Slice, D. (1990) Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks. Systematic Zoology 39, 40–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosel, P.E., Tiedemann, R. and Walton, M. (1999) Genetic evidence for limited trans-Atlantic movements of the harbour porpoise Phocoena phocoena. Marine Biology 133, 583–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheets, D.H. (2001) IMP, Integrated Morphometric Package. Available from www.canisius.edu/sheets/morphsoft.html (accessed 10 February 2012).Google Scholar
Skòra, K., Pawliczka, I. and Klinowska, M. (1988) Observations of the harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) on the Polish Baltic coast. Aquatic Mammals 14, 113–119.Google Scholar
Sommer, R.S., Pasold, J. and Schmolcke, U. (2008) Post-glacial immigration of the harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) into the Baltic Sea. Boreas 37, 458–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sveegaard, S. (2011) Spatial and temporal distribution of harbour porpoises in relation to their prey. PhD thesis. Aarhus University, 128 pp.Google Scholar
Sveegaard, S., Teilmann, J., Tougaard, J., Dietz, R., Mouritsen, K.N., Desportes, G. and Siebert, U. (2011) High density areas for harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) identified by satellite tracking. Marine Mammal Science 27, 230–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teilmann, J. and Lowry, N. (1996) Status of the harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) in Danish waters. Reports of the International Whaling Commission 46, 619–625.Google Scholar
Teilmann, J., Sveegaard, S., Dietz, R., Petersen, I.K., Berggren, P. and Desportes, G. (2008) High density areas for harbour porpoises in Danish waters. Aarhus University, National Environmental Research Institute, 84 pp.Google Scholar
Wiemann, A., Andersen, L.W., Berggren, P., Siebert, U., Benke, H., Teilmann, J., Lockyer, C., Pawliczka, I., Skora, K., Roos, A., Lyrholm, T., Paulus, K.B., Ketmaier, V. and Tiedemann, R. (2010) Mitochondrial Control Region and microsatellite analyses on harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) unravel population differentiation in the Baltic Sea and adjacent waters. Conservation Genetics 11, 195–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Galatius supplementary material

Galatius supplementary material

Download Galatius supplementary material(File)
File 42 KB