Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T21:50:38.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Diving activity of a solitary wild free ranging bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2008

Bruno Díaz López ,
Julia Andrea Bernal Shirai ,
Alberto Bilbao Prieto  and
Paula Méndez Fernández
Bruno Díaz López*
Affiliation:
The Bottlenose Dolphin Research Institute (BDRI), Via Díaz 4, Golfo Aranci 07020, Italy
Julia Andrea Bernal Shirai
Affiliation:
The Bottlenose Dolphin Research Institute (BDRI), Via Díaz 4, Golfo Aranci 07020, Italy
Alberto Bilbao Prieto
Affiliation:
The Bottlenose Dolphin Research Institute (BDRI), Via Díaz 4, Golfo Aranci 07020, Italy
Paula Méndez Fernández
Affiliation:
The Bottlenose Dolphin Research Institute (BDRI), Via Díaz 4, Golfo Aranci 07020, Italy CEMMA, Apartado 15, 36380 Gondomar, Spain
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Bruno Díaz López, The Bottlenose Dolphin Research Institute (BDRI), Via Díaz 4, Golfo Aranci 07020, Italy email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Solitary wild bottlenose dolphins and man frequenting the same small areas makes boat interaction more or less inevitable. Here we provide the first quantified data about solitary bottlenose dolphin diving behaviour in the presence and absence of boats. Over 110 hours were spent observing a solitary bottlenose dolphin within a 6 km2 bay on the north-western coast of Spain from April to August 2005. A generalized linear mixed model explaining 77.3% of the variability of duration of dives indicated that the animal did not vary its diving activity in function of the presence of boats. However, the length of dives was related with the behavioural events prior to dive. Dolphin activity was characterized by mean dive intervals (mean = 62.6 seconds) related to a predominance of foraging behaviour. Because of the frequent presence of boats and the manner in which they moved, the dolphin may have become accustomed to their presence. The data reported here could be used to implement precautionary management proposals that take into account the potential effects of boat presence on bottlenose dolphins.

Keywords

bottlenose dolphinTursiops truncatusdiving behaviourboat disturbance
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 88 , Special Issue 6: Marine Mammals , September 2008 , pp. 1153 - 1157
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2008

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

Abramson, C.I. (1994) A primer of invertebrate learning. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Baird, R.W., Hanson, M.B. and Dill, L.M. (2005) Factors influencing the diving behavior of fish-eating killer whales: sex differences and diel and interannual variation in diving rates. Canadian Journal of Zoology 83, 257–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, S. and Herman, L.M. (1989) Behavioral responses of summering humpback whales to vessel traffic: experimental and opportunistic observations. Anchorage, Alaska: United States Department of the Interior National Park Service.Google Scholar
Bearzi, G., Politi, E. and Notarbartolo di Sciara, G. (1999) Diurnal behaviour of free ranging bottlenose dolphins in the Kvarneric (Northern Adriatic Sea). Marine Mammal Science 15, 1065–1097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blane, J.M. (1990) Avoidance and interactive behavior of the St. Lawrence Beluga whale (Delphinapterus leukas) in response to recreational boating. MA thesis, Department of Geography, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
Casale, M. (2000) Sardinian wild bottlenose dolphins: an interpretation of surfacing intervals. In Evans, P.G.H. et al. (eds) European research on cetaceans 14. Cork, Ireland: European Cetacean Society, pp. 116–118.Google Scholar
Constantine, R., Brunton, D.H. and Dennis, T. (2004) Dolphin-watching tour boats change bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) behaviour. Biological Conservation 117, 299–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornick, L.A. and Horning, M. (2003) A test of hypotheses based on optimal foraging considerations for a diving mammal using a novel experimental approach. Canadian Journal of Zoology 81, 1799–1807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Díaz López, B., Mussi, B., Miragliuolo, A., Chiota, D. and Valerio, L. (2000) Respiration patterns of fin whales off Ischia, Archipelago Campano, Mediterranean Sea. In Evans, P.G.H. et al. (eds) European research on cetaceans 14. Cork, Ireland: European Cetacean Society, pp. 125–129.Google Scholar
Fortuna, C.M., Bearzi, G. and Nortarbartolo di Sciara, G. (1999) Analysis of respiration patterns of bottlenose dolphins observed in the Kvarneric (Northern Adriatic Sea, Croatia). In Evans, P.G.H. et al. (eds) European research on cetaceans 12. Valencia, Spain: European Cetacean Society, pp. 151–155.Google Scholar
Gunter, C. (1954) Mammals of the Gulf of Mexico. Fishery Bulletin, United States Department of Commerce 55, 543–551.Google Scholar
Harzen, S. (1998) Habitat use by the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) in the Sado Estuary, Portugal. Aquatic Mammals 24, 117–128.Google Scholar
Hooker, S. and Baird, R.W. (2001) Diving and ranging behaviour of odontocetes: a methodological review and critique. Mammal Review 31, 81–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hussenot, E. (1980) Le grand dauphin Tursiops truncatus en Bretagne: types de fréquentation. Penn- ar-Bed 12, 355–380.Google Scholar
Ingram, S.N. (2000) The ecology and conservation of bottlenose dolphins in the Shannon Estuary, Ireland. PhD thesis, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.Google Scholar
Johns, B.G. (1996) Responses of chimpanzees to habituation and tourism in the Kibale Forest, Uganda. Biological Conservation 78, 257–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janik, V.M. and Thompson, P.M. (1996) Changes in surfacing patterns of bottlenose dolphins in response to boat traffic. Marine Mammal Science 12, 597–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, M.L. and Swartz, S.L. (1984) Demography and phenology of gray whales and evaluation of whale-watching activities in Laguna San Ignacio, Baja California Sur, Mexico. In Swartz, S.L. and Leatherwood, S. (eds) The gray whale. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press, pp. 309–374.Google Scholar
Krebs, J.R. (1978) Optimal foraging: decision rules for predators. In Krebs, J.R. and Davies, N.B. (eds) Behavioral ecology: an evolutionary approach. London: Blackwell Science Publishers, pp. 22–63.Google Scholar
Lockyer, C. (1990) Review of incidents involving wild sociable dolphins, worldwide. In Leatherwood, S. and Reeves, R.R. (eds) The bottlenose dolphin. San Diego: Academic Press, pp. 337–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lusseau, D. (2003) Male and female bottlenose dolphins Tursiops spp. have different strategies to avoid interactions with tour boats in Doubtful Sound, New Zealand. Marine Ecology Progress Series 25, 267–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lynn, S.K. (1995) Movements, site fidelity, and surfacing patterns of bottlenose dolphins on the central Texas coast. MSc thesis, Texas A & M University, Texas, USA.Google Scholar
McCullagh, P. and Nelder, J.A. (1989) Generalised linear models 2nd edn. Monographs on statistics and applied probabilitity. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC.Google Scholar
Norris, K.S. and Prescott, J.H. (1961) Observations on Pacific cetaceans of Californian and Mexican waters. University of California Publications in Zoology 63, 291–402.Google Scholar
Nowacek, S.M., Wells, R.S. and Solow, A.R. (2001) Short-term effects of boat traffic on bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatus, in Sarasota Bay, Florida. Marine Mammal Science 17, 673–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ollervides, F.J. (2001) Gray whales and boat traffic: movement, vocal, and behavioural responses in Bahia Magdalena, Mexico. PhD thesis, Texas A & M University, Texas, USA.Google Scholar
Ritcher, C.F., Dawson, S.M. and Slooten, E. (2001) Sperm whale watching off Kaikoura, New Zealand: effects of current activities on surfacing and vocalisation patterns. Wellington, New Zealand: Department of Conservation.Google Scholar
Samuels, A., Bejder, L. and Heinrich, S. (2000) A review of the literature pertaining to swimming with dolphins. Silver Spring, Maryland: Marine Mammal Commission.Google Scholar
dos Santos, M.E. and Lacerda, M. (1987) Preliminary observations of the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truntacus) in the Sado estuary (Portugal). Aquatic Mammals 13, 65–80.Google Scholar
dos Santos, M.E., Xavier, P. and Lazaro, A. (1990) Measuring surface intervals in free-ranging bottle-nosed dolphins. In Evans, P.G.H. et al. (eds) European research on cetaceans 4. Cork, Ireland: European Cetacean Society, pp. 82–85.Google Scholar
Shane, S.H. (1990) Behaviour and ecology of the bottlenose dolphin at Sanibel Island, Florida. In Leatherwood, S. and Reeves, R.R. (eds) The bottlenose dolphin. San Diego: Academic Press, pp. 245–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stiratelli, R., Laird, N. and Ware, J. (1984) Random effects models for serial observations with binary responses. Biometrics 40, 961–971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, D. and Fedak, M. (2001) How long should a dive last? A simple model of foraging decisions by breath-hold divers in a patchy environment. Animal Behaviour 61, 287–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, R., Trites, A.W. and Bain, D.E. (2002) Behavioural responses of killer whales (Orcinus orca) to whale-watching boats: opportunistic observations and experimental approaches. Journal of Zoology 256, 255–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Würsig, B. (1978) Occurrence and group organisation of Atlantic bottlenose porpoises (Tursiops truncatus) in an Argentinian bay. Biological Bulletin. Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole 154, 348–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Würsig, B. and Jefferson, R.A. (1990) Methods of photo-identification for small cetaceans. Report of the International Whale Commission (Special Issue 12), 43–52.Google Scholar