4.5 Article

Stable isotopes of captive cetaceans (killer whales and bottlenose dolphins)

Journal

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY
Volume 214, Issue 4, Pages 538-545

Publisher

COMPANY OF BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/jeb.045104

Keywords

captivity; discrimination factor; nitrogen enrichment; Orcinus orca; turnover; Tursiops truncatus

Categories

Funding

  1. University of Liege
  2. Spanish CSIC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There is currently a great deal of interest in using stable isotope methods to investigate diet, trophic level and migration in wild cetaceans. In order to correctly interpret the results stemming from these methods, it is crucial to understand how diet isotopic values are reflected in consumer tissues. In this study, we investigated patterns of isotopic discrimination between diet and blood constituents of two species of cetaceans (killer whale, Orcinus orca, and bottlenose dolphin, Tursiops truncatus) fed controlled diets over 308 and 312 days, respectively. Diet discrimination factors (Delta; mean +/- s.d.) for plasma were estimated to Delta(13)C=2.3 +/- 0.6 parts per thousand and Delta(15)N=1.8 +/- 0.3 parts per thousand, respectively, for both species and to Delta(13)C=2.7 +/- 0.3 parts per thousand and Delta(15)N=0.5 +/- 0.1 parts per thousand for red blood cells. Delipidation did not have a significant effect on carbon and nitrogen isotopic values of blood constituents, confirming that cetacean blood does not serve as a reservoir of lipids. In contrast, carbon isotopic values were higher in delipidated samples of blubber, liver and muscle from killer whales. The potential for conflict between fisheries and cetaceans has heightened the need for trophic information about these taxa. These results provide the first published stable isotope incorporation data for cetaceans, which are essential if conclusions are to be drawn on issues concerning trophic structures, carbon sources and diet reconstruction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available