4.3 Article

Possible decline in leatherback turtle Dermochelys coriacea nesting along the coast of Caribbean Central America

期刊

ORYX
卷 38, 期 4, 页码 395-403

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0030605304000766

关键词

Aerial survey; bycatch; Demiochelys coriacea; egg collection; leatherback turtle; nesting; tag returns; trend

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Leatherback turtle Dermochelys coriacca nesting has declined on Pacific beaches and as a result the species is considered Critically Endangered. Atlantic populations are, however, also important for the species' survival and therefore we undertook a study to quantify the size and nesting trend of the Caribbean Costa Rica and Panama leatherback turtle rookery. Tag returns show that post-nesting females from the rookery disperse throughout the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico and North Atlantic. Aerial and track survey results were used to estimate 5,759-12,893 nests per year between San Juan river and Chiriqui beach, making this the fourth largest rookery worldwide. Monitoring results from three beaches (Tortuguero, Pacuare and Gandoca) were used to examine any temporal trend in nesting using nonparametric regression. Nesting appeared to decline slightly from 1995 to 2003 but the trend could be an artefact of interannual variation in nest numbers. Explanations for the difference in nesting trends over the past 15 years for Pacific (rapid decline) and Caribbean (slight decline or stable) rookeries include: (1) hatching success on Caribbean beaches has been higher due to dispersed nesting, (2) fisheries bycatch has been greater in the Pacific, and (3) less overlap between fishing areas and leatherback turtle habitats in the Atlantic. Quantification of human-caused mortality of all life stages and knowledge of the marine habitats used by Atlantic leatherback turtles are required to facilitate the development and implementation of effective strategies to reduce threats and avoid a repeat of the decline that has occurred in the Pacific population.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据