Inter-year variation in pup production of Caspian seals Pusa caspica 2005–2012 determined from aerial surveys

2015

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.3354/esr00689
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Assessing species abundance and reproductive output is crucial for evaluations of population dynamics, conservation status and the development of management objectives. The Caspian seal (Pusa caspica) is a key predator in the Caspian Sea ecosystem and is listed as “Endangered” by IUCN. Here we report on fixed-wing aerial strip transect surveys of the breeding population on the Caspian Sea winter ice field carried out in February 2005-2012. Potential detection biases were estimated by applying a Petersen mark-recapture estimator to the counts from double photographic observations. We also tested for effects of weather conditions on count results, and for correlations between pup production and ice conditions and net primary productivity (npp). Fluctuations in pup production estimates were observed among years, ranging from 8,200 pups (95% CI 7,130-9342) in 2010 to 34,000 (95% CI 31,275-36,814) in 2005. Total adults on the ice ranged from 14,500 in 2010 to 66,300 in 2012. We did not detect significant associations between pup production and either ice summary data (ice season length, and ice area) or npp. The observed inter-year variation may be partly due to underlying biological drivers influencing the fecundity of the population, although measurement errors arising from observation bias, plus variation in survey timing and weather conditions may also have contributed. Identifying the potential drivers of Caspian seal population dynamics will require extending both the survey time series and the quality of supporting data. However, inter-year fluctuations should still cause concern that the population may be vulnerable to environmental variability and ecosystem dynamics.