Feeding kinematics and performance of basal otariid pinnipeds, Steller sea lions (<i>Eumetopias jubatus</i>), and northern fur seals (<i>Callorhinus ursinus</i>): implications for the evolution of mammalian feeding

Marshall, Christopher D.; Rosen, David A. S.; Trites, Andrew W.

doi:10.1242/jeb.126573

Cited by 28 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, for example, raptorial 'pierce' or 'bite' feeding, as performed by fur seals, has been cited as the likely ancestral feeding mode for pinnipeds [11,67]. Based on our framework, we instead predict that the earliest pinnipeds used a semi-aquatic strategy more similar to modern otters.…”

Section: Evolutionary and Ecological Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 85%

A behavioural framework for the evolution of feeding in predatory aquatic mammals

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extant aquatic mammals are a key component of aquatic ecosystems. Their morphology, ecological role and behaviour are, to a large extent, shaped by their feeding ecology. Nevertheless, the nature of this crucial aspect of their biology is often oversimplified and, consequently, misinterpreted. Here, we introduce a new framework that categorizes the feeding cycle of predatory aquatic mammals into four distinct functional stages ( prey capture, manipulation and processing, water removal and swallowing), and details the feeding behaviours that can be employed at each stage. Based on this comprehensive scheme, we propose that the feeding strategies of living aquatic mammals form an evolutionary sequence that recalls the land-to-water transition of their ancestors. Our new conception helps to explain and predict the origin of particular feeding styles, such as baleen-assisted filter feeding in whales and raptorial 'pierce' feeding in pinnipeds, and informs the structure of present and past ecosystems.

show abstract

Section: Evolutionary and Ecological Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 85%

A behavioural framework for the evolution of feeding in predatory aquatic mammals

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But beyond this species, this study adds to a growing body of literature showing that pinnipeds as a clade are adaptable predators that draw from a wide repertoire of behaviors during foraging. Recently, a number of studies have looked at prey acquisition behavior in a range of species, showing them to use varying combinations of suction and biting to capture prey (Ydesen et al 2014;Marshall et al 2008Marshall et al , 2014Marshall et al , 2015Hocking et al 2013Hocking et al , 2014Hocking et al , 2016. Future study of wild pinnipeds (e.g., Bowen et al 2002, Krause et al 2015 will be able to extend on what has been learned from these captive studies by indicating the frequency at which different behavior are performed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chew, shake, and tear: Prey processing in Australian sea lions (Neophoca cinerea)

Hocking

Ladds

Slip

et al. 2016

Marine Mammal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pinnipeds generally target relatively small prey that can be swallowed whole, yet often include larger prey in their diet. To eat large prey, they must first process it into pieces small enough to swallow. In this study we explored the range of prey‐processing behaviors used by Australian sea lions (Neophoca cinerea) when presented with large prey during captive feeding trials. The most common methods were chewing using the teeth, shaking prey at the surface, and tearing prey held between the teeth and forelimbs. Although pinnipeds do not masticate their food, we found that sea lions used chewing to create weak points in large prey to aid further processing and to prepare secured pieces of prey for swallowing. Shake feeding matches the processing behaviors observed in fur seals, but use of forelimbs for “hold and tear” feeding has not been previously reported for other otariids. When performing this processing method, prey was torn by being stretched between the teeth and forelimbs, where it was secured by being squeezed between the palms of their flippers. These results show that Australian sea lions use a broad repertoire of behaviors for prey processing, which matches the wide range of prey species in their diet.

show abstract

“…Many marine animals exhibit behavioral flexibility when feeding to overcome spatial and temporal heterogeneity in prey resources (Dill, 1983;Schoen et al, 2018;McHuron et al, 2018). For example, many species of pinnipeds (seals, sea lions and walruses) change their foraging behavior in response to abiotic and biotic conditions, including prey (Bowen et al, 2002;Hocking et al, 2015Hocking et al, , 2016, feeding context (Marshall et al, 2008(Marshall et al, , 2014(Marshall et al, , 2015Hocking et al, 2014), habitat (Páez-Rosas et al, 2014), season (Breed et al, 2009;Cotté et al, 2015) and oceanographic conditions (Simmons et al, 2010;Villegas-Amtmann et al, 2017;Abrahms et al, 2017), resulting in increased foraging success. However, other pinnipeds show little flexibility when feeding and appear constrained to a particular feeding strategy (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hawaiian monk seals exhibit behavioral flexibility when targeting prey of different size and shape

Kienle

Cacanindin

Kendall

et al. 2019

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals use diverse feeding strategies to capture and consume prey, with many species switching between strategies to accommodate different prey. Many marine animals exhibit behavioral flexibility when feeding to deal with spatial and temporal heterogeneity in prey resources. However, little is known about flexibility in the feeding behavior of many large marine predators. Here, we documented the feeding behavior and kinematics of the endangered Hawaiian monk seal (Neomonachus schauinslandi, n=7) through controlled feeding trials. Seals were fed multiple prey types (e.g. night smelt, capelin, squid and herring) that varied in size and shape to examine behavioral flexibility in feeding. Hawaiian monk seals primarily used suction feeding (91% of all feeding trials) across all prey types, but biting, specifically pierce feeding, was also observed (9% of all feeding trials). Suction feeding was characterized by shorter temporal events, a smaller maximum gape and gape angle, and a fewer number of jaw motions than pierce feeding; suction feeding kinematic performance was also more variable compared with pierce feeding. Seals showed behavioral flexibility in their use of the two strategies. Suction feeding was used most frequently when targeting small to medium sized prey and biting was used with increasing frequency on larger prey. The feeding kinematics differed between feeding strategies and prey types, showing that Hawaiian monk seals adjusted their behaviors to particular feeding contexts. Hawaiian monk seals are opportunistic marine predators and their ability to adapt their feeding strategy and behavior to specific foraging scenarios allows them to target diverse prey resources.

show abstract

Feeding kinematics and performance of basal otariid pinnipeds, Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus), and northern fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus): implications for the evolution of mammalian feeding

Cited by 28 publications

References 73 publications

A behavioural framework for the evolution of feeding in predatory aquatic mammals

A behavioural framework for the evolution of feeding in predatory aquatic mammals

Chew, shake, and tear: Prey processing in Australian sea lions (Neophoca cinerea)

Hawaiian monk seals exhibit behavioral flexibility when targeting prey of different size and shape

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About