Insights into the Underwater Diving, Feeding, and Calling Behavior of Blue Whales from a Suction-Cup-Attached Video-Imaging Tag (CRITTERCAM)

By John Calambokidis, G. Schorr, G. Steiger, J. Francis, Mehdi Bakhtiari, G. Marshall, Erin M. Oleson, Diane Gendron, K. Robertson. 2007

103 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract : We examined the underwater behavior of blue whales using a suction-cup-attached video-imaging instrument (CRITTERCAM). We made 13 successful deployments (defined as tag duration of 15 min and successful recovery of the tag and data) totaling 19 hours of CRITTERCAMs on blue whales off California and in the Sea of Cortez from spring through fall (26 February to 30 September) between 1999 and 2003 . Whale diving depth and behavior varied widely by region and period, although deployments on different individuals in the same area and period often showed very similar feeding behavior. One deployment extending into night showed a diurnal shift in diving behavior with progressively shallower feeding dives as it became dark, with shift to shallow, apparently non-feeding dives during the night. Data and video from tags demonstrated that the characteristic series of vertical movements blue whales make at depth are lunges into dense aggregations of krill. These krill were visible streaming by the camera immediately before these lunges and more clearly when the whales? forward motion stopped as a result of the lunge. The progression of events leading up to and during the lunge could be documented from the head movement of whales and occasional views of the expanding throat pleats or lower jaw, and by changes in flow noise past the tag, indicating a rapid deceleration. One set of deployments in the Southern California Bight revealed consistent feeding at depths of 250-300 m, deeper than has been previously reported for blue whales. A loud blue whale vocalization was heard on only one deployment on a male blue whale in an interacting trio of animals.

Subfields: Ecology, Ocean Engineering, Oceanography

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3fa2cf2e255cab88e4ea3958012d3f63a0d32271

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

In Ocean Engineering

In Oceanography

Citations in the corpus

Integrative Approaches to the Study of Baleen Whale Diving Behavior, Feeding Performance, and Foraging Ecology (2013, background): “This evolution of animal-borne video systems provides a powerful visual context of both predator and prey, as well as a confirmation of the behavioral states interpreted from a suite of archival tag sensors (Davis et al. 1999, Calambokidis et al. 2007).”
Shallow and deep lunge feeding of humpback whales in fjords of the West Antarctic Peninsula (2011, background): “A tag mounted camera such as crittercam can help, although lighting and camera placement add to difficulties (Calambokidis et al. 2008) and solutions do not yet exist that combine calibrated kinematic and acoustic sensing with video imagery.”
Ontogeny in marine tagging and tracking science: technologies and data gaps (2012, background): “At the finest scales, re searchers have deduced individual foraging behavior using short-duration suction cup tags (Calambokidis et al. 2007, Hazen et al. 2009).”
Sound production and associated behavior of tagged fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) in the Southern California Bight (2015, unknown): “Humpback whales have been shown producing unique clicking [17] and repetitive burst sounds [18] during nighttime foraging at depth, right whales have been shown to have calling rates that are highest during periods of surface activity or travel [19], Antarctic minke whales produced bio-duck sounds w”
Studying the behaviour and sensory ecology of marine mammals using acoustic recording tags: a review (2009, background): “Calls can also indicate habitats and how they are used (Tyack et al. 2006, Watwood et al. 2006, Calambokidis et al. 2007, Aguilar Soto et al. 2008) or the location of migration pathways (Ko & Zeh 1988).”
Prey density and distribution drive the three‐dimensional foraging strategies of the largest filter feeder (2015, background): “…rare glimpse into the visual ecology of rorqual foraging indicated that the krill patches targeted by these acrobatic lunges were relatively small, shallow and less dense compared with those encountered during deep forag- ing lunges (Calambokidis et al. 2007; Goldbogen et al. © 2014 The Authors.”