Thursday, October 16, 2008

2008 KATMAI BEAR TRIP REPORT: PART 4 (GEOGRAPHIC HARBOUR - INDIVIDUAL BEARS)

A sow with her older cubs attempts to teach them to fish, although they prefer to play and loot their mother's catch.

Geographic’s fishing grounds were also home to a vivacious family unit, consisting of a sow and a pair of ~ 2 1/2 year olds. The mother was an efficacious “fisherbear,” while her cubs did little fishing. Instead, they spent much of their time grappling with each other like hairy Sumo wrestlers! When they were not playing, they were shadowing their mom and stealing any fish that she hauled in. Most of the time she would let them take off with her catch, although she did occasionally attempt to wolf down some of her piscine prey before she was looted by her greedy brood. On one occasion she lost her patience and cuffed one of her overzealous offspring before giving in and letting go of her fish (see video below). Occasionally, the two hooligans attempted to include mom in their frolicsome behavior. She complied a couple of times, jawing at her young assailants.



A trio of grizzlies: a sow with her two offspring (these to youngsters are probably 32 months old). Note how she does all of the fishing, while they benefit from the fruits of her labor! Compare these two laggards with the adolescent fishing machine below.

In contrast to these impish, 2.5-year olds, we observed an amazing young bear that was a fishing machine! This bruin was a ~ 1.5 year old (usually referred to as a yearling) with a light colored (nearly blonde) mother. The pair initially made their presence known when the mother, with the cub trailing behind, were observed chasing another bear. They gave up their half-hearted chase and began to slowly meander toward the prime fishing area. Once they arrived at the river bank, it was not long before the yearling was chasing and even catching salmon! (There were few other bears in the area at the time.) The mother bear seemed to lag behind the young bear, keeping close enough to protect its progeny if the need arised, but yet far enough away to allow it to learn some life skills. The young bear was such an enthusiastic piscator that at one point it had a fish in its mouth, while it attempted to capture a second salmonid (see the video below)!



The fishing exploits of an ~ 1.5-year old (yearling) bear - this young bruin was a very effective fisherman, as you will see in the video above.

© Scott W. Michael

Monday, October 13, 2008

2008 KATMAI BEAR TRIP REPORT: PART 3 (GEOGRAPHIC HARBOUR - INDIVIDUAL BEARS)

A sow with a first (spring) cub. Bother were very flighty. At one point, the cub ran into the tall grass and it took the nervous mother 20 to 30 seconds to relocate her progeny.

During our stay at Geographic Harbour, we spotted one sow with a first year (spring) cub, both of which were quite flighty. The sow had large, white fringed ears and her cub looked very healthy (it was quite chubby!). The first time we saw them, they made a brief appearance at the river when four or five other big bears were around. Their stay was brief, being cut short when the nervous cub was startled and dashed into the tall grass. Mother gave chase and after 20 to 30 anxious seconds was able to relocate her frightened offspring. The pair disappeared after that, apparently in search of safer pastures in which to feed.

On our last day at Katmai, this sow and her cub reappeared. The mother’s desire to increase her nutrient intake apparently overcame her concern about exposing her cub to conspecifics. The mother succeeded in catching a few fish, with the cub trailing right behind her (this includes venturing into the rapid moving water in the center of the stream). The cub also ate some its mother’s catch. It is sad to think that this tubby little bear has about a 40 % chance of surviving to adulthood.

Ginger Bear - a young bear, possibly chased off early from its mother. This is one of many pink salmon this little bear was able to capture.

On our second day at Geographic, we observed a small bear that cautiously made its way to the river. It appeared to be a young bear – possibly a runty three-year old. We speculated that it may have been run off by its mother prematurely or possibly it had somehow lost its maternal parent? It came to the river to fish and was successful in its efforts. Rather than eating it near the stream bank, the little bear grabbed its salmon by the tail and sought solitude in the tall grass. When fishing, it was very aware of its larger ursid neighbors, no doubt cognizant of its greater vulnerability because of its small size. This bear had a very distinct appearance – it was rather skinny and had large ears (it almost had a fox-like look about it). We dubbed it Ginger Bear because of its lighter pelage. We were to encounter ginger bear on a couple of occasions (more on this bear later).

Friday, October 10, 2008

2008 KATMAI TRIP REPORT: PART 2 (GEOGRAPHIC HARBOUR)

Geographic Harbour (Amalik Bay) is picturesque, sheltered and infested with brown bears!

On previous trips to Katmai, most of our bear-viewing had taken place at Hallo and Kukak Bays. On our 2008 trip, we didn’t get to either of these sites as bear numbers were sparse at the time. Instead, we spent much of our adventure in Geographic Harbour, a picturesque site at the head of Amalik Bay. Like the rest of Katmai, the scenery is magnificent and bears are ubiquitous - there are usually at least two or three bears fishing in the main stream that flows into the bay. The harbour is surrounded by a high profile landscape that provides natural protection from the inclement weather that rushes across the Gulf of Alaska. It provides an ideal anchorage and a calm landing “strip” for float planes.

The downside of Geographic, is that on a clear day you are likely to share the prime bear-viewing spots with a number of “day-trippers” (these bear-viewers arrive by floatplane and remain in Geographic for two to four hours before being whisked back to Homer or Kodiak). During our stay, there were times where we were in close proximity to at least 30 other bear-viewers. While it certainly takes away some of the “wilderness feel” of the experience, this “bear paparazzi” did not seem to bother the bears that frequent Geographic Harbour (mind you, there may be other bears that would come and fish here but do not while the viewers are present). Also, in the early mornings and from mid-afternoon on, we were the only people among the bears.

A rotund sow (possibly a barren female - see notes in text below) exhibiting the typical Geographic Harbour dark pelage.

Interestingly enough, the bears that frequent Geographic Harbour tend to be darker in color than their Hallo Bay “cousins.” While you see some darker bears in Hallo, almost all the bears at Geographic are chocolate brown. While I am sure it varies from year to year, there were fewer bears at any one time on the Geographic stream than we had seen in early to mid-August at Hallo (we saw as many as 23 bears at once during one of our previous Hallo Bay visits, while the most Ursus arctos in view at any one time in Geographic was less than 10). This may be due to the fact that the prime fishing spots (at least those in view of the bear-viewing areas) in Geographic are not as abundant so there is less space for bears to fish comfortably around one another (fishing spots are more abundant when the tide is out).

In Geographic, there is high grass meadow (Calamagrostis spp.) that grows right up to the edge of some portions of the river. It was not uncommon to see subordinate bears, standing on their back legs, peering above the grass to make sure it was safe to take up a position along the water way. At low tide we would take-up a station on the intertidal flats, where bears fished in the dendritic tributaries that branched out from the main river channel. There is also a viewing pad, consisting of a flat, slightly raised bank situated along the edge of the stream that can be used at both low and high tide. It was not uncommon for bears working the stream edge to come within 15 to 20 feet of this viewing area.

While the area was never overrun with bears, there was often good fishing action in Geographic, especially at and around low tide. We saw numerous salmon pulled from the water by subadults, and both adult boars and sows (although the latter were slightly more abundant in the area). There were some fat, beautiful sows around the river, several of which were very effective at catching fish. One of these females was huge! Brad Josephs, brown bear expert, speculated that this was possibly a barren female, as they have a propensity to become very rotund.

Thursday, October 9, 2008

2008 KATMAI BEAR TRIP REPORT: PART 1

In late August of 2008, Janine and I were joined by five other photographers/naturalists on a trip to Katmai National Park. This included Larry Jackson, Debbie Titus, David Salmanowitz, and Larry and Nancy Peterson*. I had been to Katmai in 2006 and 2007 and was excited to get back, as well as share this very special place with great friends. Based on their reactions, I think they too have caught the bear bug - at least three of the five have expressed an interest to go back next year!

We were the guests of bear-viewing guru John Rogers (Katmai Coastal Bear Tours). He runs a number of boats along the Katmai coast and he, and his guides, know the area and the bears like no one else. I had been with John on my two previous trips and once again, John and company came through with a truly amazing wildlife experience!

Katmai Notes

In my past two visits to Katmai, I did my bear-viewing in early to mid-August. This year, we arrived in the land of the great bear a little later in the season (from August 22 until August 31st). We hoped to see more corpulent bears (as a result of a few more weeks at the “salmon buffet,” which is available from July into September) as well as some different behaviors. It was highly likely there would be more fishing activity as at least three and possibly four species of salmon (chum, pink, sockeye, and possibly silver) could be “running” at that time. I also wanted to document bears feeding on moribund and/or dying salmon, as this food source is an important part of the diet of hyperphagic bears.

It turned out the fish were present in large numbers. In fact, in certain parts of the Alaskan Peninsula (e.g., Bristol Bay), there were reports of huge fish runs. I certainly observed bears catching more fish during this trip than I had seen on previous visits (in the past two years I had seen relatively small runs when I visited). We observed pink (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha), chum (O. keta) and sock-eye salmon (O. nerka) being plucked from Katmai’s rivulets. While there were definitely more fish, we saw fewer bears than we had on our past trips. Some locals speculated that the reduction in fishing bear numbers was a function of an abundant berry crop – many of the bears were in the ”bush” gorging on salmon berries. Even though Ursus arctos numbers were down, there were still more than enough bears to keep us in a constant state of awe.

First Stop Kodiak

We began our trip in Kodiak – the jumping off site to Katmai (i.e., you take a float plane from Kodiak to the Katmai coast to meet the “bear boat”). We arrived at Kodiak about five days before our Katmai trip was to commence. Katmai Coastal Bear Tours recommends that you show-up in Kodiak at least a couple days before your scheduled departure, just in case it is necessary to make an early trip to Katmai. If inclement weather is forecast for the day you are scheduled to travel to Katmai, John may have you fly out to the boat one or even two days earlier in an attempt to ensure you get to spend the time you paid for with the bears.

Spending some time on Kodiak is a treat in and of itself! It is one of the most beautiful places I have ever seen, especially when viewed from the air. There are valleys, mountains, rocky coastlines replete with tide pools, clear streams and lakes and lush vegetation (the latter is a function of the high precipitation levels [average annual rainfall of 173 cm, average snowfall 198 cm]). And, of course, it also has a large population of brown bears (a.k.a. Kodiak bears). How many Comfort Inns in the world have a sign posted on the door suggesting that guests be very careful while moving about the parking lot after dark as a curious bear has been sighted lurking around the hotel! During our stay, there were a couple reports of Kodiak bear being sighted fishing in local streams. While we did not see any bears on Kodiak, we did visit a beached humpback whale carcass in hopes of seeing some scavenging brown bears. We also did lots of hiking, learned about spatterdock (Nuphar luteu) (thanks to Larry, our amateur botanist), enjoyed some amazing scenery and found some great intertidal, invertebrate life.

Fortunately, the weather was good while we were on the island (although we arrived on a blustery, rainy night) and we were able to get off to Katmai on schedule. In the next post, we will take a look at our first bear-viewing stop, Geographic Harbour.

URSIDOPHILES 2008



* Larry and David are great dive buddies and accomplished photographers - Janine and I have spent many hours with them in the Western Pacific, both above and below the water! This was the first time we had traveled with Debbie - she was a delight to have on the trip and an accomplished photographer in her own right. Larry and Nancy are good friends from Lincoln, Nebraska (where we reside) that are passionate about wildlife. We want to thank these five great travel companions for sharing this wonderful ursid-rich experience with us!

© Scott W. Michael

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

UNDESCRIBED SEA BASS FROM EASTERN ATLANTIC

Undescribed Serranus sp. from Western Africa.

An example of this same fish in the aquarium. The banded color pattern is displayed when the fish is stressed/frightened.

The Central and Eastern Atlantic is home to a number of reef fish species, some of which are very similar to more familiar fishes found in the Western Atlantic. For example, you have the Marcella butterflyfish (Prognathodes marcellae), which is similar to the bank (P. aya) and threeband butterflyfish (P. guyanensis) of the Western Atlantic. Then there is the ever-popular resplendent angelfish (Centropyge resplendens), known from Ascension Island (in the Central Atlantic), which is similar to its Western Atlantic counterpart, the cherubfish (C. argi) and flameback pygmy angelfish (C. aurantonotus) (Note: Wirtz et al. have recently collected a specimen of the later species from the Gulf of Guinea). The lesser known West African coral hind (Cephalopholis taeniops), which is very similar to its Western cousin, the coney (C. fulvus) and the African Creole wrasse (Clepticus africanus) that is a sister species of the Creole wrasse (C. parrae).

Recently, a lovely little serranid has been imported from Western Africa. It is a handsome little fish that, thanks to the efforts of Joe Russo, has become quite readily available (e.g., www.liveaquarium.com usually has one or more available). According to Joe, they are collected in fairly deep water (greater than 35 m). Dr. Peter Wirtz, an expert on the fish communities of this region, tells me that he has seen this fish at depths of 50 cm (these were juveniles) to at least 30 m. He also reports that it is a solitary species. Wirtz et al. (2007) report that this fish is common on hard and soft bottoms at São Tomé and Príncipe (Gulf of Guinea). It is somewhat variable in color, as you can see in the two photos included with this post.

At first blush, it exhibits anatomical similarities to some of the wonderful aquarium serranids from the tropical Western Atlantic. One of my favorites is the semi-social chalk bass (Serranus tortugarum). While related, the Serranus sp. from Africa differs greatly from the chalk bass in disposition. The undescribed Eastern Atlantic serranid is a true hellion! It is both aggressive and highly predatory (it appears to relish any fish or crustacean small enough to swallow whole). So, while you may be tempted to plop one of these beauties into your moderately-peaceful community aquarium, you may want to think again! Sanjay Joshi has one in a huge tank (500 gallons) and it has caused him much consternation attacking and eating its tankmates. While a maximum length has yet to be established, it can get at least 7 cm in total length.

There are other lovely fish from this region that Joe is bringing in to the US market. I hope to feature some more of these in upcoming posts.

References

Wirtz, P., C. Eduardo, L. Ferreira, S. R. Floeter, R. Fricke, J. L. Gasparini, T. Iwamoto, L. Rocha, C. L. S. Sampaio and U.K. Schliewen. 2007. Coastal Fishes of São Tomé and Príncipe islands, Gulf of Guinea (Eastern Atlantic Ocean)—an update. Zootaxa 1523: 1–48.

© Scott W. Michael

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

COLOR FORMS OF NEMATELEOTRIS HELFRICHI – IS THERE MORE THAN ONE SPECIES HERE?

The best known color form of Nemateleotris helfrichi from Micronesia.

Micronesian color form of N. helfrichi. Compare with Cook Island color form below.

Cook Island color form of N. helfrichi - compare the head coloration with that of the two specimens from Micronesia above.

A head shot of the same specimen from the Cook Islands.

There are probably a lot of you out there that encountered their first Nemateleotris helfrichi within the pages of Helmut Debelius’ FISHES FOR THE INVERTEBRATE AQUARIUM? I received a copy of this book in the mid-1980’s and was blown away by Helfrich’s dart or firefish! While the fish was new to me, it certainly was not new to science, having been described by Dr. Jack Randall and Dr. Gerald Allen all the way back in 1973.

This lovely fish is known to occur around the Ryuku and Ogasawara Islands, in Micronesia and Polynesia (the type locality being Tahiti). This fish started making its way into aquarium stores (to the best of my recollection) in around 1991 or 1992. The first specimens I was able to buy were from Micronesia. They had the characteristic coloration of the fish pictured in Debelius’ book. This same color form appears in John Randall’s FISHES OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC. He describes the coloration of the fish as follows:

“..lavender, gradually shading posteriorly nearly to white and anteriorly on head to bright yellow; top of head from interorbital to origin of first dorsal fin with a narrowing band of bright magenta, merging with violet on dorso-anterior quadrant of iris; elevated anterior part of first dorsal fin orange and back with a broad, pale blue leading edge; rays of second dorsal and anal fins tipped with yellow or orange caudal fin pale yellow.”

This certainly describes the populations of N. helfrichi from Micronesia and Japan "to a T." But it turns out that the population of N. helfrichi from Polynesia is quite different chromatically. I had seen photos of N. helfrichi from this region before and knew the color differed. But recently my good friend Kevin Kohen was able to acquire some live specimens from the Cook Islands. While very expensive, I wanted to see this “color form” of N. helfrichi first hand and take photos of it.

As you can see from the photos above, the Cook Island fish differs rather dramatically from its Japanese/Micronesian cousin. Note for example the differences in the color of the head, the metallic blue on the “face,” the black line over the upper jaw and the subtle differences in coloration of the anal fin.

The holotype for the species N. helfrichi is a specimen from Tahiti (Randall and Allen 1973). Not surprisingly, the holotype is the same color as the Cook Island fish. That would suggest that the Polynesian fish are actually N. helfrichi, while the Micronesian/Japanese populations MAY represent an undescribed species. DNA analysis will be needed to emphatically answer this question. More to come on this one in the future.

© Scott W. Michael

Monday, September 22, 2008

CHILLING-OUT AT THE CLEANING STATION!

Cleaner fish cause predators to reduce aggression toward bystanders at cleaning stations

Karen L. Cheneya, Redouan Bsharyb and Alexandra S. Gruttera

Behavioral Ecology 2008 19(5):1063-1067

Mutualisms, in which both participants gain a net benefit, are ubiquitous in all ecosystems, and the importance of understanding their broader ecological context has been demonstrated many times. Indirect effects of mutualisms may have important implications for surrounding ecosystems through changes in density, species composition, or behavior; however, the latter has been difficult to quantify. In fish cleaning mutualisms, cleaners benefit by removing and consuming ectoparasites from clients, whereas clients benefit from a reduction in parasite load. Cleaner fish are also thought to benefit from immunity to predation and use tactile stimulation as a preconflict management strategy to manipulate partners' decisions and to avoid being eaten by piscivorous client fish. Here we show, using a laboratory experiment, that the presence of cleaner fish resulted in nearby fish not involved in the cleaner–client mutualism experiencing less aggression (chases) from predatory clients. In addition, the rate that piscivorous clients chased prey was negatively correlated with the amount of tactile stimulation given to the predator by the cleaner. These data suggest that, in the laboratory, the risk of aggression from predators toward nearby prey fish was greatly reduced as a by-product of cleaner fish presence and tactile stimulation of predators by cleaner fish. These results raise the question of whether cleaning stations act as safe havens from predator aggression.

Sunday, September 21, 2008

COLLETTE’S REEF BASSLET

A specimen of Liopropoma collettei from the Philippines (at least that is where I think it was collected!).

Holotype of Liopropoma collettei from the Hawaiian Islands.

In past posts we have been looking at some of the different reef basslets (genus Liopropoma). In one of my last posts on the genus a comment was made about L. collettei and how it was more attractive than L. susumi – well what do you think? The specimen above is an individual I recently acquired from Kevin Kohen (ww.liveaquaria.com). Liopropoma collettei is known from Papua New Guinea, the Philippines and the Hawaiian Islands. It has been collected on coral reef at depths of 6 to 34 m among stony corals, like Porites compressa and P. lobata. This species attains a maximum length of 8 cm (individuals from Hawaii are larger than those from other locations).

Randall and Taylor (1988) reported in their revision of the genus that Hawaiian specimens of what they call L. collettei differs from those from the Western Pacific in having 15 or 16 instead of 14 or 15 pectoral rays, no enlarged pore anterior to the posterior nostrils and in the total length (as mentioned above the Hawaiian specimens are larger). They decided to lump the two populations together as the same species based on similarities in body proportions and "especially in color pattern.." But, these researchers had never seen a live specimen from the Western Pacific. While the members of the two populations are similar in overall color, there are some subtle differences, as you can see in the photos included above. For example, in Hawaiian specimens the stripes on the body are dark brown (those on the fish from the Philippines are obviously reddish brown). While the Western Pacific population may not represent a distinct species, it certainly might (DNA analysis will be one way to determine if this is the case.)

I have been keeping one other specimen of L. colletti and have found it to be quite cryptic. In my experiences, the Liopropoma are all secretive, but some (e.g., L. swalesi) are more reclusive than others (e.g., L. carmabi is not as shy). I would say that L. collettei is a more reclusive species, maybe not quite as bad as L. swalesi, but close. My first specimen is in a nano-reef and is rarely seen. The only time I observe it is when it moves from one interstice to another or I occasionally see it peering out from under a ledge when only the actinics are on. If you invest in one of these beauties, do not expect it to parade back and forth along the front of the tank. That is why I recommend the members of this genus for nano-reef aquariums - if you contain them in a smaller area, you will be able to observe them with greater ease.

References:

Randall, J. E. and L. Taylor. 1988. Review of the Indo-Pacific fishes of the Serranid genus Liopropoma with descriptions of seven new species. Indo-Pacific Fishes 16, 47 pp.

© Scott W. Michael

NEW WOBBIES IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA!

WEST COAST ALIVE WITH UNIQUE SHARKS
The West.com.au
Georgia Loney
21st September 2008, 6:00 WST

Scientists have identified 46 new species of sharks in WA, 24 of which are thought to exist nowhere else.

The CSIRO’s 18-month project was to classify new sharks found in Australian waters.

Fish expert William White said a fascinating find was a one-of-a-kind carpet shark, found in the stomach of a school shark near Chatham Island, off Walpole.

While it was found almost 20 years ago, scientists were unable to state definitively whether it was a unique species, Dr White said.

“This one was a lot more elongated, it had a real ‘snake’ look,” he said.

“Even though it was obviously a new species, when you’ve got something that has come out of a gut of a shark, it’s lost colour and has had quite a few bite marks.

“The reason it took so long to classify was that we assumed we’d find other specimens and we never did.”

WA had also proved to have a fascinating array of unique Wobbegong sharks. “It’s almost like Western Australia was the centre of biodiversity for that group,” Dr White said. “There’s not many species known worldwide — only about 10 — but six or seven of them occur in Western Australia. “There’s been four new species described in Western Australia in the last couple of years.” Analysis of DNA sequences was used to differentiate closely related species of sharks, some of which scientists had thought were the same as those found outside Australia.

Other new species included the northern freshwater whipray and northern river shark, which are found in the top half of Australia.

Dr White said whiprays and northern river sharks could grow up to two metres long and were found in the Fitzroy River.

“It was originally thought to be a species which occurs throughout Asia, but it’s been found to be a separate species which is endemic to Australia,” Dr White said.

The new classifications would help manage marine ecosystems.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Hundred New Sharks and Rays Classified


September 18th, 2008
Source: CSIRO

Australian scientists have completed an ambitious 18-month project to name and describe more than 100 new species of sharks and rays. Conducted by scientists working under the auspices of CSIRO's Wealth From Oceans National Research Flagship, the project named a third of Australia's - and about a tenth of the world's - shark and ray species.

Team leader, CSIRO's Dr Peter Last, says analysis of DNA sequences was used to clarify the identity of closely related species.

'Additional taxonomic information like this is critical to managing sharks and rays, which reproduce relatively slowly and are extremely vulnerable to over-fishing and other human impacts,' he says. 'Their populations are also sensitive to small-scale events and can be an indicator of environmental change.'

CSIRO's Dr William White says sharks and rays also play a vital ecosystem role as apex predators. 'Take them away and what does it mean for the rest of the ecosystem?' Dr White says. 'We can't understand possible implications unless we know what species we're dealing with.'

The new species include:

The endemic, Northern Freshwater Whipray and the Northern River Shark, which grow to over two metres in length, and are among the largest freshwater animals in Australia. Until recently these were confused with similar marine species.

The Endangered Maugean Skate which has an extremely narrow distribution. It is closely related Gondwanan ancestor which lived off southern Australia some 80 million years ago, and the present day species clings to life at the south-western tip of Tasmania.

A Critically Endangered gulper shark, the Southern Dogfish, which is endemic to the continental slope off southern Australia. It has suffered severe population declines in the past few decades.

More than 90 of the new species were identified but undescribed in the 1994 book; Sharks and Rays of Australia, by Dr Last and CSIRO's Dr John Stevens. The new names and descriptions will feature in a revised edition of the book in 2009. Specimens of many of the new species are in the Australian National Fish Collection at CSIRO Hobart - the largest collection of preserved sharks and rays in the Southern Hemisphere.

A workshop focusing on the project's findings will be held at Sydney's Australian Museum on 22 September during the 2nd Annual Meeting of the Oceania Chondrichthyan Society. Involving some of the world's leading experts in the field, the WWF-Australia-sponsored workshop also will assess priority areas of future research and management of sharks in Australian waters.