Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38078056›Full record

ArticleIntegrative organismal biology (Oxford, England)2023

Shaped by Their Environment: Variation in Blue Whale Morphology across Three Productive Coastal Ecosystems.

D R Barlow, K C Bierlich, W K Oestreich, G Chiang, J W Durban, J A Goldbogen, D W Johnston, M S Leslie, M J Moore, J P Ryan and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Closing the air gap: the use of drones for studying wildlife ecophysiology.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

D R BarlowGeospatial Ecology of Marine Megafauna Lab, Marine Mammal Institute, Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Sciences, Oregon State University, Newport, OR 97365, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6102-5058
K C BierlichGeospatial Ecology of Marine Megafauna Lab, Marine Mammal Institute, Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Sciences, Oregon State University, Newport, OR 97365, USA.
W K OestreichMonterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute, Moss Landing, CA 95039, USA.
G ChiangCentro de Investigación para la Sustentabilidad (CIS) & Departamento de Ecología y Biodiversidad, Universidad Andrés Bello, 8370251, Santiago, Chile.
J W DurbanMarine Mammal Institute, Oregon State University, Newport, OR 97365, USA.
J A GoldbogenHopkins Marine Station, Department of Biology, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, CA 93950, USA.
D W JohnstonDivision of Marine Science and Conservation, Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University Marine Laboratory, Beaufort, NC 28516, USA.
M S LeslieNational Climate Adaptation Science Center, United States Geological Survey, Reston, VA 20192, USA.
M J MooreBiology Department, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA 02543, USA.
J P RyanMonterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute, Moss Landing, CA 95039, USA.
L G TorresGeospatial Ecology of Marine Megafauna Lab, Marine Mammal Institute, Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Sciences, Oregon State University, Newport, OR 97365, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Species ecology and life history patterns are often reflected in animal morphology. Blue whales are globally distributed, with distinct populations that feed in different productive coastal regions worldwide. Thus, they provide an opportunity to investigate how regional ecosystem characteristics may drive morphological differences within a species. Here, we compare physical and biological oceanography of three different blue whale foraging grounds: (1) Monterey Bay, California, USA; (2) the South Taranaki Bight (STB), Aotearoa New Zealand; and (3) the Corcovado Gulf, Chile. Additionally, we compare the morphology of blue whales from these regions using unoccupied aircraft imagery. Monterey Bay and the Corcovado Gulf are seasonally productive and support the migratory life history strategy of the Eastern North Pacific (ENP) and Chilean blue whale populations, respectively. In contrast, the New Zealand blue whale population remains in the less productive STB year-round. All three populations were indistinguishable in total body length. However, New Zealand blue whales were in significantly higher body condition despite lower regional productivity, potentially attributable to their non-migratory strategy that facilitates lower risk of spatiotemporal misalignment with more consistently available foraging opportunities. Alternatively, the migratory strategy of the ENP and Chilean populations may be successful when their presence on the foraging grounds temporally aligns with abundant prey availability. We document differences in skull and fluke morphology between populations, which may relate to different feeding behaviors adapted to region-specific prey and habitat characteristics. These morphological features may represent a trade-off between maneuverability for prey capture and efficient long-distance migration. As oceanographic patterns shift relative to long-term means under climate change, these blue whale populations may show different vulnerabilities due to differences in migratory phenology and feeding behavior between regions.

Identifiers

PMID38078056
PMCPMC10701340

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.