Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40367031›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Differences in the functional use of two migratory stopovers by humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae).

Raphael Mayaud, Joshua N Smith, David Peel, Craig Wilson, Wally Franklin, Tim Stevens, Susan Bengtson Nash

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Raphael MayaudGriffith School of Environment and Science, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6640-277X
Joshua N SmithHarry Butler Institute, Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
David PeelData 61, CSIRO, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1413-3168
Craig WilsonPort of Brisbane Pty Ltd, The Port of Brisbane, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Wally FranklinThe Oceania Project, Hervey Bay, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3268-6775
Tim StevensAustralian Rivers Institute, Griffith School of Environment and Science, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Susan Bengtson NashGriffith School of Environment and Science, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5928-0850

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humpback whale migration between tropical breeding grounds and polar feeding grounds is an energy-intensive activity undertaken on finite energy stores. The use of stopover sites to rest reduces energetic expenditure and provides enhanced opportunity for calves to nurse during migration. Moreton Bay is a newly identified migratory stopover for Australia's east coast humpback whale population. Understanding the functional roles of stopovers is essential for a holistic understanding of population dynamics and connectivity. Therefore, contextualising the significance of Moreton Bay relative to a well-established stopover like Hervey Bay, can provide valuable insights into their functional roles within the broader migratory network, helping to inform targeted conservation efforts. To investigate this, we conducted a total of 865km of systematic, boat-based line transects across the two distinct geographical regions during temporally staggered periods (August and September - October) of the 2021 humpback whale migration. We examined population structure, behaviour, and habitat segregation, and developed spatial density surface models to predict density distribution patterns at each respective site. Our results show that Hervey Bay supports a more heterogenous mix of demographic groups, while Moreton Bay had a significantly greater number of calf-groups (z = 4.53, p = 0.017). Both bays exhibited similar resting behaviours, but social interactions among juveniles were unique to Hervey Bay. These findings suggest Moreton Bay serves a more utilitarian role as a stopover, functioning primarily as a resting site for mother-calf pairs, rather than the multifaceted use described in Hervey Bay. As lactating females and their calves are particularly vulnerable to anthropogenic threats like vessel strike, it is imperative to understand how different habitats contribute to the success of migration and ensure adequate protection is maintained.

Indexed as

Animal MigrationHumpback WhaleAnimalsAustraliaEcosystemFemaleMalePopulation Dynamics

Identifiers

PMID40367031
PMCPMC12077682

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.