View
1
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
1
Centre for Marine Science and Technology
Habitat preferences and distribution of
killer whales (Orcinus orca) in the Bremer
Sub-Basin, Australia
Prepared for
The National Environmental Science Programme
Prepared by:
Chandra Salgado-Kent, Iain Parnum, Rebecca Wellard, Christine Erbe, Leila Fouda
PROJECT: CMST 1505
REPORT: 2017-15
October 2017
2
Contents
1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 4
2. Methodology .................................................................................................................................... 6
2.1. Study Site and Survey Information ...................................................................................... 6
2.1.1. Boat Surveys ................................................................................................................. 6
2.1.2. Aerial Surveys ............................................................................................................... 7
2.1.3. Satellite Remote Sensing Data ..................................................................................... 8
2.2. Data Preparation .................................................................................................................. 8
2.3. Statistical Analyses ............................................................................................................... 9
3. Results ........................................................................................................................................ 11
3.1. Encounter Histories ............................................................................................................ 11
3.2. Environmental Variables .................................................................................................... 18
3.3. Distribution of Marine Mammals relative to Environmental Parameters ........................ 24
4. Discussion ....................................................................................................................................... 34
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................ 35
Data Sources ...................................................................................................................................... 35
References.......................................................................................................................................... 35
3
Abstract
This report summarises visual sightings of marine mammals (primarily killer whales) in the Bremer
Sub-Basin between February and April in the years 2015-2017. Observations were made from
boats in 2015-2017 and by airplane in 2017. Environmental parameters (bathymetry, slope,
distance from shore, sea surface temperature, Chlorophyll-A) were compiled for the days of
surveying in 2015-2017 and overlain with survey track lines and locations of marine mammals.
Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) were used to investigate the influence of environmental
parameters on killer whale groups sighted for the two years of greatest effort: 2015 and 2016.
Using data collected opportunistically from a tour vessel during this period, a preliminary
assessment of the potential distribution of killer whales in the broader Bremer Sub-Basin region
was undertaken using the best fit GEE for predictions. Killer whale occurrence peaked in areas
with highest productivity which occurred at the edge of the canyon where bathymetry dropped
the fastest. Locations where other orca ‘hotspots’ may be expected were predicted in two other
canyon systems, including Hood Canyon and Pallinup Canyon; where productivity associated with
orcas was comparable to those in the Bremer Sub-Basin. The predicted hotspot in the areas
covered by relatively high survey effort were comparable with empirical observations. Estimates
of model prediction error and confidence intervals indicated that predictions had relatively wide
confidence intervals. The results presented in this report should be viewed as a preliminary
assessment to guide future research, as the model was based on highly biased (unsystematic)
surveys in one location. Robust, systematic line-transect surveys would allow for a more powerful
assessment of killer whale distribution, and reduce biases inherent in opportunistic data sets.
Systematic surveys are recommended to confirm predicted distributions reported here, as well as
to investigate killer whale and other megafauna distributions outside the months of February to
April.
4
1. Introduction
The killer whale (Orcinus orca; Linnaeus, 1758) is a cosmopolitan species, occurring throughout the
world’s oceans from warm, equatorial to cold, polar waters (Dahlheim and Heyning, 1999). While
the species is globally distributed, it is currently classified on the IUCN Red List as data deficient
with high uncertainty around abundance estimates (Taylor et al., 2013).
Killer whales occur within distinct subpopulations and populations around the world ranging from
below 100 to over several thousand animals (e.g., Berzin and Vladimirov, 1989; Branch and
Butterworth, 2001; Ford et al., 2000; Guerrero-Ruiz et al., 1998; Gunnlaugsson and Sigurjónsson,
1990; Hammond, 1984; Iñíguez, 2001; Kasamatsu and Joyce, 1995; Keith et al., 2001; Lopez and
Lopez, 1985; Mironova et al., 2002; Miyashita, 1993; Ohsumi, 1981; Øien, 1990; Sigurjónsson et
al., 1989; Visser, 1999; Wade and Gerrodette, 1993; Zerbini et al., 2007). These animals appear in
a diversity of habitats ranging from the surf zones, to river mouths, enclosed seas and open
oceans. Overall, killer whales are reported as being most common within continental margins
(Forney and Wade, 2006). Killer whale distribution is thought to be mainly linked to high
productivity, although they can occur in less productive waters (Forney and Wade, 2006). Thus,
the reported increase in killer whale density from low to high latitudes has been attributed to
greater productivity and prey abundance at higher latitudes (Dahlheim and Heyning, 1999; Forney
and Wade, 2006). In some locations where their food source is reliable year-round, resident
populations occur. However, there are many locations where killer whales occur seasonally
(Wellard et al., 2016), which is likely linked to seasonal prey availability. Based on killer whale
habitat and ecological specialisations (including prey targeted), and regionally-linked
distinguishable morphological features, colouration, acoustics and genetics, distinct killer whale
‘morphotypes’ have been described for populations that have been relatively well studied. While
morphotypes currently are considered to all fall within one species (Orcinus orca), separate
species or subspecies have been suggested for some morphological forms (Barrett-Lennard, 2000;
Berzin and Vladimirov, 1983; Hoelzel et al., 1998; Hoelzel and Dover, 1991; Mikhalev et al., 1981;
Pitman and Ensor, 2003; Pitman et al., 2007; Stevens et al., 1989).
In the North Pacific, killer whale morphotypes are described as “resident”, “Bigg’s” (or “transient”)
and “offshore” morphotypes (Ford, 2002). While killer whales around the world consume a wide
range of prey (e.g., Dahlheim and Heyning, 1999; Pitman and Ensor, 2003; Similä et al., 1996;
Visser, 1999), including cephalopods, fish (such as salmon, herring, bluefin tuna and other
schooling fish as well as sharks, stingrays and toothfish), seabirds (including penguins), turtles and
marine mammals (including dugongs, seals, sea lions, porpoises, dolphins, beaked whales, minke
whales and other baleen whales, particularly their calves), resident killer whales in the North
Pacific occurring in inshore waters year-round specialise in preying on fish (particularly Chinook
salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha); Ford and Ellis, 2006). Bigg’s killer whales in this region are
reported to almost exclusively prey on marine mammals (Ford and Ellis, 1999; Ford et al., 1998).
5
Offshore killer whales have a larger geographic range than residents and transients and primarily
feed on fish (Herman et al., 2005).
In the North Atlantic, three killer whale populations have been identified: ‘A’, ‘B’, and ‘C’ (e.g.,
Matkin et al., 1997). A and B populations feed on fish and marine mammals, while C specialises on
fish (Cosentino, 2015; Foote et al., 2009; Vongraven and Bisther, 2014).
In Antarctic and sub-Antarctic waters, morphotypes have been classified as ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’
(which are different from A, B and C in the North Atlantic). Morphotypes A and B have been
reported to feed on marine mammals, whereas Types C and D have been reported to prey on fish
(Durban et al., 2017; Pitman and Durban, 2010, 2012; Pitman et al., 2011; Pitman and Ensor, 2003;
Tixier et al., 2010).
While these distinct morphotypes vary widely in their ecological specialisations, habitat types and
regions they occupy, each population’s distribution also varies on a local scale (e.g., Pitman and
Ensor, 2003; Secchi et al., 2001). For instance, within Antarctic waters killer whale densities are
known to be higher near the ice edge (Berzin and Vladimirov, 1983). The spatial distribution and
abundance of killer whales locally is likely linked directly with the distribution of food resources.
In Australian waters, little is known regarding killer whale distribution regionally or locally, or their
ecological specialisations. Killer whale sightings have been reported in all state and territory
waters, with greater numbers of sightings off Australia’s southern coasts (Morrice, 2004; Mustoe,
2008; Pitman et al., 2015).
In the Bremer Sub-Basin off Western Australia relatively high numbers of killer whale sightings are
made consistently in late austral summer and early austral autumn (Wellard et al., 2015; Wellard
et al., 2016). Killer whales have been reported to forage in the Bremer Sub-Basin, including a few
documented beaked whale predation events (Wellard et al., 2016). Killer whale occurrence in the
Bremer Sub-Basin is most likely linked to high seasonal productivity and prey abundance.
However, the physical and environmental features that are responsible for driving productivity,
prey abundance and, ultimately, killer whale habitat use are unknown. This study investigates the
influence of environmental and physical features that may drive habitat use of killer whales during
their seasonal occupancy of the Bremer Sub-Basin. Specifically, the distribution and relative
abundance of killer whales observed from (i) boats between February and April in 2015, 2016 and
2017 and (ii) an airplane in 2017 are determined. For the years 2015 and 2016, environmental and
physical features influencing habitat use of killer whales within the Sub-Basin were identified
based on modeling outputs.
The results will provide insight in the use of other similar canyon systems in Australian waters and
ultimately help identify other locations likely used by killer whales that have not yet been
explored.
6
2. Methodology
2.1. Study Site and Survey Information
The Bremer Sub-Basin is located off the southwest continental shelf of Australia, approximately
180 km southeast of the city of Albany. The Sub-Basin contains numerous submarine canyons
extending from the shelf edge at approximately 100 m to water depths of 4500 m in the abyssal
plain (Exon et al., 2005). The submarine canyon system is biologically significant for a range of
species, including a number of toothed whales such as killer whales (Department of Sustainability,
2012).
Figure 1: Study site within the Bremer Sub-Basin, with overlaid vessel tracks (2015-2017; light red lines) and aerial
survey tracks (2017; light blue lines).
2.1.1. Boat Surveys
Opportunistic, non-systematic vessel surveys were conducted in an area approximately 4000 km2
within the canyon system (centred at 34°44.30'S latitude and 119°35.55'E longitude) between
February and April 2015 and 2016. These vessel-based surveys were undertaken from commercial
ecoutourism vessels Cetacean Explorer and Dhu Force (operated by Naturaliste in 2015 and 2016)
while these vessels were carrying out normal ecotourism manouvres taking tourists to see killer
whales. Between March and April 2017 non-systematic vessel surveys were also conducted in the
same vicinity, onboard a dedicated research vessel Big Dreams chartered by MIRG Australia.
Vessels departed from Bremer Bay, southern Western Australia, and headed offshore,
approximately 50 km south-east of Bremer Bay. Surveys were conducted on every good (up to
7
Beaufort 5) weather day (generally 6 days per week) over a period of 6 to 11 daylight hours and
consisted of passing and closing modes. At the beginning of each survey the date, observers and
start time were recorded and the track logged throughout the entire survey with a Holux wireless
GPS receiver. During passing mode, observations were undertaken by a minimum of two
individuals scanning the area forward to abeam the vessel on port and starboard sides up to the
horizon continually while on survey. Upon sighting a group of killer whales, the GPS position of the
vessel, group size and behavioural state were noted. The vessel then switched to closing mode and
the group was slowly approached to within 50 m. The GPS position of the group, group size
(minimum, maximum and best guess), group composition (numbers of adults and calves) and
predominant behavioural state were recorded and photographs taken. Behavioural states and
photographs were collected as part of a separate study and are not described here (see Wellard
and Erbe, 2017). Environmental conditions were recorded at the beginning of the survey and as
conditions changed. Conditions included Beaufort (sea state), cloud cover (okta scale), swell height
(estimated), glare (intensity from 0 to 3), visibility (up to 10 km) and wind direction and velocity
(estimated). Once all information had been collected, the vessel resumed closing mode and the
process repeated. If the same group of killer whales was encountered more than once within a
day, the observation was noted as a repeat sighting. If the group could not be confirmed as a
resight, it was considered a new group. At the end of the survey, the end time was recorded. All
survey information was recorded on a digital voice recorder. Voice recorded information was
transcribed at the end of each day and entered into the detailed field log. Photos were
downloaded to a laptop computer and backed up on an external hard drive.
2.1.2. Aerial Surveys
Aerial surveys were conducted in March 2017 with a total of 6 flight survey days. A twin-engine
over-head wing Cessna 337 aircraft with bubble windows was chartered from Norwest Air Work
Pty Ltd to survey transect lines and departed Albany airport each day. Pre-determined transects
were flown at an altitude of 300 m and a speed of 120 knots.
Personnel for each survey included one pilot and two observers. The pilot was not responsible for
spotting and was separated acoustically from the two observers during transects. The pilot’s only
role in data collection was to report the horizontal drift of the aircraft from its flight path at the
end of each transect. Two trained observers on each side of the aircraft scanned the transects and
recorded their sightings onto separate tracks on their Olympus digital recorders via headset. The
two observers worked independently and did not communicate whilst on transect.
At the beginning of each survey the date, observers and start time were recorded, as were wind
speed (knots) and wind direction. The track was logged throughout the entire survey with a Holux
wireless GPS receiver. Additional environmental conditions were recorded from each observer for
each side of the aircraft at the beginning and end of each transect, and updated immediately if any
of these conditions changed. Various weather covariates recorded included glare intensity (from 0
to 3), glare type (reflective or glitter), turbidity, Beaufort (sea state), visibility (up to 10 km) and
8
cloud cover (okta scale). All conditions were recorded onto digital voice recorder separately from
each observer accounting for different sides of aircraft.
Upon sighting marine fauna, the observer recorded time (WST), species, species confidence
(definite, probable, likely), group size, group composition, swim direction (relative to the plane)
and sighting cue. Although due to speed of plane, not all group size, composition and direction of
travel could be noted. Observers used inclinometers (Suunto PM-5/360PC) and compass boards to
record relative vertical and horizontal positions of each sighting. All sighting details were recorded
on an Olympus digital recorder for post-flight data entry by the team leader.
The surveys were conducted in passing mode with killer whales as the main focus. Due to this
focus and opportunity to gather as much information possible on this species, when a killer whale
was sighted, passing mode was aborted and the plane circled back to obtain and validate as much
detailed information as possible for this sighting. When requesting a “circle-back”, the observer
blew their whistle to alert the pilot and direct the plane to the sighting. Once observers were
confident all information necessary had been recorded, the plane travelled back to the waypoint
where the transect line had been aborted and recommenced on transect in passing mode and
continued with pre-determined transects.
The sampling consisted of two transects. Transect A consisted of a set of diagonal transects that
allowed large-scale coverage inside and adjacent to the Commonwealth Marine Reserve, whilst
Transect B consisted of a series of denser vertical transects across the known aggregation area.
2.1.3. Satellite Remote Sensing Data
Further data on environmental conditions within the study area were obtained for the survey
periods in 2015-2017, including daily (night time) sea surface temperature (SST) at a 0.01 degree
(approximately 1.1 km) resolution derived from the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer
(AVHRR) satellite data (IMOS 2015-2017a), daily Chlorophyll-A (Chl-A) at 0.01 degree (1.1 km)
resolution derived from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) satellite data
using the OC3 model (IMOS 2015-2017b), and depth from the 250 m grid created by Geoscience
Australia (2009). The downloaded SST were adjusted for sensor-specific error statistics (SSES) bias
and only data with a quality level 5 were used and converted from degrees Kelvin to Centigrade.
Chl-A data with a quality level below 3 were discarded. The following statistics were calculated
over the SST and Chl-A data for the survey days: minimum, maximum, mean, std, median, 25th
quantile and 75th quantile.
2.2. Data Preparation
To model the occurrence of killer whales over the spatial extent of the study area, the study area
was gridded into two grid resolutions: 250 m (i.e. to match the depth resolution) and 1.1 km (i.e.
to match the SST and Chl-A resolutions). Grid cells were allocated an ID and the latitude and
longitude of each grid cell’s centre was extracted. Thus, environmental conditions were allocated
9
to each grid cell with known centre point position. For the 250 m resolution data set, the statistics
calculated for the SST and Chl-A were linearly interpolated in MATLAB (The MathWorks Inc.) using
the inbuilt interp2.m function. For the 1.1 km dataset the depth was resampled from the 250 m
grid using the same function. In addition, the distance in km of the centre point of each grid to the
nearest coastline (defined as 0 m elevation in the GA 250 m bathymetric and topographic grid)
was calculated. The slope of the seafloor (in degrees) was calculated from the 250 m depth grid.
Data preparation and plotting was undertaken using MATLAB.
2.3. Statistical Analyses
The spatial occurrence of killer whale groups over time was modelled using Generalized Estimation
Equations (GEEs) with a log-link function (for Poisson distributed count data) using data gridded on
the 1.1 km resolution. GEEs account for residual autocorrelation in data (Zeger & Liang, 1986; Thall
& Stephen, 1990; Zorn, 2001; Zuur et al., 2009; Staley, 2013). Models using the CReSS-GEE (Scott-
Hayward et al., 2013a) framework in R (R Core Team, 2013) were used to allow for smooth terms
to be included. RStudio, Version 0.98.501 (© 2009-2013 RStudio, Inc.), using MRSea (Scott-
Hayward et al., 2013b) and geepack (Yan, 2002; Yan & Fine, 2004), was used to fit models.
To build the model, first independent variables were explored to identify and remove variables
with insufficient spread over the study area and period. In addition, data were truncated to only
include observation that were deeper than -250 m and shallower than -1600 m bathymetry since
no killer whale sightings were made in depths outside of this range. Thus, zero inflation in the
model was significantly reduced. Model predictors considered included grid cell centre depth,
distance from nearest land, seabed slope, mean SST, median SST, maximum SST, minimum SST,
SST standard deviation, 25th quantile SST, 75th quantile SST, mean Chl-A concentration, median
Chl-A, maximum Chl-A, minimum Chl-A, Chl-A standard deviation, 25th quantile Chl-A and 75th
quantile Chl-A. Because there was autocorrelation, a spatial blocking structure was applied as a
vector of integers numbered as sequential ~3 km2 blocks (the correlation over grid cells (clusters)
declined to approximately zero after 3 km). Grid cell was used as the ID.
Regression analyses were run in order to investigate the presence of highly correlated variables,
and Variance Inflation Factors (VIFs) of > 3 considered collinear (Zuur et al., 2009) and removed
from analyses. The function “runSALSA1D” in the MRSea package was used to select smoothness
of the covariates. An AR-1 correlation structure was initially selected (Zuur et al., 2009), however
independence, unstructured, and exchangeable correlation structures were also tested in models,
and the best fit was selected using Quasi-likelihood information criterion (QIC; Pan, 2001).
A full model was first fitted including all biologically relevant variables and interactions (that
allowed model convergence and were not collinear). Several different combinations of ‘Full
Models’ were required to test the effects of all covariates, because a number of covariates were
collinear. Explanatory terms that were not significant were eliminated one by one, and the
resulting submodel refitted. Each submodel was checked and validated using observed versus
10
fitted values to assess model fit and fitted values versus scaled Pearson’s residuals were plotted to
assess the mean-variance relationship. The model that reduced the QICu by > 2 values with the
fewest terms was selected as the best fit (Pan, 2001; Hardin & Hilbe, 2002; Cui, 2007; Hudecová &
Pešta, 2013). ANOVA was applied to cross-compare models with terms removed. All significant
terms were retained in the final model.
The final best model was then used to predict the expected distribution of groups of orcas in a
~130 km longitudinal range along the shelf edge and canyon systems in the region. Methods by
Scott-Hayward et al. (2013b) were applied. Model validation was undertaken using k-fold cross-
validation (Boyce et al., 2002) using the package boot (Davison & Hinkley, 1997; Canty & Ripley,
2017) in R (R Core Team, 2013) and k=10. In addition, bootstrap confidence intervals were
estimated for the model coefficients (using 1000 iterations) and for predicted responses (using
methods in Scott-Hayward et al., 2013b).
11
3. Results
3.1. Encounter Histories
A total of 594 hours was spent on 77 survey days over the course of 3 years. Twenty-eight surveys
were conducted in 2015, 36 in 2016 and 13 in 2017. A total of 304 cetacean encounters were
recorded. Of these, 177 were encounters with killer whales. These data are summarised in Table 1.
Table 1: Summary of visual observations.
2015 2016
2017 -
plane
2017 -
boat
2017
total TOTAL
Killer whale encounters 71 92 7 7 14 177
Other marine mammal encounters 11 31 54 31 85 127
Days surveyed 28 36 6 7 13 77
Total hours surveyed 237.8 259.2 24 72.8 96.8 593.8
Average killer whale encounters per
day 2.4 2.6 1.2 0.9 1.0 -
Average other encounters per day 0.4 0.9 9.0 3.9 6.1
Average survey hours per day 8.2 7.2 4.0 9.1 6.8 -
Average hours between killer whale
encounters 3.3 2.8 3.4 10.4 6.8 -
Average hours between other
encounters 21.6 8.4 0.4 2.4 1.1
Survey start/1st sighting 9-Feb 19-Feb 16-Mar 25-Mar - -
Survey end/last sighting 24-Mar 17-Apr 24-Mar 4-Apr - -
Figure 2 shows a map of the cumulative search effort for the visual surveys by boat and plane.
Figure 3 and Figure 4 show the survey tracks (boat and plane respectively) with the sites of killer
12
whale and other marine mammal encounters overlain. Figure 5 and Figure 6 show the same data,
but have the other marine mammals broken down by species.
Figure 2: Search effort in 1.1 km grids; (top) in cumulative hours of vessel surveys 2015-2017, (bottom) in minutes of
plane survey 2017.
13
Figure 3: Survey tracks and marine mammal encounters from vessel surveys 2015 to 2017; killer whale encounters as
pink dots and other marine mammal encounters as white dots. The lower panel is zoomed-in version of the upper
panel.
14
Figure 4: Tracks and marine mammal encounters from the plane surveys in 2017; killer whale encounters as pink dots
and other marine mammal encounters as white dots.
15
Figure 5: Tracks and marine mammal encounters from vessel surveys 2015 to 2017 by species. The lower panel is a
zoomed-in version of the upper panel.
16
Figure 6: Tracks and marine mammal encounters from the plane surveys in 2017.
17
Figure 7: The summation of the minimum group size divided by search effort in hours for vessel surveys 2015 to 2017
at 1.1 km grid resolution, for: (top) killer whales, (bottom) other marine mammals.
18
3.2. Environmental Variables
The following figures show the range of environmental parameters encountered at the locations
of surveying and sighting marine mammals. Specifically, marine mammal encounters are plotted
on top of distance from shore (Figure 8 and Figure 9), bathymetry (Figure 10 and Figure 11),
bathymetric slope (Figure 12 and Figure 13), mean SST (Figure 14) and mean Chl-A (Figure 15).
Figure 8: Distance from shore (km) with killer whale (pink) and other marine mammal (white) encounters from vessel
surveys 2015-2017. The lower panel zooms into the region of most marine mammal sightings.
19
Figure 9: Distance from shore (km) with killer whale (pink) and other marine mammal (white) encounters from plane
surveys in 2017.
20
Figure 10: Depth (m) with killer whale (pink) and other marine mammal (white) encounters from vessel surveys
between 2015-2017. The lower panel zooms into the region of most marine mammal sightings.
21
Figure 11: Depth (m) with killer whale (pink) and other marine mammal (white) encounters from plane surveys in
2017.
22
Figure 12: Slope of the seafloor (degrees) with killer whale (pink) and other marine mammal (white) encounters from
vessel surveys between 2015-2017. The lower panel zooms into the region of most marine mammal sightings.
23
Figure 13: Slope of the seafloor (degrees) with killer whale (pink) and other marine mammal (white) encounters from
plane surveys in 2017.
Figure 14: Mean SST on days of boat surveys 2015 to 2017. Killer whale encounters as pink dots and other marine
mammal encounters white dots.
24
Figure 15: Mean Chl-A (mg/m3) on days of boat surveys 2015 to 2017. Killer whale encounters as pink dots and other
marine mammal encounters white dots.
3.3. Distribution of Marine Mammals relative to Environmental Parameters
For modelling the number of killer whale groups encountered in relation to environmental
parameters, sighting data from a total of 497 h over 64 days of effort during 2015 and 2016 were
available. Over the 64 survey days, a total of 170 orca groups were encountered in 10,820 linear
km travelled.
Vessel tracks crossed a total of 1,130 1-km2 grid cells in the study area, from the point of
departure to the Bremer Sub-Basin. The effort varied among 1-km2 grid cells. Most grid cells had
less than 1 h and 10 km of effort (Figure 16). The mean number of orca groups per grid cell
observed was 0.15 and ranged between 0 and 17.
25
Figure 16: Distribution of hours and km of effort per 1 km2 grid cell in the Bremer Sub-Basin study area over the 2015
and 2016 survey seasons, overlaid with orca group sightings (red dots).
The mean depth over the grid cells traversed was 649 m and ranged between 0 and 2479 m
(Figure 17). The mean slope over the grid cells was 5.2° and ranged from 0 to 34.5°. The mean
average SST was 20.1°C and ranged over only 3 degrees from 19.8° C to 20.9° C. The mean average
Chl-A concentration was 0.16 mg/m3 and ranged from 0.11 to 0.51 mg/m3. The maximum and
minimum values for SST and Chl-A varied more widely with highest maximum SST at 22.6°C and
lowest minimum of 17.3°C, and the highest maximum Chl-A at 3.06 mg/m3 and lowest minimum of
0 mg/m3.
26
Figure 17: Distribution of environmental conditions per 1 km2 grid cell in the Bremer Sub-Basin study area taken over
the entire 2015 and 2016 survey seasons.
The statistics (mean, minimum, maximum, standard deviation, and 25th and 75th quantiles) had
limited variability over the study area, with the exception of some gradients associated with
changes in bathymetry between the mainland coast and the Bremer Sub-Basin (Figure 18).
The density of killer whale groups sighted was greatest approximately 38 km from the coast,
where the seafloor was between 800 and 1000 m deep with a slope between 5 and 8 degrees
(Figure 19). Peak numbers of killer whale groups sighted occurred in grids with environmental
conditions of an overall average temperature (across years) of approximately 20.1°C, with
minimum and maximum ranging from 19.4 to 22.1 °C. Peak numbers of killer whale groups were
observed in average Chl-A concentrations of approximately 0.15 mg/m3 with minimum and
maximum values for peak numbers of killer whales of 0.05 and 0.5 mg/m3.
However, peak numbers in killer whale groups sighted may have been influenced by high search
effort within grid cells with specific environmental conditions (Figure 20). In addition, many grid
cells had no killer whale groups sighted, despite having environmental conditions within the range
where peak number were also sighted (Figure 20).
27
Figure 18: Distribution of environmental conditions over 1 km2 grid cells surveyed in the Bremer Sub-Basin study area over the 2015 and 2016 survey period, overlaid with killer
whale group sightings (red dots). Grey region corresponds to areas where environmental conditions were absent and could not be plotted.
28
Figure 19: Number of killer whale groups sighted over the different environmental conditions in each 1 km2 grid cell surveyed in the Bremer Sub-Basin study area over the 2015
and 2016 survey period.
29
Figure 20: Number of killer whale groups sighted (red dots) in relation to environmental conditions over 1 km2 grid cells surveyed in the Bremer Sub-Basin study area over the 2015
and 2016 survey period. Grey region corresponds to km of search effort (in 10 km increments). Blue dots correspond to environmental conditions within grid cells having 0 killer
whale groups sighted.
30
To reduce the influence of values within the data that were associated with very little effort
in the model, the data were first trimmed so that grids with fewer than 10 km effort were
removed. Any observations with extreme values of environmental variable separated by
large gaps from the rest of the measures were also removed. In addition, preliminary
analyses indicated that depth and nearest distance to the coast were collinear. Distance was
removed from the model terms as there was clear evidence from the mapping exercise that
killer whales occurred approximately 38 km from the coast and beyond (near the shelf edge;
Figure 21).
Figure 21: Distribution of killer whale (pink dots) and other marine mammal (white dots) encounters as a
function of distance from shore, shown with the average depth, and survey hours for vessel surveys (2015-
2017) and plane surveys (2017).
In addition, SST measures were collinear, as were Chl-A measures. Thus, the means over the
2015 and 2016 survey seasons for SST and Chl-A were selected as priority conditions for
modelling as these represented central tendency, but also reflected smaller and greater
values (which could influence the presence of killer whale groups; Figure 22).
31
Figure 22: Number of killer whale groups sighted (red dots) in relation to modelled environmental conditions
over 1 km2 grid cells surveyed in the Bremer Sub-Basin study area over the 2015 and 2016 survey period. Grey
region corresponds to km of search effort (in 10 km increments). Blue dots correspond to environmental
conditions within grid cells having 0 killer whale groups sighted.
The subset of data used for modelling included a total of 360 h over a total of 4,284 linear km
of effort in the survey area during 2015 and 2016. Effort (km) was included in the model as
an offset. The model with the best fit (the final model) included Chl-A Max only, as a significant
explanatory term (Table 2). The model scale parameter was 0.60.
Table 2: Generalized Estimating Equations coefficients, parameter estimates, standard error, Wald
statistic,p-values and significance level (* ≤ 0.05) for the final model for predicting the number of killer
whale groups encountered.
Coefficients Estimate Std Error Wald Pr (>W)
Intercept -4.220 0.276 234.4 <2e-16 *** Chl-A Max 1.892 0.466 16.5 4.8e-05 ***
The final model indicated that Chl-A Max had a relatively large influence on the number of
killer whale groups sighted. While most observed measurements of Chl-A were below 0.6, as
the Chl-A increased so did the number of killer whale groups observed (Figure 23).
32
Figure 23 Partial residual plot produced from the best Generalized Estimating Equation model for predicting the
number of killer whale groups sighted over 1.1 km2 grid cells surveyed in the Bremer Sub-Basin study area over
the 2015 and 2016 survey periods. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.
Using the above model, the expected relative distribution of groups of orcas in a ~130 km
longitudinal range along the shelf edge and associated canyon systems in the region was
assessed (Figure 24). The numbers of groups predicted (corrected for km transited by the
survey vessel) were comparable. The mean relative number of observed killer whales sighted
per grid cell (1.1 km2) in the Bremer Sub-Basin (empirical data) was 0.015 (min=0, max=0.995,
SE=0.004, 95% CI=0.008), and the mean predicted relative number of killer whales per grid
cell (1.1 km2) across the broader region from Bremer Canyon to Pallinup Canyon was 0.012
(min=0, max=0.14, SE=0.0006, 95% CI=0.001). In the broader region, hotspots were identified
over three canyon systems including the Bremer Sub-Basin, Hood Canyon, and Pallinup
Canyon (Figure 24). The predicted hotspot in the areas covered by relatively high survey effort
were consistent with empirical observations in the region.
The GEE model prediction error (k-folds cross-validation mean squared error) was 0.728 (with
corrected bias of 0.723). Multiple runs of the k-folds cross-validation resulted in consistent
mean squared errors. The root mean squared error (RMSE) was 0.853 (corrected for
bias=0.850). Bootstrap 95% Confidence Intervals for the estimated coefficient of ChlA as the
predictor were 1.643 (lower) and 2.204 (upper). Spatial bootstrap estimates of 95%
confidence intervals of predicted relative density of whales indicated that the predictions had
wide confidence intervals (see Figure 24 for spatial maps of 95% confidence intervals).
33
Figure 24 Predicted (a), predicted lower (b) and upper (c) 95% Confidence Intervals, and
observed (d) relative densities of orca groups (corrected for km transited by the vessel).
(b) Predicted Lower 95% CI
Pallinup Canyon
Pallinup Canyon
(c) Predicted Upper 95% CI
Pallinup Canyon
(a) Predicted
(d) Observed
Pallinup Canyon
34
4. Discussion
Between January and April killer whales can be encountered within the Bremer Sub-Basin with
high probability (91.5%; Wellard et al., 2016). Thus, opportunistic boat-based observations have
been spatially concentrated near in the Bremer Sub-Basin in past years. The environmental
variables vary little over the extend of this ‘hotspot’.
Nonetheless, the occurrence of groups sighted between 2015-2017 was associated with
productivity. Higher productivity, measured in the form of Chlorophyll A, was mostly at the edge of
canyon systems, which may be due to seasonal upwelling. Cold Antarctic water rises to the surface
at the canyon edge, and brings with it nutrients and consequently higher order predators (e.g. Allen
and Durrieu de Madron, 2009; Middleton and Bye, 2007; Pattiaratchi and Woo, 2009; Waite et al.,
2007). A predictive model identified three other locations in the region that had productivity levels
expected to be associated with orca presence. These locations were associated with deep canyon
systems located at the edge of the continental shelf. The predictive model resulted in comparable
relative densities and hotspots of killer whales as those observed in the Bremer Sub-Basin. Estimates
of model prediction error and confidence intervals indicated that predictions had relatively wide
confidence intervals.
In conclusion, this study used data collected opportunistically from a tour vessel to produce a
preliminary assessment of the potential distribution of killer whales in the broader Bremer Sub-
Basin region. The predictions rely heavily on observations from a very limited region, as surveys
were mostly focused in an area where killer whales had previously been sighted reliably. As a result,
the spatial extent of the study was highly biased, and mainly dependent on observations from one
canyon area. These biases led to heavy culling of the data to exclude environmental condition ranges
that had insufficient observations to allow model stability. This led to limitations in the area in which
predictions could be made. In addition, predictions of killer whale occurrence in the broader region
of this study assume that conditions not measured in this study (prey availability, predator
prevalence, etc.) are comparable to the region surveyed by the tour vessel. Systematic line-transect
surveys (in space and time) are recommended to test and validate predicted killer whale
distributions with empirical measurements. In addition, such surveys would allow modelling of
other species of marine mammals (and megafauna in general). While the aerial surveys in 2017 were
an attempt at surveying a larger area systematically, these were too few to be useful in statistical
modelling. Line-transect surveys over a larger canyon region and at times outside of February-April
are strongly recommended.
35
Acknowledgements
Cetacean Explorer and Dhu Force were operated by Naturaliste Charters in 2015 and 2016. Big
Dreams was chartered by MIRG Australia for the 2017 season. We are further grateful for all
assistance given with the 2017 aerial surveys by Northwest Air Work pilot Conor and marine
wildlife consultant Verity Steptoe. The 2015-2017 visual data were collected under the Curtin
University Animal Ethics Committee Approval No. AEC_2013_27 and under the Australian
Government Department of the Environment Research Permits Nos. 2014/0008 and 2017/0001.
The 2015 data were collected under a contract with the SeaWorld Busch Gardens Conservation
Fund and Curtin University (recipients Christine Erbe and Leila Fouda). The 2016 and 2017 boat-
based data were collected with support from the Holsworth Wildlife Research Endowment and
The Australian Geographic Society (recipient Rebecca Wellard). This report was written with
funding from the National Environmental Science Programme.
Data Sources
Geoscience Australia. "Australian bathymetry and topography grid, June 2009." Canberra:
Geoscience Australia, http://pid.geoscience.gov.au/dataset/67703.
IMOS (2015-2017a). IMOS - SRS Satellite - SST L3S - 01 day composite - night time,
https://portal.aodn.org.au/, Accessed: 11th August 2017.
IMOS (2015-2017b). IMOS - SRS - MODIS - 01 day - Chlorophyll-a concentration (OC3 model),
https://portal.aodn.org.au/, Accessed: 11th August 2017.
References
Allen, S., and Durrieu de Madron, X. (2009). A review of the role of submarine canyons in deep-
ocean exchange with the shelf. Ocean Science, 5(4), 607-620.
Barrett-Lennard, L. G. (2000). Population structure and mating patterns of killer whales (Orcinus
orca) as revealed by DNA analysis. University of British Columbia.
Berzin, A., and Vladimirov, V. (1983). A new species of killer whale (Cetacea, Delphinidae) from the
Antarctic waters. Zoologichesky Zhurnal, 62(2), 287-295.
Berzin, A., and Vladimirov, V. (1989). Recent distribution and abundance of cetaceans in the Sea of
Okhotsk. Biologiya Morya-Marine Biology, (2), 15-23.
Boyce, M. A., Vernier, P. R., Nielsen, S. E., and Schmiegelow, F.K.A. (2002). Evaluating resource
selection functions. Ecological Modelling, 157, 281–300.
Branch, T., and Butterworth, D. (2001). Estimates of abundance south of 60^oS for cetacean
species sighted frequently on the 1978/79 to 1997/98 IWC/IDCR-SOWER sighting surveys.
Journal of Cetacean Research and Management, 3(3), 251-270.
Canty, A, and Ripley, B. (2017). boot: Bootstrap R (S-Plus) Functions. R package version 1.3-20.
36
Cosentino, A. M. (2015). First record of Norwegian killer whales attacking and feeding on a
harbour porpoise. Marine Biodiversity Records, 8.
Cui, J. (2007). QIC program and model selection in GEE analyses. The State Journal, 7(2), 209-220.
Dahlheim, M. E., and Heyning, J. E. (1999). Killer whale Orcinus orca (Linnaeus, 1758). In S. H.
Ridgway & R. Harrison (Eds.), Handbook of Marine Mammals (Vol. 6, pp. 281-322), doi:
Davison, A. C., and Hinkley, D. V. (1997) Bootstrap Methods and Their Applications. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge. ISBN 0-521-57391-2.
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. (2012). Marine
bioregional plan for the South-west Marine Region.
Durban, J., Fearnbach, H., Burrows, D., Ylitalo, G., and Pitman, R. (2017). Morphological and
ecological evidence for two sympatric forms of Type B killer whale around the Antarctic
Peninsula. Polar Biology, 40(1), 231-236.
Exon, N., Hill, P., Mitchell, C., and Post, A. (2005). Nature and origin of the submarine Albany
canyons off southwest Australia. Australian Journal of Earth Sciences, 52(1), 101-115.
Foote, A. D., Newton, J., Piertney, S. B., Willerslev, E., and Gilbert, M. T. P. (2009). Ecological,
morphological and genetic divergence of sympatric North Atlantic killer whale populations.
Molecular Ecology, 18(24), 5207-5217.
Ford, J. K. (2002). Killer whale Orcinus orca. In W. F. Perrin, B. Würsig & J. G. M. Thewissen (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of Marine Mammals (pp. 669-676): Academic Press, doi:
Ford, J. K., and Ellis, G. M. (1999). Transients: mammal-hunting killer whales of British Columbia,
Washington, and southeastern Alaska: UBC Press.
Ford, J. K., and Ellis, G. M. (2006). Selective foraging by fish-eating killer whales Orcinus orca in
British Columbia. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 316, 185-199.
Ford, J. K., Ellis, G. M., and Balcomb, K. C. (2000). Killer whales: the natural history and genealogy
of Orcinus orca in British Columbia and Washington: UBC press.
Ford, J. K., Ellis, G. M., Barrett-Lennard, L. G., Morton, A. B., Palm, R. S., and Balcomb III, K. C.
(1998). Dietary specialization in two sympatric populations of killer whales (Orcinus orca) in
coastal British Columbia and adjacent waters. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 76(8), 1456-
1471.
Forney, K. A., and Wade, P. R. (2006). Worldwide distribution and abundance of killer whales.
Whales, whaling and ocean ecosystems, 145-162.
Guerrero-Ruiz, M., Gendron, D., and Urbán, J. (1998). Distribution, movements and communities
of killer whales (Orcinus orca) in the Gulf of California, Mexico. Report of the International
Whaling Commission, 48, 537-543.
Gunnlaugsson, T., and Sigurjónsson, J. (1990). NASS-87: Estimation of whale abundance based on
observations made onboard Icelandic and Faroese survey vessels. Reports of the
International Whaling Commission, 40, 571-580.
Hammond, P. S. (1984). Abundance of killer whales in Antarctic Areas II, III, IV and V. Reports of the
International Whaling Commission, 34, 543-548.
37
Hardin, J. W., and Hilbe, J. M. (2002). Generalized Estimating Equations. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman
and Hall/CRC Press.
Herman, D., Burrows, D., Wade, P., Durban, J., Matkin, C., LeDuc, R., Barrett-Lennard, L., and
Krahn, M. M. (2005). Feeding ecology of eastern North Pacific killer whales Orcinus orca
from fatty acid, stable isotope, and organochlorine analyses of blubber biopsies. Marine
Ecology Progress Series, 302, 275-291.
Hoelzel, A., Dahlheim, M., and Stern, S. (1998). Low genetic variation among killer whales (Orcinus
orca) in the eastern North Pacific and genetic differentiation between foraging specialists.
Journal of Heredity, 89(2), 121-128.
Hoelzel, A. R., and Dover, G. A. (1991). Genetic differentiation between sympatric killer whale
populations. Heredity, 66(2), 191-195.
Hudecová, S., and Pešta, M. (2013). Modeling dependencies in claims reserving with GEE.
Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 53(3), 786-794.
Iñíguez, M. A. (2001). Seasonal distribution of killer whales (Orcinus arca) in Northern Patagonia,
Argentina. Aquatic Mammals, 27, 154-161.
Kasamatsu, F., and Joyce, G. G. (1995). Current status of odontocetes in the Antarctic. Antarctic
Science, 7(4), 365-379.
Keith, M., Bester, M., Bartlett, P., and Baker, D. (2001). Killer whales (Orcinus orca) at Marion
Island, Southern Ocean. African Zoology, 36(2), 163-175.
Lopez, J. C., and Lopez, D. (1985). Killer whales (Orcinus orca) of Patagonia, and their behavior of
intentional stranding while hunting nearshore. Journal of Mammalogy, 66(1), 181-183.
Matkin, C. O., Matkin, D. R., Ellis, G. M., Sau-litis, E., and McSweeney, D. (1997). Movements of
resident killer whales in southeastern Alaska and Prince William Sound, Alaska. Marine
Mammal Science, 13(3), 469-475.
Middleton, J. F., and Bye, J. A. (2007). A review of the shelf-slope circulation along Australia’s
southern shelves: Cape Leeuwin to Portland. Progress in Oceanography, 75(1), 1-41.
Mikhalev, Y. A., Ivashin, M., Savusin, V., and Zelenaya, F. (1981). The distribution and biology of
killer whales in the Southern Hemisphere. Report of the International Whaling Commission,
31, 551-566.
Mironova, A., Burdin, A., Hoyt, E., Jikiya, E., Nikulin, V., Pavlov, N., Sato, H., Tarasyan, K., Filatova,
O., and Vertyankin, V. (2002). O. orca abundance, distribution, seasonal presence,
predation and strandings in the waters around Kamchatka and the Kommander Islands: An
assessment based on reported sightings 1992-2000. Paper presented at the Proceedings of
the 4th International Orca Symposium and Workshop, Chize, France, pp106-108.
Miyashita, T. (1993). Abundance of dolphins stocks in the western North Pacific taken by the
Japanese drive fishery. Reports of the International Whaling Commission, 43, 417-437.
Morrice, M. G. (2004). Killer whales (Orcinus orca) in Australian territorial waters. Technical Paper.
Deakin University, Victoria. Australia.
Mustoe, S. (2008). Killer Whale Orcinus' Orca'Sightings in Coastal Victoria. Victorian Naturalist,
The, 125(3), 76.
38
Ohsumi, S. (1981). Distribution and abundance of killer whales in the Southern Hemisphere.
Reports of the International Whaling Commission, 31, 1-9.
Øien, N. (1990). Sightings surveys in the northeast Atlantic in July 1988: distribution and
abundance of cetaceans. Reports of the International Whaling Commission, 40, 499-511.
Pan, W. (2001). Akaike’s information criterion in Generalized Estimation Equations. Biometrics, 57,
120-125.
Pattiaratchi, C., and Woo, M. (2009). The mean state of the Leeuwin current system between
North West Cape and Cape Leeuwin. Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia,
92(2), 221-241.
Pitman, R. L., and Durban, J. W. (2010). Killer whale predation on penguins in Antarctica. Polar
Biology, 33(11), 1589-1594.
Pitman, R. L., and Durban, J. W. (2012). Cooperative hunting behavior, prey selectivity and prey
handling by pack ice killer whales (Orcinus orca), type B, in Antarctic Peninsula waters.
Marine Mammal Science, 28(1), 16-36.
Pitman, R. L., Durban, J. W., Greenfelder, M., Guinet, C., Jorgensen, M., Olson, P. A., Plana, J.,
Tixier, P., and Towers, J. R. (2011). Observations of a distinctive morphotype of killer whale
(Orcinus orca), type D, from subantarctic waters. Polar Biology, 34(2), 303-306.
Pitman, R. L., and Ensor, P. (2003). Three forms of killer whales (Orcinus orca) in Antarctic waters.
Journal of Cetacean Research and Management, 5(2), 131-140.
Pitman, R. L., Perryman, W. L., LeRoi, D., and Eilers, E. (2007). A dwarf form of killer whale in
Antarctica. Journal of Mammalogy, 88(1), 43-48.
Pitman, R. L., Totterdell, J. A., Fearnbach, H., Ballance, L. T., Durban, J. W., and Kemps, H. (2015).
Whale killers: Prevalence and ecological implications of killer whale predation on
humpback whale calves off Western Australia. Marine Mammal Science, 31(2), 629-657.
Scott-Hayward, L., Mackenzie, M. L., Donovan, C. R., Walker, C. G., & Ashe, E. (2013a). Complex
Region Spatial Smoother (CReSS). Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 23(2),
340-360. http://dx.doi. org/10.1080/10618600.2012.762920
Scott-Hayward, L., Oedekoven, X. S., Mackenzie, M. L., Walker, C. G., & Rexstad, E. (2013b). User
guide for the MRSea package: Statistical modelling of bird and cetacean distributions in
offshore renewables development areas (Contract with Marine Scotland: SB9
[CR/2012/05]). St Andrews, Fife, UK: University of St. Andrews. Retrieved 17 September
2015 from http:// creem2.st-and.ac.uk/software.aspx.
Secchi, E. R., Dalla Rosa, L., Kinas, P. G., Santos, M. C. d. O., Zerbini, A. N., Bassoi, M., and Moreno,
I. B. (2001). Encounter rates of whales around the Antarctic Peninsula with special
reference to humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, in the Gerlache Strait: 1997/98
to 1999/2000.
Sigurjónsson, J., Gunnlaugsson, T., and Payne, M. (1989). NASS-87: Shipboard sightings surveys in
Icelandic and adjacent waters June-July 1987. Report of the International Whaling
Commission, 39, 395-409.
39
Similä, T., Holst, J. C., and Christensen, I. (1996). Occurrence and diet of killer whales in northern
Norway: seasonal patterns relative to the distribution and abundance of Norwegian spring-
spawning herring. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 53(4), 769-779.
Staley, T. (2013) The case for Generalized Estimating Equations in state-level analysis. Working
draft prepared for the State Politics and Policy Conference, Iowa City, IA.
Stevens, T. A., Duffield, D. A., Asper, E. D., Hewlett, K. G., Bolz, A., Gage, L. J., and Bossart, G. D.
(1989). Preliminary findings of restriction fragment differences in mitochondrial DNA
among killer whales (Orcinus orca). Canadian Journal of Zoology, 67(10), 2592-2595.
Taylor, B. L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S. M., Ford, J., Mead, J. G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G.,
Wade, P., and Pitman, R. L. (2013). Orcinus orca. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
e.T15421A44220470, doi: 10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-1.RLTS.T15421A44220470.en.
Tixier, P., Gasco, N., Duhamel, G., Viviant, M., Authier, M., and Guinet, C. (2010). Interactions of
Patagonian toothfish fisheries with killer and sperm whales in the Crozet islands Exclusive
Economic Zone: an assessment of depredation levels and insights on possible mitigation
strategies. CCAMLR Science, 17, 179-195.
Thall, P. F. and Stephen C. V. (1990). Some covariance models for longitudinal count data with
overdispersion. Biometrics, 46, 657-671.
Visser, I. N. (1999). Antarctic orca in New Zealand waters?
Vongraven, D., and Bisther, A. (2014). Prey switching by killer whales in the north-east Atlantic:
observational evidence and experimental insights. Journal of the Marine Biological
Association of the United Kingdom, 94(6), 1357-1365.
Wade, P. R., and Gerrodette, T. (1993). Estimates of cetacean abundance and distribution in the
eastern tropical Pacific. Report of the International Whaling Commission, 43, 477-493.
Waite, A., Thompson, P., Pesant, S., Feng, M., Beckley, L., Domingues, C., Gaughan, D., Hanson, C.,
Holl, C., and Koslow, T. (2007). The Leeuwin Current and its eddies: An introductory
overview. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 54(8), 789-796.
Wellard, R., and Erbe, C. (2017). Killer whales of the Bremer Sub-Basin: A photo-ID catalogue.
Perth, WA, Australia: Centre for Marine Science and Technology, Curtin University.
Wellard, R., Erbe, C., Fouda, L., and Blewitt, M. (2015). Vocalisations of killer whales (Orcinus orca)
in the Bremer Canyon, Western Australia. PLoS ONE, 10(9), e0136535, doi:
10.1371/journal.pone.0136535.
Wellard, R., Lightbody, K., Fouda, L., Blewitt, M., Riggs, D., and Erbe, C. (2016). Killer whale
(Orcinus orca) predation on beaked whales (Mesoplodon spp.) in the Bremer Sub-Basin,
Western Australia. PLOS ONE, 11(12), e0166670, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0166670.
Yan, J. (2002). Geepack: Yet another package for Generalized Estimating Equations. R-News, 2(3),
12-14
Yan, J. and Fine, J. P. (2004). Estimating equations for association structures. Statistics in Medicine,
23(6), 859-880.
Zeger, S. L. and Liang, K. (1986). Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes.
Biometrics, 42, 121-130.
40
Zerbini, A. N., Waite, J. M., Durban, J. W., LeDuc, R., Dahlheim, M. E., and Wade, P. R. (2007).
Estimating abundance of killer whales in the nearshore waters of the Gulf of Alaska and
Aleutian Islands using line-transect sampling. Marine Biology, 150(5), 1033-1045.
Zorn, C. (2001). Generalized Estimating Equation models for correlated data: A review with
applications. American Journal of Political Science, 45(2), 470-490.
Zuur, A. F., Ieno, E. N., Walker, N. J., Saveliev, A. A., and Smith, G. M. (2009). Mixed effects models
and extension in Ecology with R. New York: Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 574 pp.
Recommended