title: Stranded dolphin stomach contents represent the free-ranging population's diet.
abstract: Diet is a fundamental aspect of animal ecology. Cetacean prey species are generally identified by examining stomach contents of stranded individuals. Critical uncertainty in these studies is whether samples from stranded animals are representative of the diet of free-ranging animals. Over two summers, we collected faecal and gastric samples from healthy free-ranging individuals of an extensively studied bottlenose dolphin population. These samples were analysed by molecular prey detection and these data compared with stomach contents data derived from stranded dolphins from the same population collected over 22 years. There was a remarkable consistency in the prey species composition and relative amounts between the two datasets. The conclusions of past stomach contents studies regarding dolphin habitat associations, prey selection and proposed foraging mechanisms are supported by molecular data from live animals and the combined dataset. This is the first explicit test of the validity of stomach contents analysis for accurate population-scale diet determination of an inshore cetacean.
authors: Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Sandy Bay, Tasmania 7005, Australia. ecodes@live.co.uk
authors: Glenn
authors: G
authors: Dunshea
authors: Nélio B
authors: NB
authors: Barros
authors: Elizabeth J
authors: EJ
authors: Berens McCabe
authors: Nicholas J
authors: NJ
authors: Gales
authors: Mark A
authors: MA
authors: Hindell
authors: Simon N
authors: SN
authors: Jarman
authors: Randall S
authors: RS
authors: Wells
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D004032:Diet; D004289:Dolphins; D005766:Gastrointestinal Contents; D011235:Predatory Behavior
keywords: DNA-based; PCR; Sarasota; foraging
references: Syst Biol. 2008 Oct;57(5):750-7
references: 18853361
references: Mol Ecol. 2004 May;13(5):1313-22
references: 15078466
references: Mol Ecol Resour. 2011 May;11(3):530-40
references: 21481211
references: Bull Entomol Res. 2008 Jun;98(3):239-48
references: 18439341
references: Mol Ecol. 2002 Apr;11(4):627-41
references: 11972753
references: PLoS One. 2009;4(4):e5252
references: 19390570