Summary of sample sizes by North Atlantic management subareas in the three studies referred to in the text.
Abstract
In 1998, two species of minke whales were recognized based on the review of the morphological and genetic information available at that time: the Antarctic minke whale (Balaenoptera bonaerensis), which is restricted to the Southern Hemisphere, and the cosmopolitan common minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata). Furthermore, three sub-species of the common minke whale were recognized: the North Atlantic (B. a. acutorostrata), North Pacific (B. a. scammoni) and Southern Hemisphere (B. a. subsp.). This chapter reviews the genetic studies on minke whales conducted after 1998. The review is organized by topic, e.g., those studies focused on phylogeny and other matters most relevant for taxonomy, and those focused on population genetic structure within oceanic basins most relevant for conservation and management. On the former topic, the new genetic information, whilst strongly supporting the minke whale taxonomic classification recognized in 1998, also reveals substantial genetic differentiation within the Southern Hemisphere common minke whales, with subsequent taxonomic implications. On the latter topic, results from different analytical procedures have provided information on population identification and structure in the Indo-Pacific sector of the Antarctic and western North Pacific, but they have failed to identify unequivocally any population within the North Atlantic common minke whales.
Keywords
- Antarctic minke whale
- North Pacific common minke whale
- North Atlantic common minke whale
- Southern Hemisphere common minke whale
- dwarf minke whale
- genetics
- taxonomy
- population structure
1. Introduction
Minke whales are members of the Order Cetacea. They are the smallest species within the suborder Mysticeti (baleen whales), usually not exceeding the 10 m in body length. They are characterized by a sharply pointed head that looks V-shaped when see from above, and they present a sharp longitudinal ridge that runs along the top of the rostrum [1]. Minke whales are the most abundant of the baleen whales and they are hunted in limited numbers by some countries for commercial (Japan and Norway) or aboriginal subsistence (Greenland) purposes.
Until relatively recently, only one species of minke whale was thought to exist:
In 1998, based on a review of both morphological and genetic data, two species of minke whales were recognized, the Antarctic minke whale (
Several genetic studies of minke whales have been conducted since the 1998 review. Some studies have focused on phylogenetic issues while others have focused on elucidating population genetic structure in each oceanic basin. This chapter aims to provide a short review of recent genetic studies, outlining the main new findings and implications. After introducing the genetic markers in Section 2, in Section 3, we review the studies that focus primarily on phylogeny and other matters that are relevant to taxonomy and then, in Section 4, we concentrate on the studies on the population genetic structure of each species and sub-species by oceanic basin (Southern Hemisphere, North Atlantic and North Pacific).
Both information on taxonomy and population identification and structure of minke whales are important and necessary for effective decision-making about conservation and sustainable use of the species.
2. Genetic markers
Two main genetic markers have been used in recent genetic analyses of minke whales, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) control region sequences and microsatellite DNA (msDNA, a nuclear marker) genotypes, which are briefly explained here based on [11].
The mitochondrial genome is a circular, double-stranded molecule ranging in size from 16,500 to 17,600 base-pairs (bp) in cetaceans. The main features of mtDNA are (a) maternal inheritance, (b) no recombination during reproduction and (c) it is haploid. Features (a) and (c) mean that the effective population size for the mtDNA genome is ¼ of that for nuclear markers. Sequence changes in animal mitochondrial genomes are of four types: sequence arrangements; additions; deletions; and nucleotide substitutions. The substitution rate is not constant across the mitochondrial genome. The most variable part is where replication begins (the ‘control region’). The control region is the only major non-coding region in the mitochondrial genome. In whales, its length is approximately 1000 bp. In most studies on minke whales, the sequence of the first 300-500 bp in the control region is determined, which is the most variable part.
MsDNA or simple tandem repeats (STRs) are segments of non-coding nuclear DNA containing a varying number (different alleles) of tandem repeats of short sequences of less than six nucleotides. As a nuclear marker, they are diploid with recombination during reproduction. They are abundant and widely distributed throughout the mammalian genome. MsDNA is highly variable, presenting a large number of alleles at each locus, selectively neutral, inherited in standard Mendelian fashion and allelically codominant. MsDNA generally evolves by changes in the number of repeats, i.e., in the length of the repetitive region. MsDNA alleles can be distinguished by differences in the length of the repetitive region. They predominantly mutate by insertion or deletion of repeats. In most studies on minke whales, a set of approximately 12–16 msDNA loci are used.
Most of the recent genetic studies on minke whales have made combined use of these two genetic markers, which presents several advantages. Some of the genetic criteria for taxonomic definition require results of both markers (see below). Different species of large whales can produce hybrid whales and such cases can be detected by the combined use of mtDNA and msDNA. In studies on population identification and structure, parallel analyses of Mendelian and maternally inherited loci are particularly important. Some species may display maternally directed phylopatry. In such cases, genetic differences can be found for the mtDNA but not for msDNA. The use of msDNA in addition to mtDNA allows for an investigation of kinship, which is important information for the interpretation of population structure.
Details of laboratory procedures for mtDNA and msDNA in minke whales can be found in [12].
3. Phylogenetic and other studies relevant for taxonomy
Several genetic studies addressing phylogenetic and other aspects relevant for taxonomy were conducted after the 1998 review in [10]. All those studies used samples from minke whale worldwide [13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18]. Oceanic basins covered by the genetic sampling in recent studies are shown in Figure 2.
A brief description and main findings of these studies are presented below. Several phylogenetic inference methods were used to evaluate observed heritable traits, such as mtDNA sequences, under a specified model of the evolution of the traits. Taxonomic classification is now usually based on phylogenetic data. Details of the phylogenetic inference methods are not given here however relevant bibliographic references on the methods are provided for interested readers in the sections below.
3.1 Speciation and divergence time
The focus of the first post-1998 study involving minke whales was a case study to investigate the radiation and speciation of pelagic organisms during the period of global warming [13]. The study was based on mtDNA control region sequences (340 bp) in samples of Antarctic minke whales (n = 180), North Atlantic (n = 102) and North Pacific (n = 161) common minke whales and Southern Hemisphere common or dwarf minke whales (n = 23 from the western South Atlantic, WSA and western South Pacific, WSP). A total of 187 haplotypes (unique sequences) were determined. The genealogical relationship among a sub-set of 60 haplotypes was estimated using the NUCML program in the MOLPHY computer package [19], the BASEML program in the PAML computer package [20] and the TREE-PUZZLE program of the quartet-puzzling (QP) method [21]. Divergence time was estimated by applying a molecular clock model using a calibration point that minke whales and the gray whales (
The study provided evidence for phylogenetic differentiation not only between the two species of minke whales but also among North Atlantic, North Pacific and Southern Hemisphere common minke whales. The study estimated that the two species of minke whales diverged in the Southern Hemisphere less than 5 Ma, and that the current sub-species of the common minke whales diverged after the Pliocene some 1.5 Ma. Based on their analysis, the authors hypothesized that prolonged periods of global warming facilitate speciation in pelagic marine species that depend on upwelling [13].
3.2 Phylogenetic analyses
Three relevant studies are described here [14, 16, 18]. The first study [14] used mtDNA control region sequences (327 bp) and a similar sample set of the previous study [13] but this time the study was focused to elucidate the population genetic structure of the Southern Hemisphere common minke whales using samples from WSA (n = 12) and WSP (n = 17) (Figure 3).
The genealogy of the mtDNA haplotypes was estimated using the neighbor-joining method (NJ) [23], minimum evolution (ME) [24], maximum likelihood (ML) [25] and maximum parsimony (MP) [26]. To evaluate the relative effects of divergence and migration between WSA and WSP whales, the approach in [27] modified for a finite mutation level [28] was used. Phylogenetic inferences derived from these methods were consistent, and similar to the inferences obtained in a previous study [13]. WSA common minke whale haplotypes (except one), clustered in a single clade, which nested within the North Atlantic common minke whale clade. On the other hand, WSP common minke whale haplotypes clustered in a different clade. The study showed that haplotypes from the WSA whales share more recent common ancestors with the North Atlantic minke whales than they do with the WSP minke whales. The analysis suggested a very low number of migrants by generation between WSA and WSP, which suggests that the WSA single haplotype in the WSP clade was unlikely to be a result of migration but rather due to incomplete lineage sorting [14].
The most recent genetic analysis on minke whales worldwide [18] was based on mtDNA control region sequences (313 bp) and msDNA (11 loci). The sample set for the mtDNA analysis was similar to those in the previous studies [13, 14] but the samples of the Southern Hemisphere common minke whales were increased (WSP, n = 17; WSA, n = 30), and msDNA was used in addition to mtDNA. A total of 148 haplotypes were determined. The genealogy of the mtDNA haplotypes was estimated using several methods including NJ, ML and Bayesian inferences (BI) [29]. The three methods provided similar results, and they were consistent with previous phylogenetic inferences [13, 14]. Results from the BI method are shown in Figure 4. This figure shows two main clades, one corresponding to Antarctic minke whales and the other to common minke whales. Furthermore, within the common minke whales clade, North Pacific, North Atlantic and Southern Hemisphere common minke whales clustered in different sub-clades.
Figure 4 shows that WSA and WSP common minke whales in the Southern Hemisphere clustered in different sub-clades (except the single WSA haplotype mentioned previously that clustered within the WSP sub-clade), and that the WSA haplotypes fell with the North Atlantic sub-clade.
This study estimated the net nucleotide substitutions (
The msDNA analysis in [18] involved samples from three localities only (unfortunately, no samples from the North Atlantic common minke whales were considered): North Pacific and Southern Hemisphere (WSA and WSP) common minke whales. The pattern of msDNA differentiation was investigated by two indices,
Although, the third study was focused to investigate hybrids between the two species of minke whales [16], it also provided information on genetic differentiation between the Antarctic and common minke whales species as well among common minke whales from different oceanic basins. The study was based on mtDNA control region sequences (287 bp) and msDNA (11 loci), and samples from the Antarctic minke whale (n = 91), North Atlantic (n = 91), North Pacific (n = 95) and Southern Hemisphere (WSP) (n = 9) common minke whales. The genealogy of the mtDNA haplotype was estimated using the NJ method and the inferences obtained were similar to the other studies [13, 14, 18]. The msDNA
3.3 Hybridization in minke whales
A genetic study based on both mtDNA (287 bp) control region sequences and msDNA (13 loci) reported the migration of an Antarctic minke whale into the Arctic Northeast Atlantic in 1996 [15]. The same study reported the occurrence of a hybrid whale in the North Atlantic in 2007. The analytical procedures for the identification of the hybrid involved the use of the Bayesian cluster analysis
3.4 Implications for taxonomy and suggestions for future works
Taxonomic definitions are associated with the term Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU) [36, 37], defined in [37] as ‘ESUs should be reciprocally monophyletic for mitochondrial DNA alleles and show significant divergence of allele frequencies at nuclear loci’. However, other authors have argued that the definition of ESUs should incorporate ecological data in addition to data on genetic variation of adaptive significance [38]. An example of ecological data could be discrete prey preferences of sympatric individuals. Other authors suggest the use of
Considering these criteria, the post-1998 genetic results (with larger sample sizes and wider geographical range), strongly support the division of Antarctic and common minke whales as different species [10]. They clearly match the ESU definition (based on different phylogenetic inference methods), and the average estimated
Within the common minke whales, the North Pacific and Southern Hemisphere (WSP) match the ESU criterion. Their average
The case of the North Atlantic and Southern Hemisphere (WSA) common minke whales is more complex. This is because some of the mtDNA phylogenetic analyses showed haplotypes of common minke whales from WSA clustering within the North Atlantic common minke whale clade, therefore not matching the reciprocally monophyletic for mitochondrial DNA definition of ESU, although the status of sub-species is appropriate based on the
Finally, and following the criteria above, whales from the Sea of Japan and western North Pacific should be considered as populations of the North Pacific common minke whale.
The cases of hybridization between minke whale species and the study showing that such hybrids may be fertile, and that they can back-cross have some relevance to the taxonomy of minke whales. As noted in [16], it is not possible to resolve whether the observed migration of Antarctic minke whales to the Arctic, and hybridization between Antarctic minke whales and North Atlantic common minke whales are (a) random events that have occurred over a long period of time; (b) the result of a low number of Antarctic minke whales migrating from the Antarctic to the Arctic in the 1990s; or (c) represent a trend that is increasing in frequency. The authors in [16] further argued that the lack of hybrids in the large (n > 15000) Japanese genetic data sets infers that such events are not frequent. Unless the frequency of reproductive contact increases significantly in the future, the separation of the Antarctic minke whale and the North Atlantic common minke whale should not be challenged [16].
In summary, the recent genetic studies provide support for the classification recognized in the 1998 review [10] for two species, the Antarctic and the common minke whale, and at least three sub-species of the latter. Furthermore, these studies suggest a phylogenetic separation between Southern Hemisphere common minke whales from Western South Pacific and Western South Atlantic. Whales from these two localities differed significantly in mtDNA haplotype and msDNA allele frequencies. Phylogenetic analyses showed that haplotypes from the WSA whales share a more recent common ancestor with the North Atlantic common minke whales than they do with the WSP common minke whales.
4. Studies on population genetic structure in each oceanic basin
Minke whales were hunted commercially or under special permit in the Southern Hemisphere until the 2018/19 austral summer season, and they are hunted currently for limited numbers in the North Atlantic (commercial and aboriginal subsistence purposes), and western North Pacific (commercial purposes). Identification of populations within species and sub-species in each oceanic basin, therefore, is very important for conservation and management purposes. This is because different populations of the same species or sub-species may respond in different ways to levels of direct removals (e.g., catches, bycatches) and other types of environmental stress (e.g., habitat degradation) [18]. Population dynamics modeling is used to investigate the effect of different management strategies and environmental stressors at the population level. However, the identification of populations is not a trivial issue.
In each of the relevant oceanic basins, Southern Hemisphere, North Atlantic and North Pacific, minke whales are believed, like most baleen whale species, to undertake seasonal migrations between feeding grounds in higher latitudes in summer and breeding grounds in lower latitudes in the tropical or temperate regions in winter. However, there are few direct observations of this linkage, and information of minke whale breeding grounds in low latitudes is poor. Ideally, genetic analyses on population identification should be carried out based on samples collected in breeding grounds. However, all genetic analyses on minke whale population identification have been based on samples collected in feeding grounds and migratory corridors, where different populations may mix spatially and/or temporally.
The International Whaling Commission (IWC) has defined areas for the management (i.e., the setting of catch limits) of minke whales in each oceanic basin based upon a variety of data types, genetic and non-genetic (e.g., see [40]) since the earliest days of management, often based upon limited information or analogy. Most recent studies have focused on the correspondence of the set management boundaries with the available genetic information and revising the boundaries as appropriate to ensure that over-exploitation does not occur. The primary management tool used by the IWC Scientific Committee to provide advice on commercial whaling catch limits is known as the Revised Management Procedure or RMP that focusses on providing robust management advice in the light of inevitable scientific uncertainty (e.g., [41]). Uncertainty in stock structure is one of the most influential in terms of providing robust advice. The philosophy adopted under the RMP (and the sister approach for aboriginal subsistence whaling known as the AWMP or Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Management Procedure) with respect to stock structure is that it is not often, if ever, possible to arrive at only one plausible stock structure hypothesis from the available data. Rather than in the past when the ‘best’ hypothesis (and boundaries) was determined and then fixed management boundaries for the ‘unit-to-conserve’ (usually a population) chosen, the RMP approach says that catch limits must be set that are robust to all plausible hypotheses and that these hypotheses should be regularly reviewed in the light of new data. Of course, deciding what comprises ‘plausible’ is a complex and difficult issue and one which has driven much of the work described below, especially for the North Pacific common minke whale.
In this section, the most recent genetic analyses on population identification and structure in minke whales are reviewed for each species and sub-species in each relevant oceanic basin.
The method most often used for the identification of populations within an oceanic basin was hypothesis testing under the null hypothesis of panmixia. Under this method, mtDNA haplotype and/or msDNA allele frequencies between two geographically grouped samples are compared using several statistical tests. More recently, spatially explicit clustering approaches, for example, sPCA, GENELAND, TESS and BAPS have been used to investigate population identification and structure.
Details of the statistical tests and clustering approaches are not given here however relevant references on the methods are provided for interested readers in the sections below.
4.1 Antarctic minke whales
The IWC’s management areas for baleen whales (excluding the Bryde’s whale
There are no genetic samples from Antarctic minke whales from low latitude regions of the eastern Indian Ocean and western South Pacific where breeding grounds of this species in this region are assumed to occur. The most recent genetic studies were based therefore on samples collected by the JARPA and JARPAII programs in the Antarctic feeding grounds of Areas III east, IV, V and VI west. Those studies were summarized in [42], and the most relevant aspects are highlighted here.
Previous morphometric, biological and genetic studies based on mtDNA and msDNA led to the conclusion that Antarctic minke whales in the feeding grounds between Areas III east and VI west do not comprise a single population [43]. The most recent genetic study used mtDNA control region sequences (340 bp) and msDNA (12 loci) [12] to examine a total of 2254 samples in the Indo-Pacific sector of the Antarctic: Area III east = 564; Area IV west = 734, Area IV east = 74, Area VE east = 478, Area VI west = 404. The samples were obtained in the Southern Hemisphere summer season in different years. The degree of spatial and temporal divergence was estimated via the
The main conclusion of the studies was the existence of at least two populations in the feeding grounds of the Indo-Pacific sector of the Antarctic and a transition area in the region around 100°-165°E, across which there is an as yet undetermined level and range of mixing (Figure 6). The following names were proposed for these populations: Eastern Indian Ocean Population (I-Population) and Western South Pacific Ocean Population (P-Population) [42].
A recent study described a paternity method based on msDNA (12 loci) to estimate the abundance of mature male Antarctic minke whales in the Indo Pacific sector of the Antarctic using a maximum likelihood approach [46]. Results for the geographical distribution of mother/fetus-father pairs were generally consistent with the hypothesis of separate I- and P- Populations because eight of 10 pairs were found in the expected areas of distribution of either population. Only two pairs were found in distant areas.
The genetic studies showed no concordance between the geographic boundaries of the IWC management Areas and the geographical distribution of the I- and P- populations suggested by the genetic analyses.
4.2 North Atlantic common minke whale
The IWC’s management areas for North Atlantic common minke whales are shown in Figure 7. In this section, the most recent genetic studies on population structure are summarized [47, 48, 49]. These studies were focused on examining the biological validity of the management areas in Figure 7.
The first study reviewed here [47] was based on genetic samples (n = 306) collected throughout the North Atlantic (see Table 1). Samples were collected in spring-summer over several years. The genetic markers used were mtDNA control region (500 bp) and msDNA (16 loci). The analytical procedures used for mtDNA were the
The second study [48] was based on smaller sample size (n = 202) but again throughout the North Atlantic (see Table 1). Samples were collected mainly in spring-summer over several years. The genetic markers used were mtDNA control region sequences (345 bp) and msDNA (10 loci). The relevant analytical procedures to investigate population structure based on msDNA were the
The third study [49] was based on much larger sample size (n = 2664) but primarily from the Eastern North Atlantic (Table 1). The genetic markers used were mtDNA control region sequences (331 bp) and msDNA (10 loci). The study used several analytical procedures to investigate population structure based on msDNA including
4.3 North Pacific common minke whale
The IWC’s management sub-areas for North Pacific common minke whales are shown in Figure 8. At least two populations of the common minke whales have been historically recognized in the western North Pacific, (1) the Okhotsk Sea-West Pacific (known in IWC literature as the O-stock) and (2) the Sea of Japan-Yellow Sea-East China Sea (known as the J-stock). There are morphological and reproductive [57, 58] as well genetic [59, 60] characters differentiating these two populations.
Recent genetic work has focused on refining this two-population hypothesis as well as investigating whether additional structure exists within the J- and O-stocks. Studies have been based on samples collected mainly during the Japanese Whale Research Programs under Special Permit in the western North Pacific, Phases I and II (JARPN and JARPNII) and bycatches along the Japanese coast. Surveys of these research programs were conducted systematically in the western North Pacific in spring-summer from 1994 to 2016. Table 2 summarizes the number of samples used in recent studies, by subarea.
Individual probability assignment to either J- or O-stocks was made possible by the use of
Figure 10 shows the temporal distribution of the J- and O-stock individuals on the Pacific side of Japan (2C, 7CN and 7CS) expressed as a three-month moving average. In sub-area 2C, J-stock animals are predominant throughout the year. In sub-areas 7CS and 7CN, the proportion of the J-stock increases in autumn/winter and decreases in spring/summer – the reverse is true for O-stock animals.
The phylogenetic tree of haplotypes showed no population-specific clade although most of the individuals assigned to the J-stock shared the same clade. Most of the individuals assigned to the O-stock shared clades where the J-stock individuals were less frequent [61].
A subsequent study investigated the possibility of additional structure within O-stock based on mtDNA control region sequences (487 bp) and msDNA (16 loci) [62]. The sample size of the O-Stock for the different subareas shown in Figure 8 was 2070 (Table 2). The methods used for investigating structure based on msDNA data were the probability test [63] and the discriminant analysis of principal component (DAPC) approach [64]; for the latter analysis, both J- and O-stock assigned individuals were used. For mtDNA, heterogeneity tests in haplotype frequencies among the samples were conducted using both the chi-square test of independence and conventional
A later study used DAPC and spatial analysis of principal component (sPCA) [65] to investigate population structure [66]. The study was based on msDNA (16 loci) and the sample sizes were similar to the previous study [61]. The DAPC failed to find evidence of additional structure other than the J- and O-stocks. The results indicated a low possibility that multiple stocks exist (other than the J- and O-stocks) with overlapping geographic ranges.
A different approach was used in a study that used msDNA data at 16 loci in 4554 whales to infer Parent-Offspring (P-O) relationships using a Maximum-Likelihood approach [67]. Biological information such as the sex and sexual maturity of the whales was used to interpret the genetic results on P-O pairs. The relationship between False Discovery Rate (FDR) and Power (P) was evaluated by simulation. Of 145 inferred P-O pairs (estimated FDR = 0.1), 141 were further evaluated by typing 10 additional msDNA loci. A total of 75 were confirmed (among them 26 Mother-Fetus pairs) and 66 pairs were ranked ‘False Positives’, yielding an overall observed FDR of 0.468. Among the validated P-O pairs, O-stock pairs were significantly overrepresented and no pairs between J- and O-stock individuals were detected. J-stock animals seem to appear on both sides of Japan closer to the coast, while O-stock individuals occur mostly to the east of Japan, both close to the coast and far offshore. The study provided no evidence for further population structure other than J and O-stocks.
Most recently, a study [68] used three spatially explicit clustering tools including GENELAND [69], TESS [70, 71] and BAPS to explore the msDNA data used previously in [66]. The authors believed that the most informative approach was GENELAND using the mixture model with correlated allele frequency model, which supported
4.4 Summary and suggestions for future work
Over the last two decades, several important genetic studies focused on investigating population identification and structure in minke whales have been undertaken in three oceanic basins using two genetic markers, mtDNA and msDNA. The driving force behind these analyses was obtaining information to help with effective conservation and management. Of necessity, all of these studies were based on genetic samples collected in feeding grounds and migratory corridors. In this context, population identification is associated with the concept of Management Units (MUs) described by one author in 1994 as ‘populations with a significant divergence of allele frequencies at nuclear or mitochondrial loci, regardless of the phylogenetic distinctiveness of the alleles’ [37]. Several of the studies described above presented statistical results that are consistent with this criterion for defining the population. In addition to hypothesis testing, several increasingly sophisticated clustering approaches have been used for the purpose of identifying populations.
Recent studies in the Southern Hemisphere were concentrated in the Indo-Pacific sector of the Antarctic where a large number of genetic samples of Antarctic minke whales was available from Japanese whale research programs. At least two populations have been identified in this sector, the I- and P-populations, which may be related to breeding grounds in lower latitudes of the eastern Indian Ocean and western South Pacific. These populations exhibit significant differences in their mtDNA haplotype and msDNA alleles frequencies, matching the criterion for Management Unit defined above. The Australian continent may play a role in isolating these populations during the winter breeding season, with whales presenting some degree of fidelity to particular feeding grounds in the Antarctic during summer. Although, a transition area of mixing of these two populations was postulated in the Antarctic feeding grounds, whales from each population appear to return to their respective breeding grounds in winter.
To fully understand population structure in the Southern Hemisphere, additional effort should be made to collect genetic samples from other sectors of the Antarctic and other regions of the Southern Hemisphere. This will allow investigation of the full distribution of the P- and I-populations as well the research into structure in the remaining sectors of the Antarctic. Clearly, any understanding of population structure will be greatly facilitated by dedicated efforts to investigate the migration routes and locations of breeding areas; satellite tracking will be an extremely valuable tool in this regard [74].
In the North Atlantic, the results of several genetic studies on population identification and structure may appear contradictory. While some studies suggested subtle genetic differences among groups of whales, others studies based on larger sample sizes have failed to detect any evidence of structure in this oceanic basin. As in the Southern Hemisphere, research on migratory routes and locations of breeding grounds is required to assist the interpretation of the results of the genetic analyses in the feeding ground and migratory routes.
In the North Pacific, recent genetic analyses have been concentrated in the western side due to a larger availability of genetic samples from the Japanese whale research programs and to management needs within the context of the IWC’s Scientific Committee. Historically two populations have been recognized in the western North Pacific, the J- and O-stocks, and recent genetic analyses have confirmed their existence and furthermore have revealed more information on their patterns of spatial and seasonal movement. The J-stock occurs mainly in the Sea of Japan although some individuals migrate seasonally to the Pacific side of Japan. The O-stock is mainly found on the Pacific side of Japan. The objective of most recent studies has been to whether or not additional structure occurs within either or both of the J- and O-stocks, and several new analytical approaches were used to respond that question. Results of most of the approaches indicated a lack of additional structure, other than that attributed to the J- and O- stocks. The most recent IWC Scientific Committee discussions allocated high plausibility to the hypothesis of two populations with spatial/temporal mixing in the western North Pacific [75]. As for the other two ocean basins, effort should be made to collect and analyze genetic samples from the less understood eastern North Pacific as well to undertake focused research to understand migratory corridors and breeding ground locations.
It is also important to make effort to investigate the occurrence, distribution and population structure of common minke whales distributed around Chinese and Korean Peninsula waters, and the genetic relationship with whales distributed in the subareas around Japan. Investigation of the population genetic structure in those waters is important as several annual bycatches have been reported for the Korean Peninsula.
5. General conclusions
Many genetic studies on minke whales were conducted in the last 20 years. New taxonomic information post-1998 relates primarily to the Southern Hemisphere common minke whales (dwarf minke whales) from the western South Pacific and western South Atlantic, which are differentiated by both mtDNA and msDNA markers. The paraphyletic relationship between the North Atlantic and Southern Hemisphere (WSA) common minke whale has important implications for the taxonomic definition of common minke whales. Regarding population genetic structure, at least two populations of the Antarctic minke whale have been identified in the Indo-Pacific sector of the Antarctic, and at least two populations were confirmed in the western North Pacific common minke whales. In the North Atlantic genetic studies suggest that population structure, should it exist, is rather subtle. As for the North Pacific and Southern Hemisphere, analyses are hindered by a lack of knowledge (and thus samples from) breeding grounds.
The population structure of minke whales is intertwined with some degree of fidelity to specific feeding grounds. This fidelity could vary depending on changing short- and long-term environmental conditions. In the case of the Antarctic minke whales, the pattern of distribution and movement of different populations in the feeding grounds has been related with the distribution of their key prey species, the krill (
Acknowledgments
We thank crew members, researchers and many other persons for the collection of genetic samples from minke whales from different sources, which made possible the studies reviewed in this chapter. We also thank Greg Donovan, former Head of Science of the International Whaling Commission, for useful comments and suggestions that improved substantially the previous version of this chapter. Our appreciation to Jorge Acevedo and Lucas Milmann for their assistance in figure drawing.
References
- 1.
Reeves RR, Stewart BS, Clapham PJ, Powell JA. Guide to Marine Mammals of the World. 1st ed. New York: Alfred A. Knopf Inc.; 2002. 527p - 2.
Williamson GR. Three unusual rorqual whales from the Antarctic. Proceedings. Zoological Society of London. 1959; 133 :135-144 - 3.
van Utrecht WL, van der Spoel S. Observations on a minke whale (Mammalia, Cetacea) from the Antarctic. Zeitschrift fiir Saugetierkunde. 1962; 27 :217-221 - 4.
Kasuya T, Ichihara T. Some information on minke whales from the Antarctic. Scientific Reports of the Whales Research Institute Tokyo. 1965; 19 :37-43 - 5.
Omura H. Osteological study of the minke whale from the Antarctic. Scientific Reports of the Whales Research Institute Tokyo. 1975; 27 :1-36 - 6.
Best PB. External characters of southern minke whales and the existence of a diminutive form. Scientific Reports of the Whales Research Institute Tokyo. 1985; 36 :1-33 - 7.
Wada S, Kobayashi T, Numachi K. Genetic variability and differentiation of mitochondrial DNA in minke whales. Reports of the International Whaling Commission. 1991; Special issue 13 :203-215 - 8.
Árnason U, Gullberg A, Widegren B. Cetacean mitochondrial DNA control region: Sequences of all extant baleen whales and two sperm whale species. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 1993; 70 :960-970 - 9.
Pastene LA, Fujise Y, Numachi K. Differentiation of mitochondrial DNA between ordinary and dwarf forms of minke whale. Reports of the International Whaling Commission. 1994; 44 :277-281 - 10.
Rice DW. Marine Mammals of the World. Systematics and Distribution. Society for Marine Mammalogy, Lawrence: Special Publication Number 4; 1998. 231pp - 11.
Pastene LA, Goto M, Kanda N. The utility of DNA analysis for the management and conservation of large whales. Fisheries Science. 2002; 68 (SuppI):286-289 - 12.
Pastene LA, Goto M. Genetic characterization and population genetic structure of the Antarctic minke whale Balaenoptera bonaerensis in the Indo-Pacific region of the Southern Ocean. Fisheries Science. 2016; 82 :873-886 - 13.
Pastene LA, Goto M, Kanda N, Zerbini AN, Kerem D, Watanabe K, et al. Radiation and speciation of pelagic organisms during periods of global warming: The case of the common minke whale Balaenoptera acutorostrata. Molecular Ecology. 2007; 16 (7):1481-1495 - 14.
Pastene LA, Acevedo J, Goto M, Zerbini NA, Acuna P, Aguayo-Lobo A. Population structure and possible migratory links of common minke whales, Balaenoptera acutorostrata, in the southern hemisphere. Conservation Genetics. 2010; 11 (4):1553-1558 - 15.
Glover KA, Kanda N, Haug T, Pastene LA, Oien N, Goto M, et al. Migration of Antarctic minke whales to the Arctic. PLoS One. 2010; 5 (12):e15197 - 16.
Glover KA, Kanda N, Haug T, Pastene LA, Oien N, Seliussen DB, et al. Hybrids between common and Antarctic minke whales are fertile and can back-cross. BMC Genetics. 2013; 14 :25-36 - 17.
Malde K, Seliussen BB, Quintela M, Dahle G, Besnier F, Skaug HJ, et al. Whole genome resequencing reveals diagnostic markers for investigating global migration and hybridization between minke whale species. BMC Genomics. 2017; 18 :76. DOI: 10.1186/s12864-016-3416-5 - 18.
Milmann L, Taguchi M, Siciliano S, Baumgarten JE, Oliveira LR, Valiati VH, et al. New genetic evidences for distinct populations of the common minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) in the southern hemisphere. Polar Biology. 2021;44:1575-1589 - 19.
Adachi J, Hasegawa M. MOLPHY version 2.3: Program for molecular phylogenetics based on maximum likelihood. Computer Science Monographs of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics. 1996; 28 :1-150 - 20.
Yang Z. PAML: A program package for phylogenetic analyses by maximum likelihood. CABIOS. 1997; 13 :555-556 - 21.
Strimmer K, von Haeseler A. Quartet puzzling: A quartet maximum-likelihood method for reconstructing tree topologies. Journal of Molecular Biology and Evolution. 1996; 13 :964-969 - 22.
Nikaido M, Matsuno F, Hamilton H, Brownell RL Jr, Cao Y, Ding W, et al. Retroposon analysis of major cetacean lineages: The monophyly of toothed whales and the paraphyly of river dolphins. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA. 2001; 98 :7384-7389 - 23.
Saitou N, Nei M. The neighbor-joining method: A new method for reconstructing phylogenetic tree. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 1987; 4 (4):406-425 - 24.
Cavalli-Sforza LL, Edwards AWF. Phylogenetic analysis: Models and estimation procedures. Evolution. 1967; 21 :550-570 - 25.
Felsenstein J. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: A maximum likelihood approach. Journal of Molecular Evolution. 1981; 17 :368-376 - 26.
Edwards AWE, Cavalli-Sforza LL. The reconstruction of evolution. Annals of Human Genetics. 1963; 27 :104-105 - 27.
Nielsen R, Wakeley J. Distinguishing migration from isolation: A Markov chain Monte Carlo approach. Genetics. 2001; 158 :885-896 - 28.
Palsbøll PJ, Bérubé M, Aguilar A, Notarbartolo di Sciara G, Nielsen R. Discerning between recurrent gene flow and recent divergence under a finite-site mutation model applied to North Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) populations. Evolution. 2004; 58 :670-675 - 29.
Yang Z, Rannala B. Bayesian phylogenetic inference using mtDNA sequences: A Markov chain Monte Carlo method. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 1997; 14 (7):717-724 - 30.
Nei M. Molecular Evolutionary Genetics. New York: Columbia University Press; 1987 - 31.
Weir BS, Cockerham CC. Estimating F-statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution. 1984; 38 :1358-1370 - 32.
Shriver MD, Jin L, Boerwinkle E, Deka R, Ferrel RE, Chakraborty R. A novel measure of genetic distance for highly polymorphic tandem repeat loci. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 1995; 12 :914-920 - 33.
Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics. 2000; 155 :945-959 - 34.
Piry S, Alapetite A, Cornuet JM, Paetkau D, Baudouin L, Estoup A. GENECLASS2: A software for genetic assignment and first-generation migrant detection. The Journal of Heredity. 2004; 95 (6):536-539 - 35.
Nielsen EEG, Bach LA, Kotlicki P. HYBRIDLAB (version 1.0): A program for generating simulated hybrids from population samples. Molecular Ecology Notes. 2006; 6 :971-973 - 36.
Ryder OA. Species conservation and systematics: The dilemma of subspecies. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 1986; 1 :9-10 - 37.
Moritz C. Defining ‘evolutionary significant units’ for conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 1994; 9 :373-375 - 38.
Crandall KA, Bininda-Emonds ORP, Mace GM, Wayne RK. Considering evolutionary processes in conservation biology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 2000; 15 (7):290-295 - 39.
Rosel PE, Hancock-Hanser BL, Archer FI, Robertson KM, Martien KK. Examining metrics and magnitudes of molecular genetic differentiation used to delimit cetacean subspecies based on mitochondrial DNA control region sequences. Marine Mammal Science. 2017; 33 :76-100 - 40.
Donovan GP. A review of IWC stock boundaries. Report of the International Whaling Commission. 1991; Special issue 13 :39-68 - 41.
Punt AE, Donovan GP. Developing management procedures that are robust to uncertainty: Lessons from the International Whaling Commission. ICES Journal of Marine Science. 2007; 64 (4):603-612 - 42.
Murase H, Palka D, Punt A, Pastene LA, Kitakado T, Matsuoka K, et al. Review of the assessment of two stocks of Antarctic minke whales (eastern Indian Ocean and western South Pacific). Journal of Cetacean Research and Management. 2020; 21 (1):95-122 - 43.
International Whaling Commission. Report of the intersessional workshop to review data and results from special permit research on minke whales in the Antarctic, Tokyo, 4-8 December 2006. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management (Suppl.). 2008; 10 :411-445 - 44.
Roff DA, Bentzen P. The statistical analysis of mtDNA polymorphisms: χ2 and the problem of small samples. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 1989; 6 :539-545 - 45.
Kitakado T, Schweder T, Kanda N, Pastene LA, Walloe L. Dynamic Population Segregation by Genetics and Morphometrics in Antarctic Minke Whales. Paper SC/65b/IA13 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, Bled; 2014. 25pp. [Available from the IWC Secretariat] - 46.
Ohashi Y, Goto N, Taguchi M, Pastene LA, Kitakado T. Evaluation of a paternity method based on microsatellite DNA genotypes for estimating the abundance of Antarctic minke whales (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) in the Indo-Pacific region of the Antarctic. Cetacean Population Studies. 2021; 3 :139-151 - 47.
Andersen LW, Born EW, Dietz R, Haug T, Oien N, Bendixen C. Genetic population structure of minke whales Balaenoptera acutorostrata from Greenland, the north East Atlantic and the North Sea probably reflects different ecological regions. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 2003;247 :263-280 - 48.
Anderwald P, Danielsdóttir AK, Haug T, Larsen F, Lesage V, Reid RJ, et al. Possible cryptic stock structure for minke whales in the North Atlantic: Implications for conservation and management. Biological Conservation. 2011; 144 :2479-2489 - 49.
Quintela M, Skaug HJ, Oien N, Haug T, Seliussen BB, Solvang HK, et al. Investigating population genetic structure in a highly mobile marine organism: the minke whale Balaenoptera acutorostrata acutorostrata in the north East Atlantic. PLoS One. 2014; 9 (9):e108640 - 50.
Excoffier L, Smouse PE, Quattro JM. Analysis of molecular variance inferred from metric distances among DNA haplotypes: Application to human mitochondrial DNA restriction data. Genetics. 1992; 131 :479-491 - 51.
Raymond M, Rousset F. GENEPOP Ver 3.2.: A population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. The Journal of Heredity. 1995; 86 :248-249 - 52.
Dieringer D, Schlotterer C. Microsatellite analyser (MSA): A platform independent analysis tool for large microsatellite data sets. Molecular Ecology Notes. 2002; 3 (1):167-169 - 53.
Evanno G, Regnaut S, Goudet J. Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software structure: A simulation study. Molecular Ecology. 2005; 14 :2611-2620 - 54.
Corander J, Waldmann P, Marttinen P, Sillanpaa MJ. BAPS 2: Enhanced possibilities for the analysis of genetic population structure. Bioinformatics. 2004; 20 :2363-2369 - 55.
Slatkin M. A measure of population subdivision based on microsatellite allele frequencies. Genetics. 1995; 139 :457-462 - 56.
Excoffier L, Laval G, Schneider S, Arlequin ver. 3.0: An integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Evolutionary Bioinformatics Online. 2005; 1 :47-50 - 57.
Omura H, Sakiura H. Studies on the little piked whale from the coast of Japan. Scientific Reports of the Whales Research Institute Tokyo. 1956; 11 :1-37 - 58.
Kato H. Body length, reproduction and stock separation of minke whales off northern Japan. Report of the International Whaling Commission. 1992; 42 :443-453 - 59.
Wada S, Numachi K. Allozyme analyses of genetic differentiation among the populations and species of the Balaenoptera. Report of the International Whaling Commission 1991; Special issue 13 :125-154 - 60.
Goto M, Pastene LA. Population structure of the western North Pacific minke whale based on an RFLP analysis of the mtDNA control region. Report of the International Whaling Commission. 1997; 47 :531-537 - 61.
Pastene LA, Goto M, Taguchi M, Kitakado T. Temporal and Spatial Distribution of the ‘J’ and ‘O’ Stocks of Common Minke Whale in Waters around Japan Based on Microsatellite DNA. Paper SC/F16/JR38 presented to the JARPNII special permit expert panel review workshop, Tokyo, February 2016. 2016;14pp. [Available from the IWC Secretariat] - 62.
Pastene LA, Goto M, Taguchi M, Kitakado T. Updated Genetic Analyses Based on Mitochondrial and Microsatellite DNA Indicated no Sub-Structure of the ‘O’ Stock Common Minke Whale in the Western North Pacific. Paper SC/F16/JR40 presented to the JARPNII special permit expert panel review workshop, Tokyo, February 2016. 2016;19pp. [Available from the IWC Secretariat] - 63.
Rousset F. Genepop'007: A complete re-implementation of the genepop software for windows and Linux. Molecular Ecology Resources. 2008; 8 :103-106 - 64.
Jombart T, Devillard S, Balloux F. Discriminant analysis of principal components: A new method for the analysis of genetically structured populations. BMC Genetics. 2010; 11 :94 - 65.
Jombart T, Devillard S, Dufour AB, Pontier D. Revealing cryptic spatial patterns in genetic variability by a new multivariate method. Heredity. 2008; 101 :92-103 - 66.
Taguchi M, Goto M, Pastene LA. Results of Discriminant Analysis of Principal Component (DAPC) and Spatial Analysis of Principal Component (sPCA) and Implications for the Stock Structure of Western North Pacific Common Minke Whale. Paper SC/F19/WNPM4 presented to the First Intersessional Workshop on the Implementation Review for western North Pacific minke whales, Tokyo, February 2019. 2019;16pp. [Available from the IWC Secretariat] - 67.
Tiedemann R, Tiedemann MR, Goto M, Taguchi M, Pastene LA. Finding Parent-Offspring Pairs among Western North Pacific Common Minke Whales. Paper SC/67a/SDDNA01 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, Bled, May 2017. 2017;17pp. [Available fromthe IWC Secretariat] - 68.
de Jong M, Hoelzel AS. Collaborative Analysis of WNP Minke Whale Stock Structure Using the Japanese Microsatellite DNA Database and Spatially Explicit Population Structure Analyses. Paper SC/F19/WNPM2 presented to the First Intersessional Workshop on the Implementation Review for western North Pacific minke whales, Tokyo, February 2019. 2019;25pp. [Available from the IWC Secretariat] - 69.
Guillot G, Mortier F, Estoup A. Geneland: A program for landscape genetics. Molecular Ecology Notes. 2005; 5 :712-715 - 70.
Chen C, Durand E, Forbes F, Francois O. Bayesian clustering algorithms ascertaining spatial population structure: A new computer program and a comparison study. Molecular Ecology Notes. 2007; 7 :747-756 - 71.
Francois O, Ancelet S, Guillot G. Bayesian clustering using hidden Markov random fields in spatial population genetics. Genetics. 2006; 174 :805-816 - 72.
Goto M, Taguchi M, Pastene LA. Additional Analyses to Assist the Interpretation of the Results of the Spatially Explicit Clustering Tools Used to Explore Microsatellite Data of Western North Pacific Common Minke Whale (SC/F19/WNPM02). Paper SC/F19/WNPM9 presented to the First Intersessional Workshop on the Implementation Review for western North Pacific minke whales, Tokyo, February 2019. 2019;19pp. [Available from the IWC Secretariat] - 73.
Taguchi M, Goto M, Pastene LA. Genetic and Non-genetic Evidences Suggest a Low Plausibility for Western North Pacific Common Minke Whale Stock Structure Hypothesis E. Paper SC/68a/SDDNA02 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, Nairobi, May 2019. 2019;22pp. [Available from the IWC Secretariat] - 74.
Konishi K, Isoda T, Bando T, Minamikawa S, Kleivane L. Antarctic minke whales find ice gaps along the ice edge in foraging grounds of the Indo-Pacific sector (60°E and 140°E) of the Southern Ocean. Polar Biology. 2020; 43 (4):343-357 - 75.
International Whaling Commission. Report of the Scientific Committee. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management (Suppl.). 2020; 13 :1-65