Sie sind auf Seite 1von 11

AQUATIC CONSERVATION: MARINE AND FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS

Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 15: 259–269 (2005)


Published online in Wiley InterScience
(www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/aqc.676

Identifying critical foraging habitats of the green turtle


(Chelonia mydas) along the Pacific coast of the Baja
California peninsula, Mexico

! PEZ-MENDILAHARSUa,*, SUSAN C. GARDNERa, JEFFREY A. SEMINOFFb and


MILAGROS LO
RAFAEL RIOSMENA-RODRIGUEZc
Centro de Investigaciones Biolo!gicas del Noroeste; S.C. La Paz; Baja California Sur 23090; Mexico
a
b
NOAA-National Marine Fisheries Service; Southwest Fisheries Science Center; 8604 La Jolla Shores Drive;
La Jolla; CA 92037; USA
c
Programa de Investigacio!n en Bota!nica Marina; Departamento de Biologia Marina; Universidad Auto!noma de Baja
California Sur. La Paz; Baja California Sur 23080; Mexico

ABSTRACT
1. The conservation of highly mobile and migratory species remains one of the most serious
challenges to resource managers.
2. Intense mortality of immature green turtles has been identified at principal developmental–
feeding habitats in Baja California, and is considered a great threat to the stability of the eastern
Pacific population. Thus, coastal lagoons of the Baja California peninsula, such as Bah!ıa Magdalena,
have been identified as high priority areas for their protection.
3. Conservation efforts to date have focused on creating a sea turtle refuge in the northwestern
part of the bay, but this area may not be sufficient for protecting all of the critical feeding areas used
by green turtles.
4. The diet of green turtles was investigated through analysis of digestive tract contents from 24
green turtles that were drowned incidentally in fishing nets at feeding grounds in Bah!ıa Magdalena
and adjacent areas along the Pacific coast of the Baja California peninsula, Mexico.
5. Mean straight carapace length (SCL) differed significantly between localities: mean: 55:5 cm
(range: 47.7–76:9 cm, n ¼ 11) in Bah!ıa Magdalena; mean: 67:7 cm (range: 49–87 cm, n ¼ 11) in
adjacent coastal waters.
6. Green turtle diet consisted largely of marine algae and seagrasses, but food items varied
spatially. The red algae Gracilaria pacifica, Gracilariopsis lemaneiformis and Hypea johnstonii were
the most abundant diet items inside Bah!ıa Magdalena, and the seagrass Phyllospadix torreyi was the
most commonly ingested food in coastal areas outside of the bay.
7. Results indicate that green turtles utilize spatially distinct foraging habitats within this region.
Therefore, it is recommended that any design of protected areas for sea turtles in Bah!ıa Magdalena

*Correspondence to: Milagros Lo! pez-Mendilaharsu, CID/CEUR-Karumbe, J. Paullier 1198/101, Montevideo, 11200, Uruguay.
E-mail: milagros@internet.com.uy

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Received 21 October 2003
Accepted 7 November 2004
260 M. LÓPEZ-MENDILAHARSU ET AL.

should consider a regional approach instead of a local approach, taking into account the most
important feeding areas used by green turtles at different life stages.
Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

KEY WORDS: green turtle; Baja California; eastern Pacific Ocean; food preference; ontogenetic shift

INTRODUCTION

East Pacific green turtles (also known as black turtles), Chelonia mydas, occur along the west coast of North
and South America (Cliffton et al., 1982). Owing to intense commercial harvest of turtles and eggs (Cliffton
et al., 1982; Figueroa et al., 1993) and, to a lesser extent, incidental mortality by marine fisheries, this
species has exhibited an extreme decline in numbers over the last 30 years and is listed as endangered
throughout its range by the World Conservation Union (IUCN; Hilton-Taylor, 2000). Despite a worldwide
increase in research and conservation of green turtles, their foraging biology and habitat requirements
remain poorly understood (Bjorndal, 1997).
Like most sea turtles, green turtles are migratory and use a wide range of broadly separated localities and
habitats during their lifetime (for a review, see Hirth (1997)). Upon leaving the nesting beach, it has been
hypothesized that hatchlings begin an oceanic phase, perhaps floating passively in major current systems
(gyres) for several years (Carr and Meylan, 1980; Carr, 1987). Post-pelagic green turtles are then thought to
recruit to neritic developmental habitats rich in seagrass and/or marine algae, where they forage and grow
until maturity (Musick and Limpus, 1997). Upon attaining sexual maturity, green turtles commence
breeding migrations between foraging grounds and nesting areas that are undertaken at multiple year
intervals (Hirth, 1997). Migrations are carried out by males and females and may traverse oceanic zones,
often spanning thousands of kilometres (Mortimer and Portier, 1989; Limpus et al., 1992). During non-
breeding periods, adults reside at neritic feeding grounds that may coincide with juvenile developmental
habitats (Limpus et al., 1992).
Worldwide, green turtle feeding habits vary regionally and may include marine algae (Pritchard, 1971;
Balazs, 1980; Bjorndal, 1991; Seminoff et al., 2002) or seagrasses (Mortimer, 1981; Mendon-ca, 1983) as the
primary diet constituent; some populations apparently target both food types (Garnett et al., 1985; Ross,
1985; Brand-Gardner et al., 1999). Green turtle feeding preferences are thought to be dependent on the
local availability of foods (Balazs, 1980; Garnett et al., 1985) and may be governed by differences in
digestive capabilities of the hind-gut microflora (Bjorndal, 1980).
Coastal lagoons of the Baja California peninsula are known to be important areas for the
feeding and development of east Pacific green turtles (Cliffton et al., 1982; M!arquez, 1990; Gardner
and Nichols, 2001). However, green turtle populations in these areas remain the target of illegal
hunting (Gardner and Nichols, 2001). Green turtles forage year round in Bah!ıa Magdalena, and
protecting this area has been identified as a priority for conservation efforts (Nichols et al., 2000;
Arriaga et al., 1998).
To date, most data on green turtle feeding habits in Mexico have come from the Gulf of California, and
very little information is available that addresses spatial variation in feeding habits within a region. This
information is needed to understand better what resources are most important to endangered green turtles,
and this will help guide protection strategies at their critical feeding grounds. In the present study, we
examined spatial variations in the feeding habits of green turtles at a coastal feeding ground along the
Pacific coast of the Baja California peninsula. Our primary goal was to determine whether the current
conservation plan provides adequate protection for green turtles assembled in foraging habitats of this
region.

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 15: 259–269 (2005)
GREEN TURTLE FORAGING HABITATS 261

METHODS

Study area
Bah!ıa Magdalena, a 1390 km2 coastal bay, is located along the Pacific coast of the Baja California
peninsula, Mexico (248150 –258200 N, 1118200 –1128150 W; Figure 1). The bay is sheltered from Pacific waters
by two barrier islands, Magdalena Island and Margarita Island, and is the site of seasonal marine upwelling

Figure 1. Bah!ıa Magdalena–Almejas lagoon complex, Baja California Sur, Mexico. Stomachs of green turtles were collected as a result
of incidental fisheries mortality from regions within the bay and along the adjacent Pacific coast.

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 15: 259–269 (2005)
262 M. LÓPEZ-MENDILAHARSU ET AL.

that creates high productivity (Maeda-Martinez et al., 1993). Sea-surface temperature (SST) varies
seasonally, reaching a maximum of 288C in September and a minimum of 198C in March (Lluch-Belda
et al., 2000). Marine habitats within the bay are diverse, and include intertidal sand and mudflats; extensive
beds of the seagrass Zostera marina occur throughout the year (perennial populations), with peaks in
abundance during spring (Santamaria-Gallegos, unpublished data). Diverse assemblages of macroalgae are
also present along sandy bottoms and rocky margins of the bay (Riosmena-Rodriguez, unpublished data).
Inner channels of the bay are surrounded by small and abundant multispecific mangrove stands, including
Laguncularia racemosa; Ryzophora mangle and Avicennia germinans. Rocky shore areas are present on the
Pacific side of the barrier islands of Magdalena and Margarita (Maeda-Martinez et al., 1993), dominated by
the seagrass Phyllospadix torreyi (Riosmena-Rodr!ıguez and S!anchez-Lizaso, 1996; Ram!ırez-Garc!ıa et al.,
1998). This region is a typical high-energy coast with intense wave action, differing markedly from the
shallow protected areas of mangrove lagoons and swamps inside the bay. Each habitat is thought to
provide food resources for juvenile and adult green turtles.

Sample collection and analysis


From October 2000 to September 2002, intact stomachs were collected from dead green turtles that
drowned incidentally in commercial fishery nets (seines and trawls) set in Bah!ıa Magdalena and along the
adjacent Pacific coast. For each turtle, standard straight carapace length (SCL; 0:1 cm) from the anterior
notch to the tip of the posterior-most marginal scutes was measured using forestry calipers. All stomach
contents were collected and preserved in a 4% formalin-in-seawater solution. Voucher material was housed
in the Herbario Ficolo! gico of the Universidad Auto! noma de Baja California Sur (UABCS).
Food items were identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level based on a combination of taxonomic
keys cited in Riosmena-Rodr!ıguez and Paul-Ch!avez (1997). Three species, Gracilariopsis lemaneiformis,
Gracilaria pacifica and Hypnea johnstonii, were commonly indistinguishable due to maceration and were,
therefore, grouped and referred to in our analysis as a ‘GGH group’. Mean sample volume V and frequency
of occurrence F of each prey group was determined as follows:
Total volume of diet item in all samples  100

Total volume of all samples
Number of samples containing diet item  100

Total number of samples
The entire sample volume and the relative sample volume of each prey group were calculated by the
procedure of water displacement in a graduated cylinder. Any item with a relative volume > 5% in at least
one sample was considered a major diet component (Garnett et al., 1985).

Statistical analyses
Student’s t-test was used to analyse differences in SCL of turtles collected from within Bah!ıa Magdalena
and those from the Pacific coast. Comparisons of the stomach contents were performed between locations
based on differences in V and F of each diet item at each site. Volume percentages were arcsine-root
transformed for statistical analyses and an analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was conducted among
principal diet components at each location. A Tukey HSD multiple comparison test was used when
significant differences were detected from the ANOVA (Sokal and Rohlf, 1995). A Wilcoxon test was used
to test for differences between locations in the amount of seagrass consumed, and regression analyses were
used to detect correlations in the relative volume of different diet groups (algae, seagrasses and
invertebrates) and the size of the turtle.
The relative importance of each food item within each area was assessed using the simple resultant index
Rs and weighted resultant index Rw (Mohan and Sankaran, 1988). These indices grade food items based on

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 15: 259–269 (2005)
GREEN TURTLE FORAGING HABITATS 263

their order of importance and have been used in a number of dietary studies on fishes (e.g. Fern!andez and
Oyarzu! n, 2001) and birds (e.g. Rozzatti et al., 1995). Rs and Rw were calculated using V and F (see above)
according to the following:
ðV 2 F 2 Þ1=2
Rs ¼ P  100
ðV 2 F 2 Þ1=2
QðV 2 F 2 Þ1=2
Rw ¼ P  100
QðV 2 F 2 Þ1=2
where y ¼ tan1 ðV=FÞ45, and Q ¼ ð45  Iy  45IÞ=45.

RESULTS

A total of 24 stomachs were collected, 12 from green turtles collected in Bah!ıa Magdalena and 12 from the
Pacific coastal waters. No size data were available for two of the turtles (one from inside the bay and one
from the adjacent Pacific waters). Mean SCL of turtles captured in the Pacific waters (mean SCL ¼ 67:7
3:1 cm; range: 49–87 cm; n ¼ 11) was significantly greater (t20 ¼ 2:92, p ¼ 0:008) than turtles captured in
Bah!ıa Magdalena (mean SCL: 55:5  2:8 cm; range: 47.7–76:9 cm; n ¼ 11; Figure 2).
Mean sample volume for stomach contents was 193:8 mLðSE ¼ 41:3 mL; range: 33–870 mL). Stomach
contents comprised 15 algae species, two seagrass species, two invertebrate species, and fruits of the black
mangrove (Table 1). Sixteen major prey groups were identified (Table 1): four in the Pacific (Gelidium
robustum, Pterocladiella capillacea, Codium simulans and Phyllospadix torreyi), and 12 in Bah!ıa Magdalena
(the GGH group, Codium amplivesiculatum, Mazzaella flaccida, Gracilaria textorii, Chondracanthus
canaliculatus, Schizymenia epiphytica, Sargassum horridum, P. torreyi, Z. marina, A. germinans,
Pleuroncodes planipes, and an unidentified poriferan). Additional algae species were present in trace
amounts: Gracilaria turgida from Pacific-captured turtles, and Rhodymenia californica and Ulva lactuca
from turtles collected inside the bay.

Figure 2. Size distribution of green turtles captured incidentally in fishing nets in Bah!ıa Magdalena and adjacent Pacific waters of Baja
California Sur, Mexico. SCL was measured in centimetres using calipers, taken from the anterior nuchal notch to the longest posterior
point of the carapace.

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 15: 259–269 (2005)
264 M. LÓPEZ-MENDILAHARSU ET AL.

Table 1. Mean relative volume V, frequency of occurrence F and weighted resultant index Rw of prey groups recovered from stomachs
analysed from Bah!ıa Magdalena and adjacent Pacific waters. (GGH = Gracilaria pacifica, Gracilariopsis lemaneiformis and Hypnea
johnstonii)

Diet item Bah!ıa Magdalena ðn ¼ 12Þ Pacific ðn ¼ 12Þ


Mean V (SE) No. F Rw Mean V (SE) No. F Rw
Algae
Rhodophyta
Gelidium robustum – – – – 17.2 (10.7) 3 25.0 17.4
Pterocladiella capillacea – – – – 7.4 (5.6) 4 33.3 7.1
GGH 54.0 (11.3) 9 75.0 55.3 – – – –
Gracilaria textorii 4.8 (3.0) 3 25.0 4.6 – – – –
Chondracanthus canaliculatus 2.5 (2.5) 1 8.3 2.4 – – – –
Mazzaela flaccida 2.0 (2.0) 1 8.3 1.9 – – – –
Schizymenia epiphytica 1.9 (1.9) 1 8.3 1.8 – – – –
Chloropyta
Codium simulans – – – – 11.5 (6.5) 4 33.3 11.2
Codium amplivesiculatum 9.0 (4.5) 6 50.0 8.7 – – – –
Phaeophyta
Sargassum horridum 0.5 (0.5) 1 8.3 0.5 – – – –
Seagrasses
Phyllospadix torreyi 0.9 (0.9) 1 8.3 0.9 63.4 (11.3) 11 91.7 64.3
Zostera marina 9.2 (6.2) 4 33.3 8.9 – – – –
Mangrove
Avicennia germinans 3.2 (2.3) 2 16.7 3.1 – – – –
Animal matter
Pleuroncodes planipes 6.9 (6.9) 1 8.3 7.2 – – – –
Unidentified poriferan 3.0 (2.1) 2 16.7 2.9 – – – –

Significant differences were detected in the mean relative volumes of food items consumed by turtles in
Bah!ıa Magdalena (F10;121 ¼ 8:4, p50:000) and Pacific waters (F3 ;44 ¼ 8:7, p50:001). Whereas the GGH
group (G. pacifica, G. lemaneiformis and H. johnstonii) was the most abundant and frequent component
of the diet items found in Bah!ıa Magdalena (V ¼ 54:0% and F ¼ 75:0%, p50:0001), P. torreyi was the most
dominant diet item in Pacific samples (V ¼ 63:4% and F ¼ 91:7%; Table 1). Z. marina was only found
in turtle stomachs from Bah!ıa Magdalena, this being present in three stomachs (27%) but was the
prevalent diet constituent in only one. According to Rw values, the importance of food items from
Pacific-captured turtles was (in decreasing order of importance) P. torreyi>G. robustum>C. simulans>
P. capillacea (Figure 3(a)), whereas that in Bah!ıa Magdalena was GGH>Z. marina> C. amplivesicula-
tum>P. planipes>G. textorii>A. germinans>Poriferan>C. canaliculatus>M. flaccida>S. epiphitica
>P. torreyi>S. horridum (Figure 3(b)). P. torreyi was present in samples from both localities, but the
stomachs of turtles from the Pacific had significantly greater amounts of this seagrass than those from
Bah!ıa Magdalena (Wilcoxon Z ¼ 2:7, p ¼ 0:007).
In addition to marine algae and seagrasses, turtles inside Bah!ıa Magdalena also consumed cotyledons
of the black mangrove (A. germinans; mean V ¼ 3:2%) and animal material (mean V ¼ 9:9%). Overall,
the most frequently encountered animal prey item was an unidentified poriferan (F ¼ 16:7%; Table 1),
but within samples the greatest volume of animal matter was found in the stomach of one green turtle
ðSCL ¼ 54:4 cmÞ that contained 82% of red crabs (P. planipes; Table 1).
The relative volumes of the marine algae, seagrasses and invertebrates were not significantly correlated
with sea turtle size (R2 ¼ 0:04, R2 ¼ 0:10 and R2 ¼ 0:03 respectively).

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 15: 259–269 (2005)
GREEN TURTLE FORAGING HABITATS 265

Figure 3. Resultant indices Rs and Rw plotted against the angle for food items in the stomachs of green turtles captured in (a) the
Pacific and (b) Bah!ıa Magdalena. Food items with uniformly representation in both V and F fall around the 458ðyÞ, whereas those with
uneven representation spread on either side of the middle line. From the Pacific (a) the order of importance of food items was: (1)
Phyllospadix torreyi; (2) Codium simulans; (3) Pterocladiella capillacea; (4) Galidium robustum. From Bah!ıa Magdalena (b) the order of
importance of food items was: (1) GGH where (GGH = Gracilaria pacifica, Gracilariopsis lemaneiformis, Hypnea johnstoni); (2)
Gracilaria textorii; (3) Chondracanthus canaliculatus; (4) Mazzaela flaccida; (5) Schizymania epiphytica; (6) Codium amplivesiculatum;
(7) Sargassum horridum; (8) Phyllospadix torreyi; (9) Zostera marina; (10) Avicennia germinans; (11) Pleuroncodes planipes; (12)
unidentified poriferan.

DISCUSSION

The two study areas (Bah!ıa Magdalena and the adjacent Pacific coast) differ substantially in the types of
marine habitat and food that are present.
We caution against drawing conclusions about ontogenic shifts in habitat preference based on the small
sample sizes in this study; however, it is apparent that relatively small green turtles inhabit shallow waters
inside Bah!ıa Magdalena and larger turtles are found more often in the deeper, exposed zones along the
Pacific coast. As has been reported for other reptiles (Wikelski et al., 1993), smaller turtles may have higher
energy demands than adults and, thus, prefer sheltered areas where the net energy expenditure during

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 15: 259–269 (2005)
266 M. LÓPEZ-MENDILAHARSU ET AL.

foraging activities is less than in high-energy oceanic zones. Also, the abundant food material available in
seagrass beds of the adjacent Pacific coast may attract larger individuals who become less dependent on
protection provided by the lagoon. Size-based segregation was also noted by Coyne (1994), who reported
smaller turtles using jetty habitats for the protection provided by the many submerged boulders and granite
blocks, and larger individuals (who become less dependent on protection provided by the jetties) inhabiting
grassbed environments in the north-eastern Gulf of Mexico. A similar difference in mean size of large green
turtles inhabiting deep, high-energy coastlines versus smaller turtles inhabiting shallow protected areas has
been shown in the Gulf of California (Seminoff et al., 2003; Seminoff, unpublished data.).
The differences in the species consumed between the two sites may reflect differences in the composition
and diversity of marine vegetation in the two regions. This may also indicate a dichotomy in the turtles’ use
of different habitats within a few kilometres of each other. A similar dichotomy with algae-feeding
congregations in close proximity to regions where green turtles feed primarily on seagrasses has been
observed along the west coast of Honduras (Carr, 1952), in the Gulf of California (Felger and Moser, 1973;
Seminoff et al., 2002), Fiji islands (Hirth, 1997) and Australia (Limpus et al., 1992).
P. torreyi was consumed by turtles throughout the range of size classes sampled in the current study;
however, in all cases but one it was by those turtles collected from outside of the bay. The abundance
of P. torreyi in the region may explain the low species richness found in stomach contents of turtles from
the Pacific (four species) compared with Bah!ıa Magdalena (12 species). P. torreyi is a very successful
colonist able to dominate and exclude other benthic species, such as marine algae (McRoy and McMillian,
1977). The presence of seagrass may, however, not necessarily translate into seagrass consumption by green
turtles. Within Bah!ıa Magdalena, the seagrass Z. marina, which is patchily distributed along the bay
(Riosmena-Rodriguez, unpublished data), was present in stomach contents to a lesser extent than red algae
(GGH group). This finding differs from that reported by Felger and Moser (1973) in the Infiernillo Channel
(central Gulf of California), where green turtles fed almost exclusively on Z. marina, which occurs
extensively throughout the area (Meling-Lo! pez and Ibarra-Obando, 1999).
Although variation in the diet of green turtles may be determined by the relative availability of foods
over a geographical scale (e.g. Garnett et al., 1985), it appears that diet may also be influenced by food
quality. The brown algae S. horridum are extremely abundant in the rocky habitats of Bah!ıa Magdalena
(S!anchez-Rodr!ıguez et al., 1989), but was found in only one stomach, suggesting that this species may have
been avoided. Seminoff et al. (2002) found Sargassum sp. intact in faecal samples from Bah!ıa de los
Angeles, indicating low digestibility of this brown algae by green turtles. Few data are available, but it
appears that digestibility of potential foods may affect their consumption by green turtles.
The consumption of animal matter was less frequent in comparison with the diets reported for green
turtles from other areas of the Mexican Pacific coast (Casas-Andreu and Gomez-Aguirre, 1980), the Gulf of
California (Seminoff et al., 2002), and Peru (Hays-Brown and Brown, 1982). Although the particular
reasons for this lesser occurrence are unclear, it is apparent that green turtles will opportunistically consume
such material if it is present. For example, ingestion of pelagic red crabs may coincide with winter periods
when densities of red crabs inshore and inside Bah!ıa Magdalena are at their highest (Aurioles-Gamboa,
1992). To our knowledge, this is the first report of red crab consumption by an east Pacific green turtle
(Lo! pez-Mendilaharsu et al., 2003). However, red crabs may be eaten more frequently than previously
reported, as supported by observations of other researchers in the area (A. Trujillo, pers. comm.).

CONSERVATION IMPLICATIONS

Despite a moratorium declared by the Mexican government prohibiting the harvest and trade of sea turtles
since 1990 and the protection of its principal nesting grounds in Michoac!an for the past 23 years, the green
turtle population continues to decline (Alvarado et al., 2001). The major cause of this dramatic decline is

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 15: 259–269 (2005)
GREEN TURTLE FORAGING HABITATS 267

the high mortality rate due to direct and indirect take of adults and juveniles at the principal
developmental–feeding habitats in Baja California (Alvarado et al., 2001; Nichols and Seminoff,
unpublished data). A variety of critical foraging areas have been identified in this region, but few benefit
from sea-turtle-specific marine protected areas.
The conservation of mobile and migratory species remains as one of the most serious challenges in
wildlife management. Whereas isolated marine protected areas may protect species in a given time and
place, impacts outside of the protected areas often are not effectively mitigated (Hyrenbach et al., 2000; Sala
et al., 2002; Gillanders et al., 2003). This problem is compounded when targeting species such as sea turtles,
which are highly migratory and visit a wide variety of habitats over their life time. As suggested in the
current study, green turtles near Baja California may undergo ontogenetic shifts in food and habitat
preference, thereby requiring conservation efforts that target a variety of habitats to protect the local green
turtle stock adequately.
Coastal lagoons of the Baja California peninsula, such as Bah!ıa Magdalena, have been identified as
priority areas for sea turtle conservation programmes (Nichols et al., 2000). Efforts to protect
developmental and foraging areas within the Bah!ıa Magdalena complex have been focused on the creation
of a sea turtle refuge in the Estero Banderitas mangrove channel located in the northwestern side of the Bay
(Nichols and Arcas, 2001). However, our study suggests that protection of this area alone may not be
sufficient for protecting the full complement of feeding areas used by green turtles. Therefore, instead of
focusing specifically on the mangrove habitats alone, we recommended that the current reserve design is
modified to target both the inner lagoon of Bah!ıa Magdalena and adjacent waters along Pacific coast.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding for this project was provided by the Project Aware Foundation (# 909-0), The Bay Foundation (# 861),
MUTIS scholarships (S.E.P.), and the CIBNOR-Centro de Investigaciones Biolo! gicas del Noroeste, S.C (# RP12). We
wish to express our appreciation to Rodrigo Rangel, Antonio Resendiz, The School for Field Studies, WILDCOAST
and the monitoring group of San Carlos. Elisa Serviere, Litzia Paul-Chavez, Karla Leo! n-Cisneros, and No!e
Santamaria-Gallegos provided valuable assistance in the field and laboratory. This work was conducted as part of the
Master’s of Science degree of M. Lo! pez-Mendilaharsu at CIBNOR. Research permits were obtained from the
Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SGPA/DGVS/002-2895).

REFERENCES

Alvarado J, Delgado C, Suazo I. 2001. Evaluation of the black turtle project in Michoac!an, Mexico. Marine Turtle
Newsletter 92: 4–7.
Arriaga CL, V!azquez Dom!ınguez E, Gonz!alez Cano J, Jim!enez Rosenberg R, Mun* oz Lo! pez E, Aguilar Sierra V
(coords.). 1998. Regiones marinas prioritarias de M!exico, Comisio! n Nacional para el Conocimiento y uso de la
Biodiversidad, M!exico.
Aurioles-Gamboa D. 1992. Inshore–offshore movements of pelagic red crabs (Pleuroncodes planipes) off the Pacific
coast of Baja California Sur, M!exico. Crustaceana 62: 71–84.
Balazs GH. 1980. Synopsis of biological data on the green turtle in the Hawaiian Islands. NOAA Technical
Memorandum NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFS-7.
Bjorndal KA. 1980. Nutrition and grazing behavior of the green turtle Chelonia mydas. Marine Biolology 56: 147–154.
Bjorndal KA. 1991. Digestive fermentation in green turtles, Chelonia mydas, feeding on algae. Bulletin of Marine
Science 48: 166–171.
Bjorndal KA. 1997. Foraging ecology and nutrition of sea turtles. In The Biology of Sea Turtles, P. Lutz P, Musick J
(eds). CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL; 199–232.
Brand-Gardner SJ, Lanyon JM, Limpus CJ. 1999. Diet selection by immature green turtles, Chelonia mydas, in
subtropical Moreton Bay, south-east Queensland. Australian Journal of Zoology 47: 181–191.
Carr A. 1952. Handbook of Turtles. Cornell University Press: New York.

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 15: 259–269 (2005)
268 M. LÓPEZ-MENDILAHARSU ET AL.

Carr A. 1987. New perspectives on the pelagic stage of sea turtle development. Conservation Biology 1: 103–121.
Carr A, Meylan AB. 1980. Evidence of passive migration of green turtle hatchlings in Sargassum. Copeia 1980:
366–368.
Casas-Andreu G, Gomez-Aguirre S. 1980. Contribucio! n al conocimiento de los h!abitos alimenticios de Lepidochelys
olivacea y Chelonia mydas agassizii (Reptilia Cheloniidae) en el Pac!ıfico Mexicano. Boletim do Instituto Oceanogra!fico
Sa*o Paulo 29: 87–89.
Cliffton K, Cornejo DO, Felger RS. 1982. Sea turtles of the Pacific coast of M!exico. In Biology and Conservation of Sea
Turtles, Bjornda KA (ed.). Smithsonian Institution Press: Washington, DC; 199–209.
Coyne MS. 1994. Feeding ecology of subadult green sea turtles in south Texas waters. Unpublished MS Thesis, Texas
A&M University.
Felger RS, Moser MB. 1973. Eelgrass (Zostera marina) in the Gulf of California: discovery of its nutritional value by
the Seri Indians. Science 181: 355–356.
Fern!andez C, Oyarzu! n C. 2001. Trophic variations of the Chilean croaker Cilus gilberti during the summer period
1997–98 (Perciformes, Sciaenidae). Journal of Applied Ichthyology 17: 227–233.
Figueroa A, Alvarado J, Hern!andez F, Rodr!ıguez G, Robles J. 1993. The ecological recovery of sea turtles of
Michoac!an, M!exico. Special attention to the black turtle (Chelonia agassizii). Final Report to WWF-USFWS,
Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Gardner SC, Nichols WJ. 2001. Assessment of sea turtle mortality rates in the Bahia Magdalena region, Baja California
Sur, M!exico. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 4: 197–199.
Garnett ST, Pirce IR, Scott FJ. 1985. The diet of the green turtle, Chelonia mydas (L.), in Torres Strait. Australian
Wildlife Research 12: 103–112.
Gillanders BM, Able KW, Brown JA, Eggleston B, Sheridan PF. 2003. Evidence of connectivity between juvenile and
adult habitats for mobile marine fauna: an important component of nurseries. Marine Ecology Progress Series 247:
281–295.
Hays-Brown CH, Brown WM. 1982. Status of sea turtles in the southeastern Pacific: emphasis on Peru. In Biology and
Conservation of Sea Turtles, Bjorndal KA (ed.). Smithsonian Institution Press: Washington, DC; 235–240.
Hilton-Taylor C. 2000. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN: Gland, Switzerland.
Hirth HF. 1997. Synopsis of the biological data on the green turtle, Chelonia mydas (Linnaeus 1758). United States Fish
and Wildlife Service Biological Report 97.
Hyrenbach KD, Forney KA, Dayton PK. 2000. Marine protected areas and ocean basin management. Aquatic
Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 10: 437–458.
Limpus CJ, Miller JD, Paramenter CJ, Reimer D, McLachlan N, Webb R. 1992. Migration of green (Chelonia mydas)
and loggerhead (Caretta caretta) turtles to and from eastern Australian rookeries. Wildlife Research 19: 347–358.
Lluch-Belda D, Hern!andez-Rivas ME, Saldierna-Mart!ınez R, Guerrero-Caballero R. 2000. Variabilidad de la
temperatura superficial del mar en Bahia Magdalena, BCS. Ocea!nides 15: 1–23.
Lo! pez-Mendilaharsu M, Gardner SC, Seminoff JA. 2003. Chelonia mydas agassizii (east pacific green rurtle), diet.
Herpetological Review 34: 139–140.
Maeda-Martinez EN, Reynoso T, Solis F, Leija A, Aurioles D, Salinas C, Lluch-Cota D, Ormat P. 1993. A model to
explain the formation of catarina scallop Argopecten circularis (Sowerby 1835) beds in Magdalena Bay, M!exico.
Aquaculture and Fisheries Managements 24: 323–339.
M!arquez MR. 1990. FAO Species Catalogue. Vol. 11: Sea Turtles of the World. An Annotated and Illustrated Catalogue
of Sea Turtle Species Known to Date. FAO Fisheries Synopsis, No. 125, FAO: Rome.
McRoy CP, McMillian C. 1977. Production ecology and physiology of sea grasses. In Seagrass Ecosystems, a Scientific
Perspective, McRoy CP, Helfferich C (eds). Marcel Dekker: New York; 53–88.
Meling-Lo! pez AE, Ibarra-Obando SE. 1999. Annual life cycles of two Zostera marina L. populations in the Gulf of
California: contrasts in seasonality and reproductive effort. Aquatic Botany 65: 59–69.
Mendonca MT. 1983. Movements and feeding ecology of immature green turtles (Chelonia mydas) in a Florida lagoon.
Copeia- 1983: 1013–1023.
Mohan MV, Sankaran TM. 1988. Two new indices for stomach content analysis of fishes. Aquatic Botany 33: 289–292.
Mortimer JA. 1981. The feeding ecology of the west Caribbean green turtle (Chelonia mydas) in Nicaragua. Biotropica
13: 49–58.
Mortimer JA, Portier KM. 1989. Reproductive homing and internesting behaviour of the green turtle (Chelonia mydas)
at Ascension Island, South Atlantic Ocean. Copeia 1989: 962–977.
Musick JA, Limpus CJ. 1997. Habitat utilization and migration in juvenile sea turtles. In The Biology of Sea Turtles,
Lutz P, Musick J (eds). CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL; 137–163.
Nichols WJ, Arcas F. 2001. Third Annual Meeting of the Sea Turtle Conservation Network of the Californias (Grupo
Tortuguero de las Californias). Marine Turtle Newsletter 93: 30–31.

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 15: 259–269 (2005)
GREEN TURTLE FORAGING HABITATS 269

Nichols WJ, Bird KE, Garcia S. 2000. Community-based research and its application to sea turtle conservation in
Bahia Magdalena, BCS, Mexico. Marine Turtle Newsletter 89: 4–7.
Pritchard PC. 1971. Gal!apagos sea turtles}preliminary findings. Journal of Herpetology 5: 1–9.
Ram!ırez-Garc!ıa P, Lot A, Duarte CM, Terrados J, Agawin NSR. 1998. Bathymetric distribution, biomass and growth
dynamics of intertidal Phyllospadix scouleri and Phyllospadix torreyi in Baja California (Mexico). Marine Ecology
Progress Series 173: 13–23.
Riosmena-Rodr!ıguez R, Paul-Ch!avez L. 1997. Sistem!atica y Biogeograf!ıa de Macroalgas de la Bahia de La Paz,
B.C.S., M!exico. In La Bahia de La Paz. Investigacio!n y Conservacio!n, Urban-Ram!ırez J, Ram!ırez M (eds).
UABCS–CICIMAR–SCRIPPS; 292–397.
Riosmena-Rodr!ıguez R, S!anchez- Lizaso JL. 1996. El l!ımite sur de distribucio! n de Zostera marina L. and Phyllospadix
torreyi Watson para el noroeste mexicano. Ocea!nides 11: 45–48.
Ross JP. 1985. Biology of the green turtle, Chelonia mydas, on an Arabian feeding ground. Journal of Herpetology 19:
459–468.
Rozzatti J, Marteleur G, Beltzer AH. 1995. Dieta del pato capuchino Anas versicolor (Aves: Antidae) en la provincia de
Santa Fe Argentina. Revista de Ecolog!ıa Latinoamericana 3: 19–24.
Sala E, Aburto-Oropeza O, Paredes G, Parra I, Barrera JC, Dayton PK. 2002. A general model for designing networks
of marine reserves. Science 298: 1991–1993.
S!anchez-Rodr!ıguez I, Fajardo C, Pantoja O. 1989. Estudio flor!ıstico estacional de las macroalgas en Bahia Magdalena,
BCS, M!exico. Investigaciones Marinas CICIMAR 4: 35–48.
Seminoff JA, Resendiz A, Nichols WJ. 2002. Diet of the east Pacific green turtle, Chelonia mydas, in the central Gulf of
California, Mexico. Journal of Herpetology 36: 447–453.
Seminoff JA, Jones TT, Resendiz A, Nichols WJ, Chaloupka MY. 2003. Monitoring green turtles (Chelonia mydas) at a
coastal foraging area in Baja California, Mexico: multiple indices describe population status. Journal of the Marine
Biological Association of the United Kingdom 83: 1355–1362.
Sokal RR, Rohlf F. 1995. Biometry, 3rd edn. W.H. Freeman: New York.
Wikelski M, Gall B, Trillmich F. 1993. Ontogenetic changes in food intake and digestion rate of the herbivorous marine
iguana (Amblyrhynchus cristatus, Bell). Oecologia 94: 373–379.

Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 15: 259–269 (2005)

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen