Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Faeces were collected from four captive harbour seals (Phoca vitulina) that consumed known amounts of herring (Clupea harengus), walleye pollock (Theragra chalcogramma), Pacific hake (Merluccius productus), surf smelt (Hypomesus pretiosus), and juvenile chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). The goal was to determine which structures (hard parts) passed through the digestive tract (e.g., eye lenses, scales, vertebrae, otoliths), and which of these could be used to determine the type and number of fish consumed. Nearly 5000 fish were consumed, from which over 50 000 hard parts were recovered from seal faeces. Scales were the most numerous of the 23 structures recovered (>20 000), followed by vertebrae, eye lenses, and otoliths. Morphological distinctiveness and digestive erosion of the structures varied among fish taxa. Two to five structures accounted for over 90% of the taxon-specific elements recovered, depending upon the species of fish consumed. Otoliths, which are used routinely to characterize pinniped diets, accounted for only 17% of the identified taxon-specific hard parts. The variation in types of structures and rates of recovery across taxa underscores the importance of using several types of hard parts to identify prey. Identifying several different prey structures increases the likelihood of identifying a prey type.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cottrell et al. (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: