English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Knowledge of predator-prey relationships for marinemammals is a prerequisite for understanding theecology of these top marine predators and for appro-priate management of marine resources. Sara Iverson’sresearch group at Dalhousie University and herresearch partners elsewhere have dedicated consider-able resources to attempt to develop a method fordetermining the diet of marine mammals via fatty acid(FA) signature analysis, FASA (see references in Thie-mann et al. 2004a, this volume). The most outspokenskepticism regarding the usefulness of FASA for thisspecific purpose has perhaps been put forward by ourgroup based at the University of Bergen and theNorwegian Polar Institute. With much at stake, it isunderstandable that Iverson and co-workers are sensi-tive to criticism implied by our data and our interpreta-tion of it. Discourse on our disparate views hasoccurred on several occasions including Smith et al.(1997), Thiemann et al. (2004b) and now in the Com-ment by Thiemann et al. (2004a) to our paper on polarbears (Grahl-Nielsen et al. 2003).The criticism of Grahl-Nielsen et al. (2003) by Thie-mann et al. (2004a) focuses on 3 main issues; they con-tend that (1) we use an inappropriate tissue samplingprotocol, (2) our statistical approach is invalid and (3) ourconclusions are unwarranted because we fail to dealwith expected metabolism of fatty acids in mammalianpredators. The contents of Thiemann et al. (2004a) areclosely tied to 2 publications from Iverson’s researchgroup, published after Grahl-Nielsen et al. (2003), Thie-mann et al. (2004b) and Iverson et al. (2004), so this replyaddresses these publications briefly, in addition to thesubject matter raised directly in Thiemann et al. (2004a).

Reply to comment on Grahl-Nielsen et al. (2003): Sampling, data treatment and predictions in investigations on fatty acids in marine mammals