
Phoque a capuchon
Cystophora cristata(Erxleben, 1777)
Description
espèce de mammifères
Source : Wikidata
Indicateurs du réseau écologique
Comment lire ce graphe
Ce graphe représente les interactions écologiques documentées entre Cystophora cristata et d'autres espèces, à partir de la base GloBI (Global Biotic Interactions, agrégation mondiale de la littérature scientifique) — source principale, complétée par d'autres jeux de données d'interactions agrégés par Ontologia. Il faut le comprendre comme une carte du savoir documenté, pas une carte de la réalité écologique exhaustive.
Limites principales
- Incomplet. La majorité des interactions écologiques en milieu naturel n'ont jamais été publiées. Une espèce sans liens visibles n'est pas isolée — elle est probablement mal étudiée.
- Biais publication pharmaco-agronomique. La littérature des interactions est polarisée par les enjeux économiques et sanitaires : parasitism / pathogen sur-pondéré sur les mammifères (recherche zoonoses, vecteurs), herbivory sur-pondéré sur les insectes phytophages (entomologie agronomique). À l'inverse, mutualisms, commensalisms et interactions sol/microbiote sont sous-cités. Conseil de lecture : sur les hubs mammifères ou les insectes ravageurs de culture, lire les arêtes parasitism / herbivory dominantes relativement au contexte de littérature, pas comme une mesure d'intensité écologique brute. Détails §10.1.
- Biaisé vers les espèces étudiées. Quelques espèces (oiseaux communs, abeille mellifère, espèces modèles) concentrent disproportionnellement plus d'interactions documentées. Notre score composite ajoute un malus aux hubs de littérature pour atténuer cette dominance visuelle.
- Interactions documentées globalement. Toutes les espèces affichées sont observées en France métropolitaine (les observations sont filtrées sur le territoire métropolitain), mais les interactions entre elles proviennent de la littérature scientifique mondiale. Une interaction documentée à l'étranger peut ne pas se réaliser à l'identique sur votre territoire. Le filtre « restreindre à ma commune » tient compte de la co-occurrence spatiale locale mais ne garantit pas l'interaction effective.
- Sans dimension temporelle. Les variations saisonnières (migration, floraison, cycle de vie) ne sont pas modélisées.
- Force d'interaction approximative. L'épaisseur des liens reflète le nombre de fois où l'interaction a été rapportée dans la littérature, pas son importance écologique réelle.
Comment nous sélectionnons les espèces affichées
Le graphe affiche au plus 31 nœuds par fiche (1 centre + 15 bulles depth=1 + 15 partenaires depth=2). Le serveur sélectionne intelligemment :
- Bulles famille créées si une cascade taxonomique existe ou si ≥3 espèces directement documentées partagent une même famille — les espèces sont absorbées dans la bulle (pas de doublon visuel)
- Espèces individuelles uniquement quand <3 dans une famille (sans cascade) — relations directes documentées
- Pas d'espèces inférées affichées en doublon — les cascades sont représentées via les bulles famille uniquement
- Partenaires depth=2 sélectionnés via algo priorité : candidat partagé par ≥2 docs de la famille (food web central) → reliant entre bulles → top sum_obs en dernier recours
- Sous-types GloBI traduits en français au survol de la flèche (chasse, parasite, parasitoïde, mycorhize…)
Le toggle Profondeur 1 ↔ 2 client-side cache ou affiche les partenaires depth=2 sans refetch. Filtres règne, type d'interaction, ordres/familles, patrimoniales et commune recalculent côté serveur (slow path live ~1-2 s).
Indicateurs avancés (mode expert) : Modularité Q (Newman 2006, PNAS), communautés (Louvain, Blondel et al. 2008, J. Stat. Mech.), nestedness NODF (Almeida-Neto et al. 2008, Oikos).
Source : GloBI · TAXREF v18 (INPN/MNHN) · BDC-Statuts · Wikidata
20 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.
Liste rouge IUCN
VU · Vulnérablecritères A2ab↘Décroissante- Évaluation
- 2025 · v3.1
- Altitude
- 0 – 3 m
- Profondeur
- 1000 – 0 m
État de la populationTexte officiel évaluation IUCNExpert
In European waters, Hooded Seals have experienced a precipitous decline since the 1950s. Many surveys have taken place in recent years for Greenland Sea Hooded Seals. In 1997, pup production was estimated to be 24,000 (14,800-32,700) and the one-year-old+ population size was estimated to be 100,000-110,000. In 2005, pup production was estimated to be 15,200 (CV = 0.25). This decline was supported by a survey in 2007 that estimated a pup production of 16,140 (CV = 13.30%) (Øigård et al. 2010). In 2012, pup production was estimated to be 13,655 (CV = 13.90) (Øigard et al. 2014). A survey flown in 2018, had an estimate of 12,977 (CI = 9.87–17.07) pups (Biuw et al. 2019, ICES 2019). Surveys were conducted once again in 2022 with a resulting pup production estimate of 13,509 (CV = 12.90%). Using the pup production values along with updated biological parameters for reproduction, a total population size of 76,832 (60,262-98,009) was estimated for 2022 demonstrating that the Greenland Sea Hooded Seal population is continuing to decline despite the cessation of commercial harvests (ICES 2023). Based on pup production figures, a decline of 38.1% over the past three generation lengths (1984 to 2023) has been calculated.
No new data on the abundance/trends of Hooded Seals are available for the Northwest Atlantic; the last survey was carried out in 2004-2005 (Hammill and Stenson 2006). The largest group in Canadian waters occurs on the Front while the breeding groups in the Gulf and Davis Strait are considerably smaller. The Davis Strait group declined from a pup count of 18,600 in 1984 to 3,300 in 2005 (Stenson et al. 2006) and 2024 surveys found no animals breeding in the Davis Strait (C. Hamilton pers. comm.; survey will be repeated in 2025 in this region). The overall Northwest Atlantic population was at the time of the last survey, two decades ago, c.600,000 animals.
Menaces identifiées(10 menaces classées CMP-IUCN)
5_4_1Intentional use: (subsistence/small scale) [harvest]UnknownMajority (50-90%)Ongoing5_4_2Intentional use: (large scale) [harvest]UnknownUnknownOngoing5_4_3Unintentional effects: (subsistence/small scale) [harvest]UnknownMajority (50-90%)Ongoing5_4_4Unintentional effects: (large scale) [harvest]UnknownMinority (<50%)Ongoing8_5_2Named speciesUnknownUnknownOngoing9_2_1Oil spillsUnknownUnknownOngoing9_2_3Type Unknown/UnrecordedUnknownUnknownOngoing9_6_3Noise pollutionUnknownMajority (50-90%)Ongoing11_1Habitat shifting & alterationSlow, Significant DeclinesWhole (>90%)Ongoing11_3Temperature extremesSlow, Significant DeclinesWhole (>90%)Ongoing
Description complète des menacesTexte détaillé évaluation IUCNExpert
Bycatch of Hooded Seals in coastal net fisheries has been reported from the United States, from trawl fisheries off Norway and Newfoundland, and salmon drift nets used off Greenland (Reeves et al. 1992, Waring et al. 2005, Woodley and Lavigne 1991), but it is not thought to be a major cause of mortality. Competition for food with commercial fisheries and other predators has been suggested as a factor that may limit population growth or lead to declines (Reijnders et al. 1993). The Barents and Norwegian Sea Redfish stocks declined markedly in the 1990s which might have impacted food availability for Hooded Seals. Currently, declining Polar Cod (Boreogadus saida) stocks are a concern for Hooded Seals in the Northeast Atlantic (Enoksen et al. 2017).
Impacts of oil spills on Hooded Seals have not been reported but given the Hooded Seals ice breeding habit, there might be at risk of mortality from spills during the pupping season when newborn and newly weaned pups could be fouled (St. Aubin 1990). Hooded Seals are not known to have suffered fatalities during the mass die-off of Harbour Seals in European waters from phocine distemper virus in 1998 and 2002, but subsequent testing of a variety of Arctic seals revealed antibodies to the virus in 18-24% percent of the Hooded Seals sampled, indicating exposure and transmission of the virus (Harkonen et al. 2006). Hooded Seals in the Northeast Atlantic have high organohalogen contaminant burdens, which are thought to be high enough to cause thyroid disruption (Villanger et al. 2013).
Climate change is a serious threat to this ice-breeding species (Tynan and DeMaster 1997; Kovacs et al. 2011, 2012; Laidre et al. 2015, Kovacs et al. 2021). Sea ice losses have occurred throughout the species’ range over the last few decades (e.g. Stenson and Hammill 2014, Spreen et al. 2020), with complete ice failure in the southern parts of the range in the Northwest Atlantic being increasingly common (Johnston et al. 2005). Reduction in ice cover in the Greenland Sea has resulted in smaller floes and less stable ice conditions that likely impact survivorship of pups. Additionally, pupping areas have more open water and they have shifted closer to the Greenland. The occurrence of Hooded Seals has increased in the diet of both Polar Bears and Killer Whales in East Greenland concomitant with these sea ice changes (Foote et al. 2013, McKinney et al. 2013, Øigård et al. 2014). Polar Bear predation on Hooded Seals in East Greenland has increased 9.5% per decade since the mid-190s (McKinney et al. 2013). It is thought that this source of mortality is possibly becoming a driver of the declining population trend of Hooded Seals in the Greenland Sea (Øigård et al. 2014).
An indirect result of climate change is that prey abundance and distribution is undergoing significant change, with “borealization” of the community in the Barents Region that is likely having negative impacts on Hooded Seals (e.g. Beaugrand et al. 2009, Fossheim et al. 2015, Christiansen 2017, Enoksen et al. 2017). A recent dietary study on Greenland Sea Hooded Seals found that their diet is dominated by Polar Cod (Boreogadus saida) and despite Hooded Seals seeming to be able to do some prey shifting, Enoksen et al. (2017) concluded that Greenland Sea Hooded Seals show narrow niche breadth and specialization on Arctic fishes that are suffering negative impacts of climate change. Increased fishing, disease risks, shipping, mining, ocean noise etc in areas previously ice covered, but now open, increase the general risk level for this species (Pagnan 2000, PAME 2019). Ecological change within the system is seen as the likely cause of declines in Hooded Seal numbers (Frei et al. 2012, Biuw et al. 2022).
Habitats préférentiels (classification IUCN)
10_1Marine Oceanic - Epipelagic (0-200m)★10_2Marine Oceanic - Mesopelagic (200-1000m)★9_1Marine Neritic - Pelagic★10_3Marine Oceanic - Bathypelagic (1000-4000m)12_1Marine Intertidal - Rocky Shoreline13_1Marine Coastal/Supratidal - Sea Cliffs and Rocky Offshore Islands
Mesures de conservation recommandéesStratégies de conservation IUCNExpert
Numerous conservation measures, international management plans, harvest quotas and restrictions, as well as agreements and treaties, have been developed for the conservation of Hooded Seals dating back to the 1870s (Sergeant 1976).
In European waters, harvest quotas were implemented at Jan Mayen in 1971 and complete cessation of the commercial harvest was enacted in 2007 (2008 hunting season closure). The ICES/NAFO/NAMMCO Working Group on Harp and Hooded Seals (WGHARP) models population numbers from surveys and provides advice for management. Based on surveys conducted in 2022 and new biological parameter data, zero quota is recommended (ICES 2023).
Hooded Seals are classified as Vulnerable on the Global IUCN Red List (Kovacs 2016) and are Endangered on the Norwegian Red List (Eldegard et al. 2021); the latter assessment is done for the European Hooded Seal stock.
A global assessment of population structure would help in the assessment process. More robust N1+ estimates are needed for all stocks. Ongoing survey efforts are required to track impacts of climate change and population trends.
Actions de conservation (2)Conservation Actions Classification Scheme — IUCNExpert
2_1Site/area management3_1_1Harvest management
Stress écologiques (18)Stresses Classification — IUCNExpert
1_1Ecosystem conversion1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_2Species disturbance2_2Species disturbance2_3_7Reduced reproductive success
Usage & commerce (2)Use & Trade — IUCNExpert
1Food - humannationalsubsistance10Wearing apparel, accessoriesnationalsubsistance
Priorités de recherche (5)Research Needed Classification — IUCNExpert
1_2Population size, distribution & trends1_4Harvest, use & livelihoods1_5Threats1_6Actions3_1Population trends
Niche IUCN globaleRealms · Systems · LMEs · Growth forms · FAOs — biogéographie IUCNExpert
Royaumes biogéographiques
Systèmes (terrestre/eau douce/marin)
Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs)
Zones de pêche FAO
Références bibliographiques (30)Sources scientifiques de l'évaluation IUCNExpert
- IUCN. 2025. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2025-1. Available at: <a href="www.iucnredlist.org">www.iucnredlist.org</a>. (Accessed: 27 March 2025).
- Biuw, M., Øigård, T. A., Nilssen, K. T., Stenson, G., Lindblom, L., Poltermann, M., Kristiansen, M. and Haug, T. 2022. Recent Harp and Hooded Seal Pup Production Estimates in the Greenland Sea Suggest Ecology-Driven Declines. <i>NAMMCO Scientific Publications</i> 12: https://doi.org/10.7557/3.5821
- Sumata, H., de Steur, L., Gerland, S., Divine, D.V. and Pavlova, O. 2022. Unprecedented decline of Arctic sea ice outflow in 2018. <i>Nature Communications</i> 13: 1747 doi.10.1038/s41467-022-29470-7
- Estathiou, E., Eldevik, T., Årthun, M. and Lind, S. 2022. Spatial patterns, mechanisms and predictability of Barents Sea ice change. <i>Journal of Climate</i> 35(10): 2961–2973. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-21-0044.1
- Hamilton, C.D., Lydersen, C., Aars, J., Biuw, M., Boltunov, A.N., Born, E.W., Dietz, R., Folkow, L.P., Glazov, D.M., Haug, T., Heide-Jørgensen, M.P., Kettemer, L.E., Laidre, K.L., Øien, N., Nordøy, E.S., Rikardsen, A.H., Rosing-Asvid, A., Semenova, V., Shpak, O.V., Svegaard, S., Ugarte, F., Wiig, Ø. and Kovacs, K.M. 2021. Marine mammal hotspots in the Greenland and Barents Seas. <i>Marine Ecology Progress Series </i> 659: 3-28.
- Eldegard, K., Syvertsen, P.O., Bjørge A, Kovacs, K.M., Støen, O.-G. and van der Kooij, J. 2021. Mammals: evaluation of hooded seals <i>Cystophora cristata</i> for Norway. Red List for Species (in Norwegian). Artsdatabanken.no. Available at: <a href="https://www.artsdatabanken.no/lister/rodlisteforarter/2021/12922">https://www.artsdatabanken.no/lister/rodlisteforarter/2021/12922</a>. (Accessed: 24.11.2021).
- Artsdatabanken. 2021. Norsk rødliste for arter 2021. Available at: <a href="https://www.artsdatabanken.no/lister/rodlisteforarter/2021">https://www.artsdatabanken.no/lister/rodlisteforarter/2021</a>.
- Bengtsson, O., Hamilton, C.D., Lydersen, C., Andersen, M. and Kovacs, K.M. 2021. Distribution and habitat characteristics of pinnipeds and polar bears (<i>Ursus maritimus</i>) around the Svalbard Archipelago, based on observations from 2005-2018. <i>Polar Research </i> 40: 5326.
- Kovacs, K.M., Belikov, S., Boveng, P., Desportes, G., Ferguson, S., Hansen, R., Laidre, K., Stenson, G., Thomas, P., Ugarte, F. and Vongraven, D. 2021. 2021 State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity Report (SAMBR) Update: 2021. Technical Report. Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna International Secretariat. Akureyri, Iceland.
- Spreen, G., de Steur, L., Divine, D., Gerland, S., Hansen, E. and Kwok, R. 2020. Arctic sea ice volume export through Fram Strait from 1992 to 2014. <i>Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans</i> 125: e2019JC016039. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JC016039
- Biuw, M., Haug, T. and Øigård, T.A. 2019. The 2019 abundance of hooded seals (<i>Cystophora cristata</i>) in the Greenland Sea. WP SEA 249. <i>ICES/NAF/NAMMCO Working Group on Harp and Hooded Seals, IMR, Tromsø. Norway. 2-6 September 2019</i>: 124-129. https://nammco.no/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/final-report_wgharp-2019.pdf
- ICES. 2019. ICES/NAFO/NAMMCO Working Group on Harp and Hooded Seals (WGHARP). ICES Scientific Reports 1:72. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES).
- ICES. 2019. Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS). ICES Scientific Reports. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, Copenhagen.
- Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME). 2019. Underwater noise in the Arctic: a state of knowledge report. PAME Secretariate. Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME), Akureyri, Iceland.
- Storrie, L., Lydersen, C., Andersen, M., Wynn, R.B., and Kovacs, K.M. 2018. Determining the species assemblage and habitat use of cetaceans in the Svalbard Archipelago, based on recorded observations from 2002-2014. <i>Polar Research</i> 37: 1463065.
- Náttúrufræðistofnun Íslands. 2018. Válisti spendýra [List of Mammals]. Náttúrufræðistofnun Íslands [Icelandic Institute of Natural History, IINH]. Available at: <a href="https://www.ni.is/is/midlun/utgafa/valistar/spendyr/valisti-spendyra">https://www.ni.is/is/midlun/utgafa/valistar/spendyr/valisti-spendyra</a>. (Accessed: 20/11/2023).
- Kovacs, K.M. 2018. Hooded seal <i>Cystophora cristata</i>. In: B. Wursig, J.G.M. Thewissen and K.M. Kovacs (eds), <i>Encyclopedia of Marine Mammals</i>, pp. 477-480. Academic Press.
- Enoksen, S., Haug, T., Lindstrøm, U. and Nilssen, K.T. 2017. Recent summer diet of hooded <i>Cystophora cristata</i> and harp <i>Pagophilus groenlandicus</i> seals in the drift ice of the Greenland Sea. <i>Polar Biology</i> 40: 931-937.
- Christiansen, J.S. 2017. No future for Euro-Arctic ocean fishes. <i>Marine Ecological Progress Series</i> 575: 217-227.
- Vacquie-Garcia, J., Lydersen, C., Biuw, M., Haug, T., Fedak, M.A. and Kovacs, K.M. 2017. Hooded seal <i>Cystophora cristata</i> foraging areas in the Northeast Atlantic Ocean—Investigated using three complementary methods. <i>PloS one</i> 12: e0187889.
- Kovacs, K.M. 2016. Hooded seal (Cystophora cristata). In: IUCN Red List (ed.). IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
- Fossheim, M., Primicderio, R., Johannesen, E., Ingvaldsen, R.B., Aschan, M.M. and Dolgov, A.V. 2015. Recent warming leads to a rapid borealization of fish communities in the Arctic. <i>Nature Climate Change</i> doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE2647.
- Laidre, K.L., Stern, H., Kovacs, K.M., Lowry, L., Moore, S.E., Regehr, E.R., Ferguson, S.H., Wiig, Ø., Boveng, P., Angliss, R.P., Born, E.W., Litovka, D., Quakenbush, L., Lydersen, C., Vongraven, D. and Ugarte, F. 2015. Arctic marine mammal population status, sea ice habitat loss, and conservation recommendations for the 21st century. <i>Conservation Biology</i> 29: 724-737.
- Øigård, T.A., Haug, T. and Nilssen, K.T. 2014. Current status of hooded seals in the Greenland Sea. Victims of climate change and predation? <i>Biological Conservation</i> 172: 29-36.
- Stenson, G.B. and Hammill, M.O. 2014. Can ice breeding seals adapt to habitat loss in a time of climate change? <i>ICES Journal of Marine Science</i> 71: 1977-1986.
- Andersen, J.M., Wiersma, Y.F., Stenson, G.B., Hammill, M.O., Rosing-Asvid, A. and Stern-Mauitzen, M. 2013. Habitat selection by hooded seals (<i>Cystophora cristata</i>) in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean. <i>ICES Journal of Marine Science</i> 70: 173-185.
- Villanger, G.D., Gabrielsen, K.M., Kovacs, K.M., Lydersen, C., Lie, E., Karimi, M., Sormo, E.G., Jenssen, B.M. 2013. Effects of complex organohalogen contaminant mixtures on thyroid homeostais in hooded seal (<i>Cystophora cristata</i>) mother-pup pairs. <i>Chemosphere</i> 92: 828-842.
- McKinney, M.M., Iverson, S.J., Fisk, A.T., Sonne, C., Rigét, F.F., Letcher, R.J., Arts, M.T., Born, E.W., Rosing-Asvid, A. and Dietz, R. 2013. Global change effects on the long-term feeding ecology and contaminant exposures of East Greenland polar bears. <i>Global Change Biology</i> 19: 2360-2372.
- Truchon, M.H., Measures, L., LæHerault, V., Brethes, J.C., Galbraith, P.S., Harvey, M., Lessard, S., Starr, M. and Lecomte, N. 2013. Marine mammal strandings and environmental changes: a 15-year study in the St Lawrence ecosystem. <i>PLOSOne</i> 8(3): e59311. Doi_10.1371/journal.pone.0059311.
- Foote, A.D., Newton, J., Avila-Arcos, M.C., Kampmann, M.-L., Samaniego, J.A., Post, K.,Rosing-Asvid, A., Sinding, M.-H.S. and Gilbert, M.T.P. 2013. Tracking niche variation over millennial timescales in sympatric killer whale lineages. <i>Proceedings of the Royal Society B</i> 280(1768): 20131481.
Évaluateurs & contributeurs (3)Personnes ayant contribué à l'évaluation IUCNExpert
Kovacs, K.M. 2025. Cystophora cristata (Europe assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2025: e.T6204A218995702. Accessed on 05 May 2026.
Traits biologiques
Morphologie(5)
Cycle de vie(1)
Voir 15 traits de plus (2 catégories)Replier
Reproduction(6)
Écologie & habitat(9)
Sources priorisées par qualité scientifique (peer-reviewed spécialisées → Wikidata fallback). Unités auto-converties, valeur max retenue en cas de mesures multiples. Méthodologie · Citations.
Répartition mondiale
Aucune observation géoréférencée avec précision suffisante (<10 km) dans GBIF pour cette espèce.
Consulter sur les bases externes
Observations & statuts
Cartographie
Note nomenclaturale & synonymesDétails taxonomiques + synonymes CoLExpert
Note nomenclaturale
TAXREF v18 — INPN/MNHNSynonymes (5)— redirigent vers cette page
- Cystophora antillarumGray, 1849
- Cystophora borealisNilsson, 1820
- Cytophora cristataErxleben, 1777
- Phoca cristataErxleben, 1777
- Phoca mitrataG. Cuvier, 1823
Sources : Catalogue of Life Cross-References (synonymes) · TAXREF v18 INPN/MNHN (commentaires FR).