Phoque tacheté
Phoca larghaPallas, 1811
1 photo · Licences CC (Wikimedia Commons / iNaturalist)Click pour agrandir
Description
espèce de mammifères
Source : Wikidata
Pays · région · aire protégée · écorégion · biome
Chargement du graphe…
Indicateurs du réseau écologique
Comment lire ce graphe
Ce graphe représente les interactions écologiques documentées entre Phoca largha 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
82 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.
Partenaires
82
Espèces avec interactions documentées
Types d'interactions
7
Prédation, pollinisation, parasitisme…
Connectance
0.071
Densité des liens dans le sous-graphe affiché
Rang animalia
96 %
Percentile vs ensemble des animalia
Liste rouge IUCN
LC · Préoccupation mineure?Inconnue- Évaluation
- 2016 · v3.1
- Altitude
- – 3 m
- Profondeur
- – m
État de la populationTexte officiel évaluation IUCNExpert
The abundance of Spotted Seals has never been well quantified. Poorly documented estimates suggest a total population size in the 1970s of perhaps 400,000, with 200-250,000 in the Bering-Chukchi Seas and perhaps 170,000 in the Okhotsk Sea (Bigg 1981, Quakenbush 1988). More recent surveys indicate the total number may be in excess of 640,000 individuals, with more than 460,000 in the Bering Sea (Conn et al. 2014), 180,000 in the Sea of Okhotsk (Fedoseev 2000), and about 3,300 in the Yellow Sea and Sea of Japan (Han et al. 2010, Nesterenko and Katin 2009). Surveys have been too irregular and imprecise to measure population trend, but Alaska Native hunters have not reported any notable changes in the availability of Spotted Seals (Boveng et al. 2009, Quakenbush et al. 2009).
Maximum longevity is at least 35 years (Quakenbush 1988). Less than a third of females and males become sexually mature by age 3, about two-thirds of both sexes become mature by age 4, and nearly all (i.e., >90%) are sexually mature by age 5 (Tikhomirov 1966, Naito and Nishiwaki 1972, Fedoseev 2000, Boveng et al. 2009).
Maximum longevity is at least 35 years (Quakenbush 1988). Less than a third of females and males become sexually mature by age 3, about two-thirds of both sexes become mature by age 4, and nearly all (i.e., >90%) are sexually mature by age 5 (Tikhomirov 1966, Naito and Nishiwaki 1972, Fedoseev 2000, Boveng et al. 2009).
Menaces identifiées(8 menaces classées CMP-IUCN)
11_1Habitat shifting & alterationOngoing1_2Commercial & industrial areasOngoing5_4_1Intentional use: (subsistence/small scale) [harvest]Ongoing5_4_2Intentional use: (large scale) [harvest]Past, Unlikely to Return5_4_4Unintentional effects: (large scale) [harvest]Ongoing5_4_5Persecution/controlOngoing8_2Problematic native species/diseasesOngoing9_2_1Oil spillsOngoing
Description complète des menacesTexte détaillé évaluation IUCNExpert
Intensive harvesting of fish in the Okhotsk and Bering seas poses a risk to Spotted Seals, as several of their main prey species are targets of commercial fisheries (Lowry and Frost 1985). Entanglement in commercial fisheries occurs occasionally in Japan and in the Sea of Okhotsk and Bering Sea. Small, organized control kills to limit damage to fisheries regularly occur in Japan (Mizuno et al. 2001, Angliss and Outlaw 2007). In Kamchatka, Spotted Seals sometimes eat fish out of fishing gear and fishermen shoot small numbers in local areas to defend their landings and protect their equipment (V. Burkanov, pers. comm.).
Oil and gas development may cause disturbance to and adversely affect the habitat used by Spotted Seals (Reijnders et al. 1993). Oil contamination poses poorly known risks to their populations, but the closely related North Pacific Harbor Seal was impacted by oil spilled from the tanker Exxon Valdez (Frost et al. 1994). The greatest impacts would likely result if spills occurred during the pupping season, if food resources were negatively affected, or if the spill was an event that affected a large area (St. Aubin 1990). A variety of contaminants have been found in Spotted Seals sampled in Alaska but their potential impacts are largely unknown (Quakenbush et al. 2009). Contaminant concerns would be greatest for animals living in the western part of the range where they occur near large population and industrial areas in China, Korea, and Japan.
Reduction in late winter and spring sea ice cover as a result of the disrupted, warming climate could be problematic for Spotted Seals as the majority of the population uses pack ice at the southern limit of the ice extent for pupping (e.g., Tynan and DeMaster 1997). Changes to ice characteristics that affect its location, timing, stability, etc. could result in lower survival of Spotted Seal pups. This threat is strongest in the southern parts of the range, the Yellow Sea and Sea of Japan, where ice extent and seasonal persistence time have already been greatly reduced (Boveng et al. 2009). The threat may be mitigated somewhat in the Bering Sea, where a long-term range shift northward would be possible through Bering Strait to the Chukchi Sea, where seasonal formation of suitable ice is projected to occur beyond the current century under the most commonly used global climate models (Boveng et al. 2009). Disruption or alteration of the patterns of primary productivity and abundance of key prey species, either by sea ice loss or ocean acidification could also have detrimental effects on Spotted Seals, though the magnitude and even the direction of impacts are very uncertain (Boveng et al. 2009).
Oil and gas development may cause disturbance to and adversely affect the habitat used by Spotted Seals (Reijnders et al. 1993). Oil contamination poses poorly known risks to their populations, but the closely related North Pacific Harbor Seal was impacted by oil spilled from the tanker Exxon Valdez (Frost et al. 1994). The greatest impacts would likely result if spills occurred during the pupping season, if food resources were negatively affected, or if the spill was an event that affected a large area (St. Aubin 1990). A variety of contaminants have been found in Spotted Seals sampled in Alaska but their potential impacts are largely unknown (Quakenbush et al. 2009). Contaminant concerns would be greatest for animals living in the western part of the range where they occur near large population and industrial areas in China, Korea, and Japan.
Reduction in late winter and spring sea ice cover as a result of the disrupted, warming climate could be problematic for Spotted Seals as the majority of the population uses pack ice at the southern limit of the ice extent for pupping (e.g., Tynan and DeMaster 1997). Changes to ice characteristics that affect its location, timing, stability, etc. could result in lower survival of Spotted Seal pups. This threat is strongest in the southern parts of the range, the Yellow Sea and Sea of Japan, where ice extent and seasonal persistence time have already been greatly reduced (Boveng et al. 2009). The threat may be mitigated somewhat in the Bering Sea, where a long-term range shift northward would be possible through Bering Strait to the Chukchi Sea, where seasonal formation of suitable ice is projected to occur beyond the current century under the most commonly used global climate models (Boveng et al. 2009). Disruption or alteration of the patterns of primary productivity and abundance of key prey species, either by sea ice loss or ocean acidification could also have detrimental effects on Spotted Seals, though the magnitude and even the direction of impacts are very uncertain (Boveng et al. 2009).
Habitats préférentiels (classification IUCN)
10_1Marine Oceanic - Epipelagic (0-200m)★12_1Marine Intertidal - Rocky Shoreline★13_1Marine Coastal/Supratidal - Sea Cliffs and Rocky Offshore Islands★9_1Marine Neritic - Pelagic★
Mesures de conservation recommandéesStratégies de conservation IUCNExpert
In the United States the Spotted Seal is generally protected from all but subsistence hunting by Alaska Natives under the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, which also generally prohibits import and export of parts or products from all marine mammals.
Commercial harvesting of Spotted Seals from vessels of the Russian Federation ended in 1994. Small scale commercial and subsistence harvests from small boats and land occurs along the Russian Far East coast, but the size of the harvest is relatively small (V. Burkanov pers. comm.).
Spotted Seals are listed in the Second Category (II) of the State Key Protected Wildlife List in China, listed as Vulnerable in the China Red Data Book of Endangered Animals, and designated a vulnerable species under the Wildlife Conservation Act of China (Wang 1998). However, as of 2004, no “conservation action, public awareness or education programmes have been carried out for the species in this region” (Won and Yoo 2004).
In 2000, Spotted Seals were afforded protected status under the Wildlife Conservation Act of South Korea. Despite this protection, the Liaodong Bay population, shared between China and Korea, has continued to decline (Han et al. 2010).
Commercial harvesting of Spotted Seals from vessels of the Russian Federation ended in 1994. Small scale commercial and subsistence harvests from small boats and land occurs along the Russian Far East coast, but the size of the harvest is relatively small (V. Burkanov pers. comm.).
Spotted Seals are listed in the Second Category (II) of the State Key Protected Wildlife List in China, listed as Vulnerable in the China Red Data Book of Endangered Animals, and designated a vulnerable species under the Wildlife Conservation Act of China (Wang 1998). However, as of 2004, no “conservation action, public awareness or education programmes have been carried out for the species in this region” (Won and Yoo 2004).
In 2000, Spotted Seals were afforded protected status under the Wildlife Conservation Act of South Korea. Despite this protection, the Liaodong Bay population, shared between China and Korea, has continued to decline (Han et al. 2010).
Actions de conservation (1)Conservation Actions Classification Scheme — IUCNExpert
2_1Site/area management
Stress écologiques (14)Stresses Classification — IUCNExpert
1_1Ecosystem conversion1_1Ecosystem conversion1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_2Species disturbance2_2Species disturbance2_3_8Other
Usage & commerce (2)Use & Trade — IUCNExpert
1Food - humansubsistance10Wearing apparel, accessoriessubsistance
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
NearcticPalearctic
Systèmes (terrestre/eau douce/marin)
TerrestrialMarine
Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs)
Beaufort SeaChukchi SeaEastern Bering SeaWestern Bering SeaYellow SeaSea of JapanSea of Okhotsk
Zones de pêche FAO
Arctic SeaPacific - northwestPacific - northeast
Références bibliographiques (30)Sources scientifiques de l'évaluation IUCNExpert
- IUCN. 2016. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016-1. Available at: <a href="www.iucnredlist.org">www.iucnredlist.org</a>. (Accessed: 30 June 2016).
- Conn, P.B., Ver Hoef, J.M., McClintock, B.T., Moreland, E.E., London, J.M., Cameron, M.F., Dahle, S.P., Boveng, P.L. 2014. Estimating multispecies abundance using automated detection systems: ice-associated seals in the Bering Sea. <i>Methods in Ecology and Evolution</i> 5: 1280-1293.
- Allen, B.M. and Angliss R.P. 2014. Alaska marine mammal stock assessments, 2013. U.S Department of Commerce National Marine Fisheries Service Technical Memorandum NMFSAFSC-277.
- Li, X., Tzika, A.C., Liu, Y., Doninck, K.V., Zhu, Q. and Milinkovitch, M.C. 2010. Preliminary genetic status of the spotted seal <i>Phoca largha</i> in Liaodong Bay (China) based on microsatellite and mitochondrial DNA analyses. <i>Trends in Evolutionary Biology</i> 2: 33-38.
- Han, J.-B., Sun, F.-Y., Gao, X.-G., He, C.-B., Wang, P.-L., Ma, Z.-Q., and Wang, Z.-H. 2010. Low microsatellite variation in spotted seal (<i>Phoca largha</i>) shows a decrease in population size in the Liaodong Gulf colony. <i>Annales Zoologici Fennici</i> 47: 15-27.
- O'Corry-Crowe, G. and Bonin, C. 2009. The biogeography and population structure of spotted seals (<i>Phoca largha</i>) as revealed by mitochondrial and microsatellite DNA. Draft Report to the National Marine Mammal Laboratory. 8 p. Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute, Florida Atlantic University, Fort Pierce, FL..
- Quakenbush, L., Citta, J. and Crawford, J. 2009. Biology of the spotted seal (<i>Phoca largha</i>) in Alaska from 1962 to 2008. Report to the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service.
- Boveng, P.L., Bengtson, J.L., Buckley, T.W., Cameron, M.F., Dahle, S.P., Kelly, B.P., Megrey, B.A., Overland, J.E. and Williamson, N.J. 2009. Status review of the spotted seal (<i>Phoca largha</i>). U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Memorandum NMFS-AFSC-200.
- Nesterenko, V.A., and Katin, I.O. 2009. Haulout: Scope of the term and procedure for identification. <i>Russian Journal of Ecology</i> 40: 48-54.
- Angliss, R. P. and Outlaw, R. B. 2007. Alaska Marine Mammal Stock Assessments, 2006. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-AFSC-168.
- Trukhin, A.M. 2005. <i>Larga (Spotted seal)</i>. Dalnauka, Vladivostok, Russia.
- Vertyankin, V. V. and Nikulin, V. S. 2004. The spotted seal of Utashud Ilsnad. <i>Sokhran. Bioraznoobr. Kamchatki I Pril. More</i>: 25-32.
- Won, C., and Yoo, B.H. 2004. Abundance, seasonal haul-out patterns and conservation of spotted seals <i>Phoca largha</i> along the coast of Bak-ryoung Island, South Korea. <i>Oryx</i> 38: 109-112.
- Kostenko, V. A., Nesterenko, V. A. and Truhkin, A. M. 2004. <i>Mammals of the Kuril Archipelago</i>. Dalnauka, Vladivostok, Russia.
- Mizuno, A. W., Suzuki, M. and Ohtaishi, N. 2001. Distribution of the spotted seal <i>Phoca largha</i> along the coast of Hokkaido, Japan. <i>Mammal Study</i> 26(2): 109-118.
- Trukhin A.M. and Katin, I.O. 2001. Larga seal breeding in the Gulf of Peter the Great (the Sea of Japan). <i>Results of the Far East Marine Mammal Researches in 1991-2000</i>, pp. 176-186. VNIRO, Moscow.
- Lowry, L. F., Burkanov, V. N., Frost, K. J., Simpkins, M. A., Davis, R., DeMaster, D. P., Suydam, R. S. and Springer, A. 2000. Habitat use and habitat selection by spotted seals (<i>Phoca largha</i>) in the Bering Sea. <i>Canadian Journal of Zoology</i> 78: 1959-1971.
- Fedoseev, G.A. 2000. Population biology of ice-associated forms of seals and their role in the northern Pacific ecosystems. Center for Russian Environmental Policy, Moscow, Russia.
- Rice, D.W. 1998. <i>Marine Mammals of the World: Systematics and Distribution</i>. Society for Marine Mammalogy, Special Publication Number 4, Lawrence, Kansas.
- Wang, S. 1998. <i>Phoca largha</i>. In: S. Wang (ed.), <i>China Red Data Book of Endangered Animals: Mammalia</i>, pp. 155-157. Science Press, Beijing, China.
- Lowry, L.F., Frost, K.J., Davis, R., DeMaster, D.P. and Suydam, R.S. 1998. Movements and behavior of satellite-tagged spotted seals (<i>Phoca largha</i>) in the Bering and Chukchi Seas. <i>Polar Biology</i> 19: 221-230.
- Tynan, C. T. and DeMaster, D. P. 1997. Observations and predictions of Arctic climate change potential effects of marine mammals. <i>Arctic</i> 50: 308-322.
- O'Corry-Crowe, G. M. and Westlake, R. L. 1997. Molecular investigations od spotted seals (<i>Phoca largha</i>) and harbor seals (<i>P. vitulina</i>), and their relationship in areas of sympatry. In: A. E. Dizon, S. J. Chivers and W. F. Perrin (eds), <i>Molecular genetics of marine mammals</i>, pp. 291-304. The Society of Marine Mammalogy.
- Heptner, V.G., Chapskii, K.K., Arsen’ev, V.A. and Sokolov, V.E. 1996. <i>Mammals of the Soviet Union</i>. Smithsonian Institution Libraries and National Science Foundation.
- Frost, K.J., Lowry, L.F., Sinclair, E., Ver Hoef, J. and McAllister, D.C. 1994. Impacts on distribution, abundance and productivity of harbor seals. In: T.R. Loughlin (ed.), <i>Marine Mammals and the Exxon Valdez</i>, pp. 97-118 . Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
- Reijnders, P., Brasseur, S., van der Toorn, J., van der Wolf, P., Boyd, I., Harwood, J., Lavigne, D. and Lowry, L. 1993. <i>Seals, fur seals, sea lions, and walrus. Status survey and conservation action plan</i>. IUCN Seal Specialist Group.
- St. Aubin, D. J. 1990. Physiologic and toxic effects on pinnipeds. In: J. R. Geraci and D. J. St. Aubin (eds), <i>Sea mammals and oil: confronting the risks</i>, pp. 103-127. Academic Press, New York, USA.
- Burkanov, V. N. 1990. The spotted seals (<i>Phoca largha</i>) in the waters of Kamchatka and its impact on Pacific salmon. Thesis, Institute of Evolution, Morphology, and Biology of Animals.
- Burkanov, V. N. 1988. Modern status of marine mammal resources in Kamchatka. Razionaln. <i>Ispol’zov. Bioresursov Kamchat</i>: 138-176.
- Quakenbush, L. T. 1988. Spotted seal. In: J. W. Lentfer (ed.), <i>Selected marine mammals of Alaska: species accounts with research and management recommendations</i>, pp. 107-124. U.S. Marine Mammal Commission, Washington, DC, USA.
Évaluateurs & contributeurs (3)Personnes ayant contribué à l'évaluation IUCNExpert
assessor
Boveng, P.
evaluator
Lowry, L.
facilitators
Lowry, L., Ahonen, H., Pollock, C.M., Chiozza, F. & Battistoni, A.
Boveng, P. 2016. Phoca largha. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T17023A45229806. Accessed on 05 May 2026.
Traits biologiques
21 valeurs · 7 sources
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 (9)— redirigent vers cette page
- Phoca ochotensisJ. A. Allen, 1902
- Phoca chorisiiLesson, 1828
- Phoca nummularisTemminck, 1844
- Phoca ochotensis macrodensJ. A. Allen, 1902
- Phoca petersiMohr, 1941
- Phoca stejnegeriAllen, 1902
- Phoca vitulina: Ellerman & Morrison-Scott, 1951
- Phoca vitulina larghaPallas, 1811
- Phoca vitulina largha: Ellerman & Morrison-Scott, 1951
Sources : Catalogue of Life Cross-References (synonymes) · TAXREF v18 INPN/MNHN (commentaires FR).