
Lion de mer de Nouvelle-Zélande
Phocarctos hookeri(Gray, 1844)
Description
espèce de mammifères
Source : Wikidata
Indicateurs du réseau écologique
Comment lire ce graphe
Ce graphe représente les interactions écologiques documentées entre Phocarctos hookeri 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
75 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.
Liste rouge IUCN
EN · En dangercritères A4bd↘Décroissante- Évaluation
- 2015 · v3.1
- Altitude
- 0 – 500 m
- Profondeur
- 700 – 0 m
État de la populationTexte officiel évaluation IUCNExpert
The majority of pups are born at the Auckland Islands and annual pup production estimates have been made there since 1994/95 (pups are mostly born in December-January). Estimates suggest that the population was largely stable until 1997/98, but has declined since then at a rate of 4%/year (see the Table 1 in the Supplementary Material - see below). The number of pups counted in 2013/14 was 18% less than in 2012/13, and 48% less than 1997/98 (Childerhouse 2014). The decrease in pup production at Auckland Islands has been linked with decreasing numbers of adult females (Chilvers 2012a).
The other location where a substantial number of pups are born is Campbell Island. While there have been some counts made there (Childerhouse et al. 2005; Maloney et al. 2009, 2012; see Table 1) effort has been intermittent with significantly varying methods (including timing of surveys) and the data cannot be used to estimate meaningful trends. Therefore, while pup count results indicate that Sea Lions on Campbell Island are not in decline, the apparent upward trend is not predicted to continue (Maloney et al. 2012). Campbell Island is at the southern limit of the New Zealand Sea Lion range and pup mortality is very high there, apparently due to cold and wet conditions during the pupping season and substrates unsuitable for a breeding colony and early pup survival (Maloney et al. 2012).
A few pups are also born on the south coast of the South Island of New Zealand and on Stewart Island not far offshore (see Table 1 in the Supplementary Material - see below). The pups born at Stewart Island were only discovered in 2010/2011 and since that year regular searches of the most likely places Sea Lions would pup have been undertaken. The apparent increasing trend of Stewart Island pup counts (see Table 1 in the Supplementary Material - see below) is an artefact of better search techniques and areas searched on Stewart Island since 2010/2011 rather than an increase in pup numbers. The number of pups born at those locations has been about 30/year, which is less than 1% of the total pup production.
The mean age of reproduction for female New Zealand Sea Lions is 10.75 years (Childerhouse 2007) hence the generation time is estimated to be 10.75 years with 3 generations being equivalent to approximately 32 years.
The best information that can be used to project future abundance of New Zealand Sea Lions is the trend in pup production at the Auckland Islands. If the pup estimate from 1997/98 (3,021) is projected three generations forward with a decline of 4%/year the number of pups born in 2029/30 is estimated to be 840, which is a 72% reduction. While threats to New Zealand Sea Lions have been identified (fishing related mortality, climate/nutritional stress, disease), they are not fully understood (Roberts and Doonan 2014). Management measures have been introduced to mitigate fisheries interactions, but declines in Sea Lion numbers have not ceased.
A population viability analysis has been undertaken for the Auckland Island population of New Zealand sea lions (Chilvers 2012b). The PVA was only for this population because it makes up three-quarters of the species and has the most reliable population parameter estimates for modelling. The results show that at the current rate of decline in the Auckland Island population, this population could be functionally extinct (less than 1,000 animals within the population) by 2035 (24 years, less than three New Zealand Sea Lion generations). The modelling of the severest known fisheries and bacterial impacts shows that with a probability of 0.982, the Auckland Island population will be functionally extinct in 59 years with a mean annual population decline rate (r) of -0.039 (Chilvers 2012b).
Recent demographic assessment of the decline in the Auckland Island subpopulation has identified the main proximate causes for decline that include generally low pupping rates, declining trends in cohort survival to age 2 since the early 1990s, and low adult survival (age 6-14 years) since 1999 which may account for declining pup numbers at Sandy since the late 1990s (Roberts et al. 2014). Analyses to identify the ultimate causes have been compromised by a short time series mostly covering the period of decline (Roberts and Doonan 2014). However, juvenile (2-5 years) and adult (6-14 years) survival was poorly correlated to estimated fishing related mortality in the squid trawl fishery at the Auckland Islands. Correlative assessment with cohort survival to age 2 was consistent with disease-related mortality impacting survival after 2005. Roberts and Doonan (2014) consider that declines in maternal conditions, variable diet composition, changes in milk quality and pup mass, and reduced pupping rates are consistent with changes in the nutritional status of the subpopulation; however they noted that some of these responses could also occur in response to pup mortality not driven by nutritional stress factors.
See the Supplementary Material for further information about New Zealand Sea Lion pup production at Auckland Islands, Campbell Island, Otago Peninsula and Catlins (mainland New Zealand), and Stewart Island.
Menaces identifiées(4 menaces classées CMP-IUCN)
10_2Earthquakes/tsunamisCausing/Could cause fluctuationsUnknownUnknown5_4_4Unintentional effects: (large scale) [harvest]Slow, Significant DeclinesMajority (50-90%)Ongoing8_2Problematic native species/diseasesOngoing8_2_1Unspecified speciesMinority (<50%)Ongoing
Description complète des menacesTexte détaillé évaluation IUCNExpert
At the present time, New Zealand Sea Lions have a highly restricted distribution, a small population, and nearly all of the breeding activity is concentrated in two subantarctic island groups. This restricted and small breeding population in combination makes them vulnerable to disease outbreaks, environmental change, and human activities.
The commercial Arrow Squid trawl fishery near the Auckland Islands reported their first New Zealand Sea Lion bycatch mortalities in 1978. Reported or estimated mortality between 1995 and 2007 averaged 92 animals annually (range 17-143) which was 3.7% of the estimated number of mature individuals in the Auckland Island area (Thompson and Abraham 2009). Of particular concern is that most bycatch animals are females (up to 91%; Chilvers 2008). New Zealand Sea Lions are also incidentally caught in other trawl fisheries around the Auckland and Campbell Islands (Chilvers 2008, Thompson et al. 2013). Apart from direct mortality, competition and habitat modification caused by fishing activity may also be impacting New Zealand Sea Lion foraging areas (Robertson and Chilvers 2011).
Epizootic outbreaks at the Auckland Islands in 1998, 2002, and 2003 led to more than 50%, 33%, and 21% early pup mortality respectively, and were also responsible for the deaths of some animals from other age classes during 1998. The source of the suspected bacterial agent and cause of the outbreak and subsequent mortality for the 1998 outbreak are unknown, however the 2002 and 2003 outbreaks have been identified as being caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae (Castinel et al. 2007b).
Habitats préférentiels (classification IUCN)
10_1Marine Oceanic - Epipelagic (0-200m)★10_2Marine Oceanic - Mesopelagic (200-1000m)★12_1Marine Intertidal - Rocky Shoreline★12_2Marine Intertidal - Sandy Shoreline and/or Beaches, Sand Bars, Spits, Etc★12_3Marine Intertidal - Shingle and/or Pebble Shoreline and/or Beaches★1_3Forest - Subantarctic★3_2Shrubland - Subantarctic★9_1Marine Neritic - Pelagic★13_1Marine Coastal/Supratidal - Sea Cliffs and Rocky Offshore Islands
Mesures de conservation recommandéesStratégies de conservation IUCNExpert
There are three main management strategies currently in place to mitigate New Zealand Sea Lion bycatch interactions in trawl fisheries off the Auckland Islands:
1) Input controls: a Marine Mammal Sanctuary and Marine Reserve surrounding the Auckland Islands extending 22.2 km offshore, within which no trawling or any other form of fishing is allowed. However, satellite tracking data indicate that this closure only protects a small part of the foraging areas of adult females (Chilvers et al. 2005, Chilvers 2009).
2) Output controls: restrict the number of New Zealand Sea Lions the trawl fishery may kill incidentally within designated fishery management zones before the zone is closed for the season (Chilvers 2008).
3) Sea Lion exclusion devices (SLEDs): SLEDs were introduced to the fishery in 2001. A SLED is a metal grid fixed inside the trawl net that allows smaller objects, such as squid, to pass into the cod-end, while larger objects are directed to an escape hatch opening. There is uncertainty about the efficacy of SLEDs and the overall impact of fishery interactions on New Zealand Sea Lion populations.
Actions de conservation (4)Conservation Actions Classification Scheme — IUCNExpert
1_2Resource & habitat protection3_2Species recovery4_3Awareness & communications5_4_2National level
Stress écologiques (5)Stresses Classification — IUCNExpert
1_1Ecosystem conversion1_2Ecosystem degradation2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality
Priorités de recherche (5)Research Needed Classification — IUCNExpert
1_2Population size, distribution & trends1_3Life history & ecology1_5Threats2_1Species Action/Recovery Plan3_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. 2015. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2015.2. Available at: <a href="www.iucnredlist.org">www.iucnredlist.org</a>. (Accessed: 23 June 2015).
- Roberts, J. and Doonan, I. 2014. New Zealand sea lion: demographic assessment of the causes of decline at the Auckland Islands. Demographic model options: correlative assessment. Draft report prepared for Department of Conservation, NIWA .
- Roberts, J., Fu, D., Doonan, I. and Francis, C. 2014. New Zealand sea lion: demographic assessment of the causes of decline at the Auckland Islands. Demographic model options: demographic assessment. Report prepared for Department of Conservation, NIWA client report No: WLG2014-60.
- Childerhouse, S. 2014. Preliminary Report for CSP Project 4522 New Zealand sea lion ground component 2013/14. .
- Thompson, F.N., Berkenbusch, K., and Abraham, E.R. 2013. Marine mammal bycatch in New Zealand trawl fisheries, 1995–96 to 2010–11. New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 105. Ministry for Primary Industries, New Zealand.
- Chilvers, B.L. 2012b. Population viability analysis of New Zealand sea lions, Auckland Islands, New Zealand’s sub-Antarctics: assessing relative impacts and uncertainty. <i>Polar Biology </i> 35: 1607-1615.
- Chilvers, B.L. 2012a. Life-history traits of New Zealand sea lions, Auckland Islands, during a period of significant pup production decline. <i>Journal of Zoology, London</i> 287: 240-249.
- Maloney, A., Chilvers, B.L., Muller, C.G. and Haley, M. 2012. Increasing pup production of New Zealand sea lions at Campbell Island/Motu Ihupuku: can it continue? <i>New Zealand Journal of Zoology</i> 39: 19-29.
- Berkson, J.M. and DeMaster, D.P. 2011. Use of pup counts in indexing population changes in pinnipeds. <i>Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences </i> 42: 873-879.
- Robertson B.C. and Chilvers, B.L. 2011. New Zealand sea lions <i>Phocarctos hookeri</i> possible causes of population decline. <i>Mammal Review</i> 41: on line.
- Chilvers, B.L., Amey, J.M., Huckstadt, L.A. and Costa, D.P. 2011. Investigating foraging utilization distribution of female New Zealand sea lions, Auckland Islands. <i>Polar Biology </i> 34: 565-574.
- Chilvers, B.L., Wilkinson, I.S. and McKenzie, D. 2010. Predicting life-history traits for female New Zealand sea lions, <i>Phocarctos hookeri</i>: intergrating short-term mark-recapture data and population modeling. <i>Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Ecological Statistics </i> 15: 259-278.
- Meynier, L., Morel, P.C.H., Chilvers, B.L., Mackenzie, D.D.S. and Duignan, P.J. 2010. Quantitative fatty acid signature analysis on New Zealand sea lions: model sensitivity and diet estimates. <i>Journal of Mammalogy </i> 91: 1484-1495.
- Baker, C.S., Chilvers, B.L., Constantine, R., DuFresne, S., Mattlin, R.H., van Helden, A. and Hitchmough, R. 2010. Conservation status of New Zealand marine mammals (suborders Cetacea and Pinnipedia), 2009. <i>New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research</i> 44(2).
- Chilvers, B.L. and Mackenzie, D. 2010. Age and sex specific survival estimates incorporating tag loss for New Zealand sea lions, <i>Phocarctos hookeri</i>. <i>Journal of Mammology</i> 91: 758-767.
- Thompson, F.N. and Abraham, E.R. 2009. Estimation of the capture of New Zealand sea lions (<i>Phocarctos hookeri</i>) in trawl fisheries from 1995–96 to 2006–07. New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 41.
- Geschke, K. and Chilvers, B.L. 2009. Managing big boys: a case study on remote anaesthesia and satellite tracking of adult male New Zealand sea lions (<i>Phocarctos hookeri</i>). <i>Wildlife Research </i> 36: 666-674.
- Chilvers, B.L. 2009. Foraging locations of a decreasing colony of New Zealand sea lions (<i>Phocarctos hookeri</i>). <i>New Zealand Journal of Ecology </i> 33: 106-113.
- Chilvers, B.L. and Wilkinson, I.S. 2009. Diverse foraging strategies in lactating New Zealand sea lions. <i>Marine Ecology Progress Series </i> 378: 299-308.
- Townsend, A.J., de Lange, P.J., Duffy, C.A.J., Miskelly, C.M., Molloy, J. and Norton, D.A. 2008. <i>New Zealand Threat Classification System Manual</i>. Department of Conservation, Wellington.
- Chilvers, B.L. 2008. New Zealand sea lions (<i>Phocarctos hookeri</i>) and squid trawl fisheries: bycatch problems and management options. <i>Endangered Species Research</i>.
- Lalas, C., Ratz, H., McEwan, K. and McConkey, S.D. 2007. Predation by New Zealand sea lions (<I>Phocarctos hookeri</I>) as a threat to the viability of Yellow-eyed Penguins (<I>Megadyptes antipodes</I>) at Otago Peninsula, New Zealand. <i>Biological Conservation</i> 135: 235-246.
- Castinel, A., Duignan, P.J., Pomroy, W.E., Lopez-Villalobos, N., Gibbs, N.J., Chilvers, B.L. and Wilkinson, I. 2007. Neonatal mortality in New Zealand sea lions (<i>Phocarctos hookeri</i>) at Sandy Bay, Enderby Island, Auckland Islands from 1998 to 2005. <i>Journal of Wildlife Diseases</i> 43: 461-474.
- Castinel, A., Grinberg, A., Pattison, R., Pomroy, B., Rogers, L. and Wilkinson, I. 2007. Characterization of Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates from NZ sea lions (<i>Phocarctos hookeri</i>) pups during and after the epidemics on Enderby Island, Auckland Islands. <i>Veterinary Microbiology</i> 122: 178-184.
- Childerhouse, S. 2007. Conservation biology of New Zealand sea lions (<i>Phocarctos hookeri</i>). Thesis, Otago University.
- Chilvers, B. L., Wilkinson, I. S. and Childerhouse, S. 2007. New Zealand sea lion, <i>Phocarctos hookeri</i>, pup production – 1995 to 2005. <i>New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research</i> 41: 205–213.
- Chilvers, B.L., Wilkinson, I.S., Duignan, P.J. and Gemmell, N.J. 2006a. Diving to extremes: are New Zealand sea lions pushing their limits in a marginal habitat? <i>Journal of Zoology, London</i> 269: 233–240.
- Robertson, B.C., Chilvers, B.L., Duignan, P.J., Wilkinson, I.S. and Gemmell, N.J. 2006. Dispersal of breeding, adult male <i>Phocarctos hookeri</i>: implications for disease transmission, population management and species recovery. <i>Biological Conservation </i> 127: 227-236.
- Chilvers, B.L., Robertson, B.C., Wilkinson, I.S. and Duignan, P.J. 2006. Growth and survival of New Zealand sea lions, <i>Phocarctos hookeri</i>: birth to 3 months. <i>Polar Biology</i> 30: 459–469.
- Chilvers, B.L., Wilkinson, I.S., Duignan, P.J. and Gemmell, N.J. 2005. Summer foraging areas for lactating New Zealand sea lions, <i>Phocarctos hookeri</i>. <i>Marine Ecology Progress Series</i> 304: 235–247.
Évaluateurs & contributeurs (4)Personnes ayant contribué à l'évaluation IUCNExpert
Chilvers, B.L. 2015. Phocarctos hookeri. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T17026A1306343. 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 (1)— redirigent vers cette page
- Arctocephalus hookeriGray, 1844
Sources : Catalogue of Life Cross-References (synonymes) · TAXREF v18 INPN/MNHN (commentaires FR).