%2C%20Territorialverhalten.jpg?width=220)
Lion de mer de Californie
Zalophus californianus(Lesson, 1828)
5 photos · 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 Zalophus californianus 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
172 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.
Partenaires
172
Espèces avec interactions documentées
Types d'interactions
8
Prédation, pollinisation, parasitisme…
Connectance
0.069
Densité des liens dans le sous-graphe affiché
Rang animalia
98 %
Percentile vs ensemble des animalia
Liste rouge IUCN
LC · Préoccupation mineure↗Croissante- Évaluation
- 2015 · v3.1
- Altitude
- – 5 m
- Profondeur
- 400 – m
État de la populationTexte officiel évaluation IUCNExpert
Exploitation during the 19th and 20th centuries reduced the California Sea Lion population, but not as much as some other pinniped species (Gerber and Hilborn 2001). Odell (1971) estimated the size of the breeding population on the California Channel Islands to be approximately 35,000 in 1964. Since then the population size has increased considerably.
Five geographic populations have been identified based on mitochondrial DNA: 1) Pacific temperate, from California to northern Baja California; 2) Pacific subtropical, along the west coast of Baja California; 3) southern Gulf of California; 4) central Gulf of California; and 5) northern Gulf of California (Schramm et al. 2009). Using both nuclear and mitochondrial DNA, the population structure in Mexico suggests a pattern of isolation by distance resulting in at least three management units: the Pacific coast of Baja California, the southern Gulf of California, and the north-central Gulf of California (González-Suárez et al. 2009). The species does not show signs of a reduction in genetic variability (González-Suarez et al. 2009, Schramm et al. 2009, González-Suarez et al. 2010).
It is not possible to directly count individuals in order to obtain the total population size because not all age- and sex-classes are on shore at the same time. Therefore, the size of the population is estimated based on the number of births and the proportion of pups in the population following the methods developed by Boveng (1998) and Lowry et al. (1992). Pups are the only age class constantly on land during the reproductive season, and thus they are used as a reference point in estimating the other age classes. The 2007 minimum population on the Channel Islands and at haul-out sites located between Point Conception and Point Reyes was 153,337. For the same year, the estimated total population in the USA was estimated at 296,750 (Carretta et al. 2014). In Mexico, the species occupies both sides of the Baja California Peninsula. In 2010, the total population size on the Pacific coast was 58,859 individuals (Milanés-Salinas 2012) while the population in the Gulf of California consisted of 32,037 individuals (Aurioles-Gamboa, unpublished data). Thus, the total population of California Sea Lions is approximately 387,646.
The California Sea Lion population is thought to be reaching carrying capacity in the USA (Carretta et al. 2007), however recent censuses suggest the population is still increasing (Carretta et al. 2014). The Gulf of California does not show a similarly marked fluctuation (Szteren et al. 2006, Ward et al. 2010), and animals in the Gulf are genetically isolated from individuals inhabiting the rest of the species’ geographic distribution (Maldonado et al. 1995, Bowen et al. 2005, Schramm et al. 2009).
Five geographic populations have been identified based on mitochondrial DNA: 1) Pacific temperate, from California to northern Baja California; 2) Pacific subtropical, along the west coast of Baja California; 3) southern Gulf of California; 4) central Gulf of California; and 5) northern Gulf of California (Schramm et al. 2009). Using both nuclear and mitochondrial DNA, the population structure in Mexico suggests a pattern of isolation by distance resulting in at least three management units: the Pacific coast of Baja California, the southern Gulf of California, and the north-central Gulf of California (González-Suárez et al. 2009). The species does not show signs of a reduction in genetic variability (González-Suarez et al. 2009, Schramm et al. 2009, González-Suarez et al. 2010).
It is not possible to directly count individuals in order to obtain the total population size because not all age- and sex-classes are on shore at the same time. Therefore, the size of the population is estimated based on the number of births and the proportion of pups in the population following the methods developed by Boveng (1998) and Lowry et al. (1992). Pups are the only age class constantly on land during the reproductive season, and thus they are used as a reference point in estimating the other age classes. The 2007 minimum population on the Channel Islands and at haul-out sites located between Point Conception and Point Reyes was 153,337. For the same year, the estimated total population in the USA was estimated at 296,750 (Carretta et al. 2014). In Mexico, the species occupies both sides of the Baja California Peninsula. In 2010, the total population size on the Pacific coast was 58,859 individuals (Milanés-Salinas 2012) while the population in the Gulf of California consisted of 32,037 individuals (Aurioles-Gamboa, unpublished data). Thus, the total population of California Sea Lions is approximately 387,646.
The California Sea Lion population is thought to be reaching carrying capacity in the USA (Carretta et al. 2007), however recent censuses suggest the population is still increasing (Carretta et al. 2014). The Gulf of California does not show a similarly marked fluctuation (Szteren et al. 2006, Ward et al. 2010), and animals in the Gulf are genetically isolated from individuals inhabiting the rest of the species’ geographic distribution (Maldonado et al. 1995, Bowen et al. 2005, Schramm et al. 2009).
Menaces identifiées(8 menaces classées CMP-IUCN)
5_4_2Intentional use: (large scale) [harvest]Past, Unlikely to Return5_4_4Unintentional effects: (large scale) [harvest]Ongoing5_4_5Persecution/controlOngoing8_1_2Named speciesOngoing8_2_1Unspecified speciesOngoing9_1_3Type Unknown/UnrecordedOngoing9_2_3Type Unknown/UnrecordedOngoing9_3_4Type Unknown/UnrecordedOngoing
Description complète des menacesTexte détaillé évaluation IUCNExpert
Conflicts with fisheries, poaching and entanglement in marine debris contribute to California Sea Lion mortality (Stewart and Yochem 1987, Howorth 1994, Harcourt et al. 1994, Zavala and Mellink 1996, Aurioles-Gamboa et al. 2003). Prey availability is greatly reduced during El Niño events and large numbers of pups born during these periods die of starvation, as do weaker animals of all age classes (Francis and Heath 1991, Shirasago-German et al. 2015). Sea lion rookeries in the Gulf of California do not appear to be greatly influenced by El Niño events (Aurioles and Le Boeuf 1991, Szteren et al. 2006).
California Sea Lions accumulate pollutants through the food chain, and large amounts of DDT and PCBs discharged in the past continue to accumulate in coastal marine food chains that include this species (DeLong et al. 1973, Le Boeuf et al. 2002). California Sea Lions occasionally die of paralytic shellfish poisoning caused by domoic acid, a biotoxin produced by diatom blooms that enters the food web through planktivorous fish, such as Herring and Sardines (Scholin et al. 2000, Silvagni et al. 2005). Diseases also contribute to California Sea Lion mortality, including some contracted from terrestrial animals, like leptospirosis (Vedros et al. 1971), an endemic disease with periodic epidemics of acute disease (Lloyd-Smith et al. 2007). Contact with feral and domestic dogs and other terrestrial animals may expose the species to additional diseases like brucellosis, which may cause miscarriages (Goldstein et al. 2009, Avalos-Tellez et al. 2014).
California Sea Lions accumulate pollutants through the food chain, and large amounts of DDT and PCBs discharged in the past continue to accumulate in coastal marine food chains that include this species (DeLong et al. 1973, Le Boeuf et al. 2002). California Sea Lions occasionally die of paralytic shellfish poisoning caused by domoic acid, a biotoxin produced by diatom blooms that enters the food web through planktivorous fish, such as Herring and Sardines (Scholin et al. 2000, Silvagni et al. 2005). Diseases also contribute to California Sea Lion mortality, including some contracted from terrestrial animals, like leptospirosis (Vedros et al. 1971), an endemic disease with periodic epidemics of acute disease (Lloyd-Smith et al. 2007). Contact with feral and domestic dogs and other terrestrial animals may expose the species to additional diseases like brucellosis, which may cause miscarriages (Goldstein et al. 2009, Avalos-Tellez et al. 2014).
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★10_2Marine Oceanic - Mesopelagic (200-1000m)
Mesures de conservation recommandéesStratégies de conservation IUCNExpert
Protection, which began in the mid-20th century in the United States, was solidified with the passage of the U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 and similar laws in Mexico. These protective measures provided the impetus for recovery of the population. At coastal sites and on most offshore islands, tourism is highly regulated and controlled. The National Marine Fisheries Service regularly monitors the California Sea Lion population in US waters. The Mexican federal government’s Comisión Nacional de Areas Naturales Protegidas (National Commission of Natural Protected Areas) has conducted annual censuses and monitored the health of the California Sea Lion populations in the Gulf of California since 2011.
Actions de conservation (2)Conservation Actions Classification Scheme — IUCNExpert
1_1Site/area protection2_1Site/area management
Stress écologiques (10)Stresses Classification — IUCNExpert
1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation1_2Ecosystem degradation2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_1Species mortality2_2Species disturbance2_3_7Reduced reproductive success
Priorités de recherche (3)Research Needed Classification — IUCNExpert
1_2Population size, distribution & trends1_5Threats3_1Population trends
Niche IUCN globaleRealms · Systems · LMEs · Growth forms · FAOs — biogéographie IUCNExpert
Royaumes biogéographiques
Nearctic
Systèmes (terrestre/eau douce/marin)
TerrestrialMarine
Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs)
Gulf of AlaskaGulf of CaliforniaCalifornia CurrentPacific Central American Coastal
Zones de pêche FAO
Pacific - northeastPacific - eastern central
Références bibliographiques (30)Sources scientifiques de l'évaluation IUCNExpert
- Shirasago-German, B., Perez-Lezama, E.L., Chavez, E.A. and Garcia-Morales, R. 2015. Influence of El Nino-Southern Oscillation on the population structure of a sea lion breeding colony in the Gulf of California. <i>Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science</i> 154: 69-76.
- Arellano-Peralta, V.A. and Medrano-Gonzalez, L. 2015. Ecology, conservation and human history of marine mammals in the Gulf of California and Pacific coast of Baja California, Mexico. <i>Ocean & Coastal Management</i> 104: 90-105.
- IUCN. 2015. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2015-4. Available at: <a href="www.iucnredlist.org">www.iucnredlist.org</a>. (Accessed: 19 November 2015).
- Bohórquez-Herrera, J., Hernández-Camacho C.J., Aurioles-Gamboa, D. and Cruz- Escalona, V. 2014. Plasticity in the agonistic behaviour of male California sea lions, <i>Zalophus californianus</i>. <i>Animal Behavior</i> 89: 31-38.
- Avalos-Téllez R., Ramírez-Pfeiffer, C., Sánchez-Domínguez, C., Zavala- Norzagaray, A., Hernández-Castro, R., Arellano-Reynoso, B., Suárez-Güemes, F., Díaz-Aparicio, E., Aguirre, A.A. and Aurioles-Gamboa, D. 2014. Infection of California sea lions (<i>Zalophus californianus</i>) with terrestrial <i>Brucella</i> spp. <i>The Veterinary Journal</i> 202: 198-200.
- Carretta J.V. Oleson E., Weller D.W., Lang A.R., Forney K.A., Baker J., Hanson B., Martien K., Muto M.M., Orr A.J., Huber H., Lowry M.S., Barlow J., Lynch D., Carswell L., Brownell R.L. Jr. and Mattila D.K. 2014. U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments; 2013. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-532.
- Milanés-Salinas, M.A. 2012. Abundancia y distribución del lobo marino de California (<i>Zalophus californianus</i>) en el Pacífico Mexicano. Tesis de Maestría en Oceanografía Costera, Fac. de Ciencias Marinas, UABC.
- Villegas-Amtmann, S., Simmons, S.E., Kuhn, C.E., Huckstadt, L.A. and Costa, D.P. 2011. Latitudinal range influences the seasonal variation in the foraging behavior of marine top predators. <i>PLoS One</i> 6(8):e23166.
- Orr, A.J., VanBlaricom, G.R., DeLong, R.L., Cruz-Escalona, V.H. and Newsome,S.D. 2011. Intraspecific comparison of diet of California sea lions (<i>Zalophus californianus</i>) assessed using fecal and stable isotope analyses. <i>Canadian Journal of Zoology</i> 89(2): 109-122.
- Ward, J.E., Chirakkal, H., González-Suárez, M., Aurioles-Gamboa, D., Holmes, E.E. and Gerber, L. 2010. Inferring spatial structure from time-series data: using multivariate state-space models to detect metapopulation structure of California sea lions in the Gulf of California, Mexico. <i>Journal of Applied Ecology</i> 47: 47-56.
- Weise M.J., Harvey, J.T. and Costa, D.P. 2010. The role of body size in individual-based foraging strategies of a top marine predator. <i>Ecology</i> 91(4): 1004-1015.
- González-Suárez, M., Aurioles-Gamboa, D. and Gerber, L.R. 2010. Past exploitation of California sea lions did not lead to a genetic bottleneck in the Gulf of California. <i>Ciencias Marinas</i> 36(3): 199-211.
- Braje, J.T. and DeLong, R.L. 2009. Ancient sea mammal exploitation on the south coast of San Miguel Island. In: C.C. Damiani and D.K. Garcelon (eds), Proceedings of the 7th California Islands Symposium. Institute for Wildlife Studies, Arcata, CA., pp. 43-53.
- Goldstein, T., Zabka, T.S., DeLong, R.L., Wheeler, E.A., Ylitalo, G., Bargu, S., Silver, M., Leighfield, T., Van Dolah, F., Langlois, G., Sidor, I., Dunn, J.L. and Gulland, F.M.D. 2009. The role of domoic acid in abortion and premature parturition of California sea lions (<i>Zalophus californianus</i>) on San Miguel Island, California. <i>Journal of Wildlife Diseases</i> 45: 91-108.
- González-Suárez, M., Flatz, R., Aurioles-Gamboa, D., Hedrick, P.W. and Gerber L.R. 2009. Isolation by distance among California sea lion populations in Mexico: redefining management stocks. <i>Molecular Biology</i> 18: 1088-1099.
- Schramm, Y., Mesnick, S.L., de la Rosa, J., Palacios, D.M., Lowry, M.S., Aurioles-Gamboa, D. and Escorza-Treviño, S. 2009. Phylogeography of California and Galápagos sea lions and population structure within the California sea lion. <i>Marine Biology</i> 156(7): 1375-1387.
- Hernández-Camacho C., Aurioles-Gamboa, D. and Gerber, L.R. 2008b. Age-specific birth rates of California sea lions (<i>Zalophus californianus</i>) in the Gulf of California, Mexico. <i>Marine Mammal Science</i> 24(3): 664-676.
- García-Aguilar, M.C. and Aurioles-Gamboa, D. 2008b. Cuidado materno en el lobo marino de California de Los Islotes, Golfo de California, México. <i>Ciencias Marinas</i> 29(4): 573-583.
- Hernández-Camacho C., Aurioles-Gamboa, D., Laake, J. and Gerber, L.R. 2008a. Survival rates of the California sea lion, <i>Zalophus californianus</i>, in Mexico. <i>Journal of Mammalogy</i> 89(4): 1059-1066.
- Weise, M.J. and Harvey, J.T. 2008. Temporal variability in ocean climate and California sea lion diet and biomass consumption: implications for fisheries resources and management. <i>Marine Ecology Progress Series</i> 373: 157-172.
- Melin, S.R., DeLong, R.L. and Siniff, D.B. 2008. The effects of El Niño on the foraging behavior of lactating California sea lions (<i>Zalophus californianus californianus</i>) during the nonbreeding season. <i>Canadian Journal of Zoology</i> 86(192-206).
- Sakahira, F. and Niimi, M. 2007. Ancient DNA Analysis of the Japanese Sea Lion (<i>Zalophus japonicus japonicus</i> Peters, 1866): Preliminary results using mitochondrial control-region sequences. <i>Zoological Sciences</i> 24: 81-85.
- Aurioles-Gamboa, D. and Camacho-Ríos, F.J. 2007. Diet and feeding overlap of two otariids, <i>Zalophus californianus</i> and <i>Arctocephalus townsendi</i>: Implications to survive environmental uncertainty. <i>Aquatic Mammals</i> 33(3): 315-326.
- Weise, M. J. and Costa, D. P. 2007. Total body oxygen stores and physiological diving capacity of California sea lions as function of sex and age. <i>Journal of Experimental Biology</i> 210: 278-289.
- Lloyd-Smith, J.O., Greig, D., Ghneim, G., Hietala, S., Palmer, L., St. Leger, J., Grenfell, B.T. and Gulland, F.M.D. 2007. Cyclical changes in seroprevalence of leptospirosis in California sea lions: endemic and epidemic disease in one host species? <i>BMC Infectious Diseases</i> 7: 125.
- Wolf, J.B.W., Tautz, D. and Trillmich, F. 2007. Galapagos and Californian sea lions are separate species: genetic analysis of the genus <i>Zalophus</i> and its implications for conservation management. <i>Frontiers in Zoology</i> 4: doi:10.1186/1742-9994-4-20.
- Carretta J.V., Forney, K.A., Lowry, M.S., Barlow, J., Baker, J., Hanson, B. and Muto, M.M. 2007. U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments: 2007. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-414.
- Newsome, S. D., Koch, P. L., Etnier, M. A. and Aurioles, D. G. 2006. Using carbon and nitrogen isotope values to investigate maternal strategies in Northeast Pacific otariids. <i>Marine Mammal Science</i> 22(3): 556-572.
- Weise, M.J., Costa, D.P. and Kudela, R. 2006. Movement and diving behavior of male California sea lion (<i>Zalophus californianus</i>) during anomalous oceanographic conditions of 2005 compared to those of 2004. <i> Geophysical Research Letters </i> 33 L22S10.
- Szteren, D., Aurioles, D. and Gerber, L. 2006. Population status and trends of the California Sea lion in the Gulf of California, Mexico. In: A. Trites, S. Atkinson, D. DeMaster, L. Fritz, T. Gelatt, L. Re and K. Wynne (eds), <i>Sea Lions of the World</i>, pp. 369-384. University of Alaska Fairbanks.
Évaluateurs & contributeurs (3)Personnes ayant contribué à l'évaluation IUCNExpert
assessor
Aurioles-Gamboa, D. & Hernández-Camacho, J.
evaluator
Harvey, J.
facilitators
Lowry, L., Ahonen, H., Pollock, C.M., Chiozza, F. & Battistoni, A.
Aurioles-Gamboa, D. & Hernández-Camacho, J. 2015. Zalophus californianus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T41666A45230310. Accessed on 05 May 2026.
Traits biologiques
22 valeurs · 8 sources
Morphologie(5)
Cycle de vie(1)
Voir 16 traits de plus (3 catégories)Replier
Reproduction(6)
Écologie & habitat(9)
Divers(1)
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 (3)— redirigent vers cette page
- Otaria californianaLesson, 1828
- Otaria gillespiiMacBain, 1858
- Zalophus californianus californianus(Lesson, 1828)
Sources : Catalogue of Life Cross-References (synonymes) · TAXREF v18 INPN/MNHN (commentaires FR).