(2006) requiring the C:N ratio and the isotopic discrimination factor between lipid and protein (D = 7.018 ± 0.263) of the sample, and a constant (I = 0.048 ± 0.013). After carbonate extraction of krill samples, the sample C:N threshold values were also used to confirm that carbonates had been fully extracted (Søreide et al. 2006). Normalization click here for the effects of lipid on δ13C values in fin and humpback whale skin is not currently possible and standard chemical lipid extraction procedures lead to unpredictable changes

in δ15N values (Ryan et al. 2012a, Lesage et al. 2010). Therefore δ13C values from lipid-extracted skin and δ15N values analyzed from nonextracted aliquots of skin were used as end-members (consumers) in mixing models. Diet solutions were estimated by mixing models via Bayesian inference using the SIAR package in the statistical programming environment, R (Parnell et al. 2008, R Development Core Team 2011). SIAR utilizes the generalized multivariate equivalent of the Beta

distribution, Dirichlet, as a prior which treats each dietary source (prey) independently but necessitates a sum to unity (i.e., that diet proportions sum to 1). Models are fitted hierarchically using Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) to produce parameter estimates based on both the data and the prior distribution. Probabilistic density estimates of proportionate dietary contributions of sources (prey) to end members (whale skin) are thus Midostaurin purchase derived. The advantage of this approach over alternative mixing model techniques is the ability to include uncertainty that is unconstrained by the MCE公司 number of sources used (Phillips and Gregg 2003). SIAR was chosen over other Bayesian mixing models (e.g., MixSIR) as it includes a residual error term which is incorporated into diet solutions, thereby recognizing unknown sources of error in the observed data. Thus uncertainty in inter alia: trophic enrichment factors, sources, and end members are explicitly accounted for in the SIAR model (Parnell et al. 2010). Using fish muscle and whole zooplankton as sources and whale skin as end

members (prey), 500,000 iterations (thinned by 20 and with a burn-in discard of 10,000) were used to derive posterior distributions of source contributions. The diet-tissue discrimination factors used in our mixing models, for both fin and humpback whales (1.28 ± 0.38 for δ13C and 2.82 ± 0.30 for δ15N) were derived for lipid-extracted fin whale skin (Borrell et al. 2012). Lipid-extraction leads to small but unpredictable changes in δ15N values (0.1‰ ± 1.2 SD) in fin and humpback whale skin (Ryan et al. 2012b). This discrepancy represents a caveat, albeit a very minor one, in our study. No such discrimination factors have been calculated for humpback whales, however, closely related cetacean taxa are known to exhibit similar values (Newsome et al. 2010, Caut et al. 2011). Whale species (fin and humpback whale) was used as a grouping factor to investigate resource preferences by species.