Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 286

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 91 of the 91 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The social and reproductive biology of Humpback Whales: an ecological perspective

CLAPHAM, PHILLIP J.·1996·Mammal Review

Abstract

Existing knowledge of the social organization, mating system and reproduction of Humpback Whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) is reviewed to assess how our current understanding of this wide‐ranging marine mammal fits into the predictive framework developed from ecological studies of more accessible terrestrial taxa. The small unstable groups characteristic of this species on its summer feeding grounds appear to be a function of absence of predation and of the patchy, mobile nature of most prey; the absence of territoriality and the minimal importance of kinship in associations are also predictable consequences of the latter. The mating system is similar to both leks and to male dominance polygyny, in which males display (sing) or directly compete (perhaps sometimes in coalitions) for access to females. However, the rigid spatial structure characteristic of classic leks is absent. The mating system of this species is sufficiently different to merit a novel category, and ‘floating lek’ is proposed. The widespread distribution of females resulting from absence of both predation and resources during the breeding season preclude simultaneous monopolization by males of more than one potential mate. Furthermore, these factors, together with a male‐biased operational sex ratio, minimize the possibility of competition among females. The intensity of intrasexual competition among males conforms to predictions derived from information on testis size and from expectation of future reproductive success. Female choice and, to a lesser extent, differential allocation of competitive effort by males, appears likely. Lack of interpopulation variation in social and mating behaviour, and in general reproductive biology, is likely a response to similarity of marine environmental conditions. Year‐to‐year variation in reproductive rates may be linked to variations in the abundance of prey. The invariably uniparous nature of female Humpback Whales is assumed to be related to the energetic demands of lactation, and the lower ratio of available energy partitioned to reproduction that is characteristic of larger mammals. The reversed sexual size dimorphism of this species may reflect different selective pressures on males and females. Finally, there is now evidence that, as in some other taxa, offspring sex ratio is related to maternal condition.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2907.1996.tb00145.x

Cites

91 of 91 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 91 references

Metadata

Authors
CLAPHAM, P. J.
Venue
Mammal Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1996-03
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
27-49
ISSN
  • 0305-1838 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2907
OpenAlex
W2079212173
Cited by
286
References
91
FWCI
3.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The social and reproductive biology of Humpback Whales: an ecological perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2907.1996.tb00145.x
The paper
CLAPHAM, P. J. (1996). The social and reproductive biology of Humpback Whales: an ecological perspective. Mammal Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2907.1996.tb00145.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.