Weaving together Inuit knowledge and western science: a mixed-methods case study of qilalugaq (beluga whale) in Quaqtaq, Nunavik
Abstract
The harvest and consumption of country food is a cornerstone of Inuit culture, sovereignty, food security, and nutrition. Qilalugaq (beluga whales) (Delphinapterus leucas (Pallas, 1776)) are hunted across the Canadian Arctic and are an especially important food source for Inuit communities in Nunavik, northern Québec, Canada. The presence of environmental contaminants and nutrients in beluga has been the subject of recent research interest, including the role of selenoneine and its interactions with methylmercury. Using interviews conducted in Quaqtaq and analyses of beluga tissue samples harvested by hunters, this study aimed to bridge Inuit knowledge and scientific knowledge to understand how beluga hunting, preparation, and consumption practices may explain the different levels of selenoneine found in Nunavimmiut (Inuit from Nunavik). It also sought to characterize the health, social, and cultural importance of beluga and factors influencing its consumption. Research findings confirmed the important role of beluga in Nunavimmiut culture, food security, and nutrition. Findings documented gender-based consumption practices, including consumption of the selenoneine-rich beluga tail exclusively by women, which may explain previously documented gender differences in blood selenoneine levels. This study demonstrates the utility of weaving Inuit knowledge and scientific knowledge to inform future environmental health research, public health communications, and wildlife comanagement.
Introduction
The harvest and consumption of traditional foods (often called country foods) is a cornerstone of Inuit culture, sovereignty, food security, and nutrition across Inuit Nunangat (homelands) (Hoover et al. 2016). For Nunavimmiut (Inuit from Nunavik, northern Québec), country foods such as Arctic char, seal, beluga, caribou, birds, shellfish, and berries are vital sources of calories, protein, essential fatty acids, and micronutrients (Kuhnlein and Receveur 2007; Johnson-Down and Egeland 2010; Pufall et al. 2011; Gagné et al. 2012; Jamieson et al. 2012; Lemire et al. 2015; Rosol et al. 2016; Kenny et al. 2018). Country foods are also an important alternative to store-bought foods, which can be expensive, culturally incongruent, and less nutrient-dense (Kuhnlein and Receveur 1996; Fa et al. 2003; Hughes and Lawrence 2005; Bharucha and Pretty 2010; Ferguson et al. 2016). Within a complex country food system, the hunting, butchering, and consumption of the qilalugaq—the beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas (Pallas, 1776))—represents an important opportunity to practice and strengthen embedded knowledge and traditions, enhance community sharing and unity, and provide culturally preferred nutritious food for communities (Tyrrell 2007, 2008; Waugh et al. 2018).
In the Eastern Canadian Arctic, beluga whales can be found along the coasts of Hudson Bay, James Bay, and Ungava Bay (DFO 2018). Four genetically distinct stocks of beluga have been identified, including the eastern Hudson Bay (EHB), western Hudson Bay (WHB), Ungava Bay, and James Bay stocks (DFO 2018; Johnson et al. 2020). Since the mid-1980s, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) has worked to protect and preserve beluga populations in Canada (Tyrrell 2008). In 2008, the Nunavik Marine Region Wildlife Board (NMRWB) was created under the Nunavik Inuit Land Claims Agreement (NILCA) (Nunavik Marine Region Wildlife Board 2019). The NMRWB is recognized as the main instrument of wildlife management in the Nunavik Marine Region and regulates access to wildlife through its use of seasonal closures and total allowable take (TAT, i.e., community harvest quota) measures, primarily to protect the EHB stock, which was designated “endangered” by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC 2004). The NMRWB approved its first beluga management plan in 2010 (DFO 2010); this plan is renewed every three to 5 years, with the current plan in effect for 2021–26 (Department of Fisheries and Oceans 2021).
While country foods are important sources of energy and nutrients, marine mammals and some species of fish contain elevated levels of environmental contaminants, including methylmercury (MeHg) and persistent organic pollutants (POPs) (Donaldson et al. 2010). Environmental contaminants accumulate in Arctic marine ecosystems. Once in the food chain, contaminants biomagnify at higher trophic levels and bioaccumulate over the life course of animals, with potential health implications for Inuit communities that rely on locally harvested wildlife (Kuhnlein and Chan 2000; Clayden et al. 2015). Due in part to national and international regulations (e.g., the Stockholm Convention), the presence of POPs (e.g., polychlorinated biphenyls and DDT) in Arctic ecosystems has been declining in recent years; however, there remains concern over MeHg and emerging contaminants (e.g., per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) (Donaldson et al. 2010; AMAP 2016). MeHg is found in particularly high concentrations in beluga meat (including nikku, which is meat that has been air-dried) (Lemire et al. 2015). Overexposure to MeHg has been associated with a variety of health effects among Inuit, including obstetric (e.g., shorter gestation), perinatal (e.g., fine neuromotor function and visual acuity), and cardiovascular (e.g., heart rate variability) outcomes (Pirkle et al. 2016).
Several laboratory and animal studies suggest that selenium (Se) compounds may be involved in the demethylation and detoxification of MeHg (Cuvin-Aralar and Furness 1991; Palmisano et al. 1995; Khan and Wang 2009; Yamashita et al. 2013). Inuit consume large amounts of Se in country foods and display some of the highest blood concentrations of Se of any population in the world (Achouba et al. 2019; Little et al. 2019). A recent area of interest for our research team is the possible detoxification of MeHg by a Se compound called selenoneine (Achouba et al. 2019; Little et al. 2019). Selenoneine is a recently discovered Se analogue of ergothioneine and was identified in some marine foods (Yamashita et al. 2010; Yamashita and Yamashita 2010). Selenoneine is a strong antioxidant and has been shown to promote mercury demethylation in zebrafish models (Yamashita et al. 2013). Such evidence indicates that elevated dietary intake of selenoneine may be a protective factor against health risks associated with MeHg exposure, although this has not been proven in human populations (Yamashita et al. 2013; Little et al. 2019).
Recent research in Nunavik revealed that selenoneine represents the primary form of Se in beluga mattaaq (skin and attached underlying fat layer), a delicacy highly praised by Inuit and consumed across Nunavik (Achouba et al. 2019). Our previous work has also demonstrated that Nunavimmiut possess very high concentrations of selenoneine in their red blood cells (RBCs), especially Elders and people who consume larger amounts of beluga mattaaq (Little et al. 2019). RBC selenoneine concentrations are considerably higher among Inuit women on average, even after controlling for total beluga mattaaq consumption (Achouba et al. 2019; Little et al. 2019). After reporting these results to the Anguvigak, otherwise known as the Regional Nunavimmi Umajulivijiit Katujaqatigininga (RNUK; the Nunavik Regional Hunters and Trappers Association), members in attendance mentioned that traditional cultural practices dictate different consumption patterns between women and men, and specifically, mattaaq from the tail region of the whale tends to be reserved for women. This discussion led to two important research questions: is mattaaq from the tail of beluga whales higher in selenoneine than mattaaq from other parts of the whales, and does this cultural practice lead to higher intakes of selenoneine among women compared with men? We sought to answer this question by weaving together Inuit knowledge and western scientific methods.
Inuit knowledge refers to social, cultural, governance, biophysical, health, and ecological knowledge of Inuit acquired and shared through life experiences and intergenerational transmission. Other terms exist, including Inuit Qaujimajatagangit (IQ, literally “that which has been long known by Inuit”) (White 2006), which is often seen as a broader concept encompassing “values, world-view, language, social organization, knowledge, life skills, perceptions, and experiences” (Anonymous, as quoted in Wenzel 2004). The discourse on Inuit Qaujimajatagangit as an ontology, epistemology, knowledge system, and tool of resistance and decolonization has been primarily driven by Nunavummiut (Inuit from Nunavut) and Nunavut institutions (Wenzel 2004; Tester and Irniq 2008; Wilson et al. 2020), with limited validation and uptake in other regions of Inuit Nunangat, including Nunavik (Fletcher et al. 2017; Nunavik Marine Region Wildlife Board 2019). Meanwhile, Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) is frequently used in reference to Inuit knowledge focused on ecological processes and relationships (Berkes and Usher 2000; Furgal and Laing 2011; Waugh et al. 2018). While there is ongoing debate about appropriate terminology and translations (Wenzel 2004; Pfeifer 2018), we use the term Inuit knowledge in this study, as it encompasses (but is not limited to) ecological knowledge, avoids the connotation that such knowledge is purely “traditional” (Bell 2002; Wenzel 2004), and is more frequently used in Nunavik when compared with IQ (Weatherhead et al. 2010; Cuerrier et al. 2015; Breton-Honeyman et al. 2016b).
It is widely recognized that Inuit knowledge can make large contributions to framing and conducting environmental health research, including topics related to marine wildlife ecology and health (Mymrin and Huntington 1999; Breton-Honeyman et al. 2016a; Ostertag et al. 2018; Calvo-Lerma et al. 2019; Carlos and Fikret 2019; Martinez-Levasseur et al. 2020), marine wildlife management (Tyrrell 2007; Dale and Armitage 2011; Thornton and Scheer 2012; Weiss et al. 2013; Breton-Honeyman et al. 2021), and biomonitoring and exposure assessment (Lemire et al. 2015; Pontual et al. 2021). There is growing recognition of the need to weave together multiple types of knowledge, including Inuit knowledge and science-based knowledge, to improve coastal and marine research, monitoring, and management (Alexander et al. 2019). Benefits of this practice include improved understandings of social-ecological systems, trust in decision-making, and collaboration on desirable pathways for the future (Tengö et al. 2014). For example, Ostertag et al. (2018) demonstrate how the coproduction of scientific and traditional ecological knowledge can be useful for beluga health monitoring in the Inuvialuit Settlement Region, in the western Arctic. Similarly, Waugh et al. (2018) discuss how research and Inuit knowledge of beluga can be used to understand the implications on hunting and food preparations under changing climatic conditions. Inuit knowledge can also contribute to public health decision-making, particularly in regard to nutrition and the role of country foods (Egeland et al. 2009; Kral et al. 2011; Byers et al. 2019; Martinez-Levasseur et al. 2020). Despite the demonstrated usefulness of Inuit knowledge for understanding the interactions of health, marine wildlife, and the environment, there has been limited documentation of Inuit knowledge on beluga whales in the Eastern Canadian Arctic, including Nunavik (Breton-Honeyman et al. 2016a). This study therefore aims to characterize the health, social, and cultural importance of beluga and the factors influencing its consumption. Additionally, this study aims to weave Inuit knowledge and laboratory analyses of beluga tissue samples to understand how hunting, preparation, gendered food preferences, and consumption practices may account for the different levels of selenoneine found between Inuit women and men in Nunavik.
Materials and methods
Study area and research design
This mixed-methods project employed semistructured interviews with Inuit hunters and laboratory analyses of beluga tissue samples. Community-based work was carried out over 14 days during October–November 2018 and 15 days in June 2019 in Quaqtaq, Nunavik (Fig. 1). Quaqtaq is a village (population approximately 400) on the Hudson Strait shoreline that is well known for hunting beluga whales during the spring and fall migrations. This project was developed in coordination with (and approved by) the RNUK, the Quaqtaq Anguvigapik (otherwise known as the local Nunavimmi Umajulivijiit Katujaqatigininga (LNUK), the local hunters, fishers, and trappers association), the NMRWB, the Nunavik Nutrition and Health Committee (NNHC), and researchers at the University of Victoria, the University of Guelph, Université Laval, and the Institut national de santé publique du Québec (May–October 2018). The University of Guelph Research Ethics Board approved the project (September 2018).
Fig. 1.
Recruitment and documentation of Inuit knowledge
In October–November 2018 and June 2019, we recruited Nunavimmiut hunters and community members in Quaqtaq for interviews using word-of-mouth, posters, radio advertisements, and social media. Inclusion criteria were that participants be at least 18 years of age, identified as Inuit, and capable of providing consent. Since women increasingly participate in hunting beluga and have always held special roles in butchering, processing, and preparing beluga for consumption, recruitment efforts targeted a balance of women and men. Not all participants were residents of Quaqtaq, since the village is a popular hunting destination for residents of other communities in Nunavik. All interviews were conducted by the first author. All participants provided free, informed verbal consent prior to the interview. A local interpreter was hired to assist with the interviews, and participants had the option of conducting interviews in English or Inuktitut with immediate translation to English by the interpreter. Interviews were conducted in a private setting, lasted between 30 and 60 min, and were audio-recorded. During analysis and reporting, participants remained confidential and anonymous. Interviews were semistructured and collected information about methods of beluga harvesting, butchering, sharing, and preparation; generational and gender differences in beluga hunting and consumption; knowledge and experiences with beluga; and the significance of beluga on health, culture, and food security. Participants were also encouraged to share knowledge on beluga migration patterns and hunting sites using erasable markers on a laminated 1:25,000 satellite image map of the Quaqtaq region derived from Google Earth. Photographs of each annotated map were taken, and these were compiled into one map showing local knowledge on migratory routes and seasonal hunting locations using Esri (ArcGIS).
Qualitative data analysis
English components of recordings were transcribed verbatim. Recordings and transcripts are currently held by the first author and will be transferred to the RNUK following the finalization of a data sharing agreement, in line with the data ownership principles outlined in the National Inuit Strategy on Research (ITK 2018a). NVivo (Version 12, 2018; QSR International) was used to analyze transcripts using a thematic analysis methodology. Specifically, we employed an inductive approach consistent with the methodologies described by (Braun and Clarke 2009), with data being interpreted at the semantic (explicit) level. The first and second authors conducted initial coding separately before establishing a consensus on codes, refining these into overarching themes, and writing the manuscript. Results of the thematic analysis and annotated mapping activity were reviewed and discussed with four hunters in Quaqtaq in November 2019 and June 2022 to validate the research findings.
Beluga tissue collection and analysis
Biological samples were obtained from four female beluga whales that had been harvested by Inuit hunters in Quaqtaq during the fall 2018 and spring 2019 hunts. Mattaaq samples were drawn from the beluga's pectoral, dorsal, and tail fins (Fig. 2). Selenoneine and its methylated metabolite Se-methylselenoneine were quantified in mattaaq, using high-performance liquid chromatography/inductively coupled tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-ICP-MS/MS) (Achouba et al. 2019). The fat layer was removed from each sample with a scalpel, leaving the skin layer, which was frozen in liquid nitrogen and pulverized with a mortar and pestle. For selenoneine extraction, 50 mg of the skin powder was homogenized in 15 mL of a 50 mmol/L DTT aqueous solution using an ultraprobe sonification (Misonix Fisher Scientific Sonic Dismembrator 550; Fisher Scientific, Ottawa, ON) at 20% (100 W) for 2 min. The homogenate was then centrifuged and filtered through a 10 kDA centrifugal filter. The filtrate was concentrated under vacuum and taken up in 1 mL of ultrapure water. For the HPLC-ICP-MS/MS analysis, samples were diluted to 1:10 in the mobile phase, and 10 mL of the internal standards solution was added. The selenoneine standard was biosynthesized using a genetically modified yeast strain and purified by solid phase extraction. Pooled beluga skin homogenate was used as an in-house quality control sample for analyses since no reference material is commercially available. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the mean selenoneine concentration between the mattaaq samples drawn from the pectoral, dorsal, and tail regions.
Fig. 2.
Results
Fifteen Nunavimmiut were interviewed, including ten men (67%) and five women (33%). Participants’ ages ranged from 20–66 years, with a median age of 37. A majority of the participants were residents of Quaqtaq, although some lived in other communities in Nunavik and had travelled to Quaqtaq to hunt beluga for their home communities, a practice that has become increasingly common due to the accessibility of air travel in Nunavik and the availability of financial support for hunters through LNUKs.
Inuit knowledge on migratory patterns
Hunters confirmed that the EHB and WHB stocks overwinter in Hudson Strait and the Labrador Sea and migrate through Hudson Strait into Hudson Bay for the summer. Both the EHB and WHB beluga stocks followed predictable seasonal migratory patterns past Quaqtaq (Fig. 3). The fall migration follows the Hudson Strait shoreline past Kangiqsujuaq (a village approximately 140 km west-northwest of Quaqtaq) and along the coast of Diana Bay before navigating around the Quaqtaq Peninsula, including the Quaqtaq village site, Nuuvuuk (Cape Hope), Inuksuapiq (a common spring camping site), and southward toward Kangirsuk (a village approximately 120 km south of Quaqtaq). The spring migration route follows a similar route in reverse, but whales often follow the ice floe's edge instead of the shoreline; as a result, beluga whales typically avoid traveling deep into Diana Bay due to the persistence of sea ice at that time of year.
Fig. 3.
Inuit knowledge of beluga hunting and butchering
Hunting for belugas in Quaqtaq coincides with the seasonal migration and occurs in the spring (typically occurring mid- to late-June) and the fall (typically late October until late November). When identifying belugas to pursue, the most common selection criterion for hunters was size. Larger whales, typically males, were considered ideal. Some hunters could distinguish adult whales by sex according to their size, with males being larger than females, although one hunter refuted this. While most hunters preferred the taste of smaller whales, maximizing the quantity of harvested food was deemed more important than taste preference. Hunters pointed to the quota system outlined in the 2017–2020 beluga management plan as their rationale for pursuing larger whales, as this decision ensured a large food yield while still abiding by the TAT. Some hunters reported additional selection criteria, including “cleanliness” (i.e., a lack of blemishes, which may indicate injury or disease) and colouring (older whales are white/yellowish and younger whales are grey). Hunters also typically avoid harvesting whales that are obviously pregnant or those traveling with calves (newborns). Of the hunters that were asked about the EHB and WHB stocks, about half were unaware of these different groups. Others were aware of the stocks and suggested there may be size differences but were unable to distinguish between belugas belonging to each stock. A few hunters mentioned that EHB stocks migrate past Quaqtaq prior to the WHB in the fall but were unsure about the migration timings of these stocks in the spring. No hunters considered stock as a criterion for selecting a beluga to harvest. When asked how they decide on a whale to pursue, one hunter summarized:
Usually the ones with calves, we don't want to shoot them, we try to make sure the one we're shooting at, if there's a gray [calf] beside it, we don't touch them. You can see the size of the head and hump on the back […] usually when its hump is bigger, it's usually a male […] we also look at the size of the whale, and colouration too. Sometimes, it's a little bit yellowish, the colour, that usually says it's a large bull, so we try to go for those ones too. Plus, the males, they usually stick together, you can see three, four, almost same size and they're all white or yellowish, not gray. Those ones we usually go after (37-year-old male hunter).
Hunters used a variety of equipment to hunt beluga, including canoes (umiaq; usually 20–24 ft cedar strip canoes with outboard motors), and unaaq (a harpoon) attached to an avataq (a float), retrieving hooks, ropes, and rifles of various calibres (Fig. 4). Most often, hunting takes place from shore or shore ice, although it was also common to use canoes when conditions (limited ice, light wind, and little or no precipitation) allowed. Many hunters reported using low calibre rifles (0.22 calibre) to direct whales closer by shooting the water surface, thereby encouraging belugas to surface in a location more amenable for a successful shot. When hunting from canoes, hunters will often manoeuvre their boats alongside pods of beluga and use a harpoon affixed to a float to prevent the selected whale from diving and to improve the canoe operator's ability to visually locate and follow the whale. This practice facilitates humane harvesting practices and reduces the likelihood of injured and lost whales. Once the selected whale surfaces, hunters try to kill the beluga with one shot (a “kill shot”) using higher calibre rifles (most often 0.308 Winchester, but sometimes a 0.30-06 Springfield, 0.270 Winchester, a 7 mm Remington Magnum, or a 0.300 Winchester Magnum). For this shot, the hunter typically aims for the brain or the upper spinal column, behind the blowhole. Hunters described a specific strategy for timing their shot, which changes by season. They explained that in the spring, the belugas will float once shot, likely due to their thicker layer of blubber. In the fall, the beluga may sink if killed after exhaling and before inhaling (while the lungs are empty of air), so hunters try to time their shots accordingly:
Fig. 4.
When they come up for air, they take a breath and when they're diving their mouth [blowhole] goes under and you shoot it at the right time while it's diving, you can make it float…That's mostly in the fall that we do that, and in the spring, you can shoot them and they will still float, most of the time (60-year-old female hunter).
After a beluga has been killed, it is retrieved by canoe using a long hook, tied to the boat, and towed back to shore. Often with the assistance of multiple hunters, the beluga is hauled onto either shore ice (in the spring) or rocks (in the fall) for butchering. Hunters avoid butchering on sand to prevent grittiness in the food cuts. One hunter identified the importance of butchering at low tide and away from hunting cabins to avoid attracting polar bears and ensure the tide washes away any remains. Figure 5 shows the parts of the beluga that hunters reported harvesting. All hunters reported harvesting beluga mattaaq, blubber, meat, intestines, pectoral fin, and tail for human consumption. Other parts were harvested less frequently, including the ribs, spine, heart, and throat. When asked, no hunters took the kidney or liver. The whale is butchered by hand using kitchen or hunting knives. The mattaaq is removed first, along with the blubber, by cutting it into vertical strips. The entire tail is removed approximately 40 cm from the fluke. This cut includes the fluke and the posterior section of the body (behind the anus) and the posterior 2–3 vertebrae. Next, the meat, intestines, spine, tail, and pectoral fins are removed. No hunters reported using power tools for the butchering, and several hunters insisted that butchering practices had not changed in their lifetimes. One 50-year-old male hunter noted the collective knowledge grounded in experience and intergenerational transmission, telling us, “We've been doing this so long, we know which areas to cut, and which areas not to cut.” Many hunters reported that the remains of the whale were given to people with sled dogs, although some told us they left the carcass on shore, particularly when the butchering location is difficult to access by truck or four wheeler.
Fig. 5.
Hunters described the tradition of passing on hunting knowledge to successive generations. All hunters learned their skills from older family members and the community Elders and those with children were teaching them how to hunt. Most participants agreed that younger generations enjoyed and were interested in learning how to harvest and prepare beluga, and believed that Inuit knowledge regarding beluga hunting and consumption was actively being passed on to subsequent generations:
I like to go hunting with older people, the Elders, cause that's when you learn, so you can pass it on […] We're doing what we know, what've took from the past, but I can tell you for sure, I think we've lost some knowledge, but we're maintaining (21-year-old male hunter).
I think, just a little bit [of knowledge is lost], not too much, it's always to passing on, from generation to generation…I think these days, everything is not same as before, but a little bit of knowledge is always passed onto the next generation (66-year-old female hunter).
Inuit knowledge of beluga food preparation and the “women's feast"
Hunters and community members prepared and consumed a variety of products from harvested beluga (Fig. 6). As described above, the entire tail region is separated as a single cut. This tail section is comprised primarily of mattaaq, meat, cartilage, and bone. All but one hunter confirmed that this tail section is generally brought home by the hunter who killed the whale and that the mattaaq and meat (and occasionally the cartilage) was consumed immediately, raw, and almost exclusively by women of all ages (often immediate family members and close female friends). This event was often referred to as the “women's feast” (Fig. 7). As described by participants:
When a beluga is killed…the tail is taken away for the women's feast. When I was a child, women used to be very happy. We had no telephones, nothing, at the camp. And someone would just say, “amikoqonaa!”, and that means there's a feast. And you would know, whoever yells out that, that's where you go….The women are all excited about it. The men don't go there, unless it's in their home (59-year-old female participant).
We call or we announce by the radio, local radio, or social media. Any women who wants to eat, they're free to come (39-year-old female hunter,).
[The women] celebrate, they celebrate what they got with a thankful heart (66-year-old female hunter).
Fig. 6.
Fig. 7.
Hunters agreed that the women's feast dated back generations, but there was little knowledge about its origins or rationale. Most participants reasoned that it was a cultural tradition and needed no other reason to continue. One male hunter wondered if women preferred the taste of mattaaq from the tail region, although no female participants reported this. Another hunter suggested it could be a way to ensure equal sharing between the men and women. A different participant suggested that it was perhaps a way to thank women for their role in the hunt, harvest, and food preparation:
Us men, we don't usually eat the tail. There's been a long tradition that we're not allowed to eat that. Back in the day, that was the traditional way of life. Nowadays, I don't know, but I still don't eat the tail, we always leave that to women…I don't know why, it's like a way to celebrate killing a whale and thank the women, maybe (56-year-old male hunter).
Several other products and preparations were consumed by participants (Fig. 6). Mattaaq was prepared and consumed in various ways, including raw, fried, boiled, frozen, or aged (fermented). Most participants did not have a consumption preference as to where the mattaaq was taken from the whale. Many hunters reported harvesting and consuming the mattaaq and soft bones from the pectoral fins. Aside from the tail mattaaq, participants did not describe any gendered differences or preferences in the consumption of beluga products and preparations.
Almost all participants also reported preparing and consuming beluga nikku (air-dried meat). Many participants had their own individual preferences for preparing nikku. Most commonly, respondents drained the blood from the meat for 1 or 2 days, sliced it into thin strips (approximately ½ cm thick), seasoned it (often with Montreal steak spice), and hung it to dry on racks (outdoors in the spring or indoors in the fall) for approximately 3 to 5 days. Once dried, nikku was often kept frozen to prevent it from spoiling.
Misaraq (aged ursuk, i.e., blubber) and igunaq (aged mattaaq, flippers, and/or fluke) were also common preparations consumed by participants. Methods for preparing misaraq and igunaq were similar, and the two were often prepared together, as shown in Fig. 7C.1 Both of these preparations require a fermentation step, which participants often call “rendering”. Making misaraq and igunaq is more common after the spring harvest, when temperatures are ideal for slow fermentation (daytime temperatures of approximately 8–10 °C). The most common technique to prepare misaraq involves cutting ursuk into cubes and placing these into a vessel (typically a food-safe container or a bucket lined with a scent-free plastic bag). The vessel is then placed in a location with no exposure to sunlight and a relatively stable temperature. Traditionally, fermentation occurred in purpose-built stone caches (Fig. 8) to prevent animal scavenging, but presently it is more common to place the preparation inside a wooden box in a shed or under a house. The preparation should not be airtight to allow for aerobic fermentation, and a screen is often placed overtop to prevent the ingress of flies or debris. Hunters stir the preparation occasionally and allow it to ferment for about a month. During this time, the ursuk liquefies into misaraq. Hunters explained the fermentation time was dependent on weather and individual taste preferences. They also reported different indicators for determining when the preparation was ready and safe to eat, including taste, colour, and smell. The process to prepare igunaq is similar. Hunters boil tissue (typically mattaaq, but also small pieces of meat, pectoral flippers, and/or fluke), let the preparation cool, and then add it to the plastic-lined bucket with the blubber for several weeks. After fermentation, the igunaq (which remains solid) is separated from the liquified misaraq and is usually eaten separately. Once prepared, both igunaq and misaraq are stored frozen. Igunaq is consumed plain, while misaraq is used as a flavourful dipping sauce for a variety of other country foods, including dried caribou, dried fish, and mattaaq. One participant detailed his technique for making misaraq:
I use the middle layer of blubber, cut it, muscle parts off first, and I used the middle parts of the blubber to make misaraq. Cut it in strips and put them in a bucket or a water jar. Five-gallon water tank. I put them in and keep them in the cool, cool place and I kinda shake that […] maybe every other day, until the blubber starts to become oil. And becomes misaraq […] Not too cold, not too warm. If it's too cold, it's gonna take a lot more time to become oil, but if it's too warm, you might make something that is bad. Could be dangerous, I think maybe. Or less tasty also. So, you have to watch what you're doing, if you're trying to make misaraq. And last year I made pretty big misaraq and still have some “til now. [Interviewer: “How do you know when it’s ready?”] I can smell it. Or you can see the colour of it. And people, some people, prefer it stronger, some less, so it's usually up to the chef […] Once it's ready I usually put it more bottles, more containers, and freeze it […] We use it as a dip for other meat, caribou, fish, or nikku, a lot of stuff. We use it as a dip, yeah (34-year-old male hunter)
Fig. 8.
Beluga intestines were commonly consumed, either dried or prepared into sausages. The process for drying involved boiling or cooking the intestines and hanging them to dry inside during the fall or outside during the spring. To prepare sausages, hunters cut the intestines, cleaned them with saltwater, turned them inside-out, and added small pieces of mattaaq inside before tying the two ends with string. The sausages are then boiled and could be eaten as is, smoked, dried, or frozen. Many hunters explained that preparing sausages from beluga was a relatively new type of food preparation, inspired by imported sausages available in retail food stores.
Inuit knowledge of healthfulness and safety of beluga food preparations
Hunters were asked about their knowledge of the health benefits and risks associated with the consumption of beluga. One hunter suggested consuming beluga could be good for the skin, and another mentioned the meat provided vitamin C. A third hunter mentioned that in the past, consuming beluga blood was helpful for women who had just given birth. Hunters were knowledgeable about the safety risks associated with consuming beluga. All hunters were aware of the precautions needed for preparing fermented meat while avoiding spoilage and dangers (e.g., botulism). Hunters explained that it was crucial to ferment in an open container, at cooler temperatures, and away from sunlight. Many hunters relayed past stories of cases of dangerous spoilage and botulism in Nunavik communities:
There's a very dangerous case of leaving beluga blubber inside a black bag in the sun, for a couple of hours, and that's really bad, can kill you. I don't know why…If you leave a mattaaq in a black bag in the sun for hours, I don't know what happens to it… I guess it's poisonous (21-year-old male hunter).
However, all participants who made misaraq and/or igunaq were confident in their ability to safely produce these products, largely due to the knowledge passed on to them by their Elders and family members: “The way we do it, we know, and the knowledge is passed down. And when we ferment the mattaaq and the misaraq, we know where to put it and to keep it, or to check up on it” (60-year-old female hunter). Aside from the safety risks associated with the aging process for making misaraq and igunaq, few hunters mentioned other health concerns associated with consuming beluga. After prompting, some stated they had heard of environmental contaminants, including mercury or persistent pollutants, but were not aware of specific health implications. Hunters who were more knowledgeable about mercury stated that they did not let this impact their hunting behaviour. One 34-year-old male hunter told us, “Right now, I try to not to worry [about the mercury]. “Cause we survive with what we have in the past, and we like to keep it that way, so I don't want to be worried.” When asked about harvest practices to reduce the risk of foodborne infections, only two hunters mentioned that they avoided harvesting or consuming specific parts of the beluga due to concern for illness-causing pathogens; one did not harvest around the blowhole, while another avoided the area around the mouth.
Cultural significance of beluga hunting and consumption
Hunting and consumption of beluga have important cultural significance at both the individual and community levels. Most hunters explained that they hunted belugas twice a year for as long as they could remember. Hunters shared personal stories and fond memories of hunting with family. They easily recalled the first beluga they harvested, and some recounted the tradition of presenting mattaaq and meat from their first beluga to their sanaji, the person who cut their umbilical cord, an important relationship in Inuit culture. Many of the hunters associated these experiences with enjoyment and pride:
So, that was my first whale, I felt like I became a man after. I had to tell my grandmother … and she was really happy. I have many stories, but that one I can be most proud of I guess. My first one (Male hunter, 34 years old).
Beyond individual significance, beluga hunting and consumption promoted sharing and cooperation, which facilitated a strong sense of community. Many hunters characterized the hunting process as a cooperative group effort; hunters reported assisting visiting hunters from other communities to reach their TAT, coordinating with each other frequently during a hunt, and assisting anyone who had successfully killed a whale. While hunting, many hunters stressed the importance of the hunt in providing food for the community and chose to target larger whales to feed more people. Sharing was considered very important, as described by one 60-year-old female hunter: “When it comes on shore and they're cutting it up, anybody who's there, like at the beach, each house gets a piece, piece of the mattaaq. And we've always had this tradition to share equally”. Respondents explained that the first few whales harvested in spring and fall are always shared as a community feast. As described by one 60-year-old female hunter, “Each year, like spring and fall, every time someone catches first beluga in the fall or spring, they usually share with the whole community first, with all the houses…” Participants described the importance of sharing with Elders and others who were unable to hunt. After the first whale has been caught, hunters often share harvests on a “first come, first serve” basis while the whale is butchered: “The people get their pieces, like they're really anxious to get their piece. We're like seagulls trying to get a piece of the mattaaq [laughs]” (60-year-old female hunter). Another hunter described how consuming beluga acts as an opportunity to socialize and strengthen social relationships:
When you invite people to come eat at your place, you eat on the floor and tell stories too. [I]t's usually at the place the hunter's house or if it's your first one…you give a piece to the person who cut the umbilical cord for you (Male hunter, 37 years old).
Contribution of beluga to food security and wellness
Descriptions of beluga harvest, preparation, and consumption underscored its importance as an accessible, affordable, healthy, and desirable source of food. Hunters described how people in their communities, including younger generations and children, exhibit a strong preference for beluga over other food sources. Beluga was frequently described as fresher and better-tasting than store-bought foods. Several hunters also characterized belugas as an inexpensive food source, as a large abundance of food can be harvested from one whale:
[Beluga] provides nutritious food for my family and provides less costly food that we can eat. And we really love eating it. [If] we're to choose what we eat, this is one of the top foods that we'd be eating. It can last a long, long time if you have enough, can last you a year. And making that dip [misaraq], we use for everything, so that's the most beneficial thing we do with the beluga… (34-year-old male hunter).
Hunters told us that beluga provides them with more energy, nourishment, and satiety, keeps them warmer, and makes them “feel better” than store-bought foods. A few hunters also discussed how the warmth and energy provided by beluga enable them to participate in extended land-based activities such as snowmobiling, camping, and hunting. One 21-year-old male hunter told us, “[Beluga] definitely fills you up for a longer time [than store-bought foods], like, you won't be hungry after a couple hours. You'll eat some, you'll be warm, you won't get hungry fast.” Respondents commonly described the cravings experienced after an extended duration without access to beluga and other country foods:
We're used to having country food, it's our culture, our tradition, it's way of eating, so our bodies used to it…and when we don't eat meat for a long period, we long to have some kind of meat, we long for that (66-year-old female hunter).
I've been eating [beluga] all my life…when the time comes to eat, in May, June, and October, I have a craving for fresh mattaaq. My biological clock knows when it's migration time (60-year-old female hunter).
Factors influencing trends in beluga harvest and consumption
While several hunters insisted that beluga hunting and consumption practices had remained the same for several generations, others discussed how changes in available technology, cultural norms, policies, and the natural environment have impacted accessibility, availability, and practices related to harvesting beluga. In some ways, new technology has eased the challenges of hunting—for example, one young hunter used a drone to obtain aerial views while hunting, making it easier to spot migrating whales before they were visible from the ground. Vehicles (e.g., trucks, ATVs, and snowmobiles) are also frequently used to facilitate the transportation of hunters and harvested whales. Newer, better rifle scopes are sought-after pieces of equipment that serve to increase the accuracy of rifles from longer distances. Finally, telephones and social media play an increasing role in sharing pictures and stories about recent hunts and facilitating community food sharing, as discussed above.
While hunters stressed the important role of Inuit knowledge and corresponding cultural traditions, some hunters stated that shifting cultural values have impacted hunting and consumption practices. Participants shared that until recently, Nunavimmiut consumed or used every part of the whale; however, in recent decades, the carcass (including bones, organs, and the head) is often fed to dogs or left in the intertidal zone to be washed away. Another clear example of recent changes to cultural traditions is the shifting of gender roles. Specifically, participants explained that it was increasingly common for women to take part in hunting and men to participate in cooking. As described by one middle-aged participant, “Back in the day, women didn't used to hunt belugas, they were preparing the food after the man caught them. Today it's everybody” (male hunter, 50 years old).
Several hunters also discussed the implications of harvest policy—specifically, the introduction of the harvest quota system by the DFO and managed by the NMRWB—which impacted beluga selection, food supply, and knowledge transfer to younger generations. Specifically, the quota system prompted hunters to select larger whales, as described above. One hunter explained that people prefer the younger whales for their tenderness, but due to the quota, hunters often opt to harvest larger whales to secure a larger overall quantity of food. Many hunters wished for larger harvests and expressed frustration at the restricted hunt. Some hunters noted that due to the quota, they do not catch as many belugas as in the past and that some communities may not be able to hunt as many belugas as they need. As shared by one 34-year-old male hunter, “We freeze the meat and save it for later, have some for maybe half a year. Because we don't really have much quota, we run out pretty fast”.
One hunter described conflicted feelings about the quota system; he recognized that wildlife management was not “bad,” but that it had the potential to introduce scarcity, with implications for food access, sharing, fairness, and equality. A second hunter voiced his anger and frustration over previous incidents when other communities had overhunted their quotas, and his community was subsequently forced to limit the number of belugas they could hunt. Hunters also expressed concern about the declining popularity of fermenting beluga due to the quota system, as misiraq and igunaq are often prepared in bulk and families rarely have enough beluga blubber and tissue to justify aging and fermenting these products. This is particularly true with igunaq, and some participants attributed Inuit knowledge loss to the quota system, specifically:
The quota, we don't catch enough [to ferment], that's why the tradition is disappearing rapidly…[Young people] still like igunaq but the knowledge is disappearing. There's not enough mattaaq to show them how it's done anymore. But I was fortunate to learn how to do it. Because back then there were no quotas. (50-year-old male hunter)
A final factor influencing beluga harvest and consumption was changes in the timing and paths of whale migration, possibly due to climate change. A few hunters noted that environmental changes (e.g., variable temperature patterns and later sea ice formation) could be associated with the less predictable whale migration. Many participants explained that some fluctuations in the yearly weather are normal, but increasingly unpredictable weather patterns have caused fluctuations in the timing of beluga migrations through the Hudson Strait by as much as 6 weeks. Such unpredictability creates challenges for hunters to plan hunting around other responsibilities and, if necessary, travel from their home community to hunt beluga. Finally, several hunters mentioned that belugas are sensitive to noise and expressed concern for increasing boat traffic (e.g., sea transport; coast guard activity), which may disrupt migration routes and timing.
Beluga mattaaq tissue sample analyses
Selenoneine concentrations in mattaaq samples are presented in Table 1. Tail samples had significantly higher concentrations of selenoneine (mean 8.73 µg Se/g) compared with dorsal samples (mean 4.07 µg Se/g) and pectoral samples (mean 4.78 µg Se/g) (p < 0.001).
Table 1.
Discussion
Understanding beluga hunting and consumption practices can inform Inuit food security, food sovereignty, and food safety efforts
Participants’ experiences and descriptions are consistent with other research that has captured Inuit beluga hunting, food preparation, and consumption practices (Morseth 1997; Tyrrell 2007; Waugh et al. 2018; Worden et al. 2020; Breton-Honeyman et al. 2021). Participants acquired knowledge primarily through intergenerational transmission and personal observations. Interviews underscored the importance of passing knowledge from Elders and adults to youth, often recounting stories of hunting during childhood with parents and older extended family members. Intergenerational transmission of knowledge has persisted despite disruptions in the past decades (e.g., forced settlement and relocation, residential schools, and the sled dog massacre perpetuated by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, among other disruptions) (McHugh 2013; Greene and Zawadski 2022). This study contributes to existing evidence that beluga whales play an important role in Inuit food systems, food security, health, and culture (Wein et al. 1996; Tyrrell 2005, 2007, 2008; Waugh et al. 2018). Study participants described how hunting, butchering, sharing, and consuming beluga foster a strong sense of community and a connection to culture and tradition. Furthermore, hunters consistently agreed that beluga whales are a crucial food source and contribute to food security, nutrition, energy, and satiety. As research continues to explore Inuit diets and the implications of the increasing reliance on store-bought foods (Kuhnlein et al. 2004; Blanchet and Rochette 2008; Johnson-Down and Egeland 2010; Lougheed 2010; Gagné et al. 2012; Little et al. 2021), understanding the importance, preferences, practices, and consumption of beluga and other country foods can inform the development of culturally appropriate public health, harvest management, and food security efforts.
This study offers insight into the food safety concerns associated with environmental contaminants and food preparation practices in Inuit communities. Previous research has discussed the association between country foods and the risk of foodborne illness, with a particular focus on botulism and trichinellosis; although trichinella is not a concern in beluga (Austin and Leclair 2011; Fagan et al. 2011; Leclair et al. 2013). In the current study, participants were aware of the potential dangers of beluga consumption and took steps to ensure food safety, especially when aging and fermenting ursuk, mattaaq, and meat to produce misaraq and igunaq. Despite the persistence of intergenerational transfer of Inuit knowledge, some participants were concerned about disruptions (e.g., due to climate change and harvest quotas) that restricted access to beluga and reduced the practice of producing misaraq and igunaq, thereby limiting opportunities for knowledge transfer and increasing the risk of foodborne illnesses (Worden et al. 2020). Within this context, it is crucial to support ongoing monitoring, research, and communication efforts on country food safety in collaboration with public health authorities and Inuit leaders (Ducrocq et al. 2020). Fostering opportunities for intergenerational Inuit knowledge transmission regarding safe and appropriate practices of food preparation using culturally relevant activities (e.g., on-the-land camps and integration into school curricula) is particularly important (McGregor 2012; Martinez-Levasseur et al. 2020; Greene and Zawadski 2022).
Global emissions of environmental contaminants, and their accumulation in food sources in polar regions, should be considered a serious environmental injustice (Watt-Cloutier 2015; Jodoin et al. 2020). While Inuit leaders (including the Inuit Circumpolar Council) have been instrumental in international advocacy efforts leading to the ratification of the Stockholm and Minamata Conventions against POPs and mercury, respectively, industries continue to develop alternative “forever chemicals” while regulators play catch-up (Watt-Cloutier 2015; Odland et al. 2016). In contrast to participants’ consistent awareness of the risks of foodborne illness, only a few were cognizant of the presence or health implications of environmental contaminants (e.g., MeHg and POPs) in beluga. Additionally, none were aware that beluga meat (and nikku) contains substantially higher levels of MeHg than mattaaq, even though public health messages conveying this information have been widely disseminated in Nunavik in the past 10 years (Lemire et al. 2015). Limited retention of public health messaging in Nunavik has been noted elsewhere, which underscores the need for innovative approaches to knowledge mobilization and communication incorporating Inuit knowledge and western sciences (O'Neil et al. 1997; Furgal et al. 2005; Myers and Furgal 2006; McAuley and Knopper 2011; Krümmel and Gilman 2016; Henri et al. 2022). This is particularly pertinent as our study found that quotas may promote the harvest and consumption of older, larger whales. Age and size were associated with higher concentrations of environmental contaminants in the Eastern Beaufort Sea beluga population due to biomagnification and bioaccumulation (Loseto et al. 2008). Similarly, age was associated with mercury concentration in liver tissue samples from belugas harvested between 1984 and 1998 in EHB (Sanikiluaq, Nunavut, and Nastapoka River, Québec) (Lockhart et al. 2005). It is therefore likely that larger, older whales exhibit higher concentrations of MeHg and other contaminants across stocks. Among those hunters who were aware of the potential presence of environmental contaminants in country foods, this understanding did not modify their hunting or consumption behaviours. Still, public health messaging and programs aimed at improving food security need to carefully balance the human health risks of contaminant exposure with the important nutritional and cultural value of country foods so that hunters and families can make informed decisions about harvesting, preparing, and consuming country foods, including beluga (Furgal et al. 2005; Laird et al. 2013).
Beluga management approaches have health, cultural, and social implications for Inuit communities
Beginning in the 1980s, a quota-based management system was applied to beluga harvesting across Nunavik, primarily to protect the EHB stock, which declined to less than half of its historic abundance (and has not yet recovered) due to heavy commercial harvesting in the late-1800s and early 1900s (Reeves and Mitchell 1987; Hammill et al. 2017). The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada identified the EHB beluga stock as endangered in 2004 before downgrading this status to threatened in 2020. Both the EHB stock and the WHB stock (which is not threatened) pass through the Hudson Strait during their migrations in the spring and fall. Our results confirm previous findings that hunters are rarely able to distinguish between the EHB and WHB stocks (Breton-Honeyman et al. 2021); indeed, about half of the hunters interviewed were unaware of the existence of multiple stocks and considered migrating belugas as one large population.
When NILCA came into force in 2008, the NMRWB was established and assigned oversight for beluga harvest comanagement with Nunavimmiut leaders, including RNUK (Johnson et al. 2020). Starting in 2014, the TAT for each community is renewed in 3- to 5-year blocks. At the time of our study (2018–19), the TAT for each community was allocated by RNUK based on the assumed proportions of EHB belugas in the total harvest (Nunavik Marine Region Wildlife Board 2010). After a consultation period in 2019–20, the NMRWB introduced a new management plan (effective 2021–26) that eliminated the TAT system for Hudson Strait communities in favour of a fall hunting closure period from September 1 to October 31, which theoretically should allow the EHB stock to pass prior to the beginning of the fall harvest, since the EHB stock migrates through Hudson Strait earlier than the WHB stock (Department of Fisheries and Oceans 2021).
The NMRWB, RNUK, and LNUKs have recognized the challenge of balancing conservation with minimizing infringements on hunting rights. With the caveat that interviews took place before the enactment of the 2021–26 plan, participants reported varied impacts of the beluga harvest quota system. Interview participants in our study described how the quota system restricted access, impacted beluga selection, and disrupted intergenerational knowledge transfer of hunting and preparation practices. A few hunters described feelings of injustice and frustration due to the restrictions on their local food supply. Further, the management system can lead to inter- and intra-community conflict when communities overhunt their quota, which can occasionally lead to hunting closures and reduced quotas for other communities (Tyrrell 2007). Notably, as per the NMRWB beluga management plan at the time (2017–19), the TAT was defined at the community level, and harvested belugas only counted towards the quota of the hunters’ home community, regardless of where the harvest took place. Conflict can also arise when hunters travel outside their own communities to fulfill their community quotas before the migration arrives, leading to reports of disruptions in host communities, including problematic substance use among visiting hunters (Nunavik Marine Region Wildlife Board 2010). Our findings are therefore consistent with previous research that describes the complexity and contention surrounding management of belugas in Canada's Arctic and the need for in-depth consultation on all comanagement decisions (Kishigami 2005; Tyrrell 2005, 2007, 2008; Breton-Honeyman et al. 2021).
Previous research has suggested that Nunavimmiut believe the quota system has impacted hunting practices and contributed to the de-skilling and de-culturation of younger generations (Tyrrell 2005, 2008). For example, it has been suggested that the quota system has created intracommunity competition due to imposed scarcity, which has decreased the willingness to involve the younger, less-skilled hunters (Tyrrell 2008). Our study did not find evidence that younger generations were being excluded from beluga hunting; however, it was suggested that some knowledge and skills have been lost, particularly regarding traditional food preparations such as igunaq. In addition, other research has suggested that the quota system may affect food sharing practices (Tyrrell 2008). Participants in our study reported that prior to the quota system, beluga mattaaq was shared equally across the community. Currently, however, only the first few harvested whales of each hunting season are shared across the village, while the remaining beluga are often consumed by the successful hunter and their immediate families. Such practices may contribute to inequitable access to beluga that favours those with the skills and resources to participate in the harvest (Tyrrell 2008). Following enactment of the 2021–26 beluga management plan, it will be important to evaluate whether the recent changes, including the replacement of the TAT system in favour of a seasonal fall closure, reduce hunters’ frustrations and perceptions of injustice and inter- and intracommunity conflict in Hudson Strait communities (Department of Fisheries and Oceans 2021).
There is a continued need to better understand the benefits and challenges of wildlife comanagement strategies and advance approaches that benefit Indigenous communities in northern Canada. The increased attention to Indigenous knowledge and participation in wildlife and health research, harvest management, and conservation is a crucial paradigm shift (Weiss et al. 2013). To ensure that conservation efforts do not infringe on Inuit health and cultural and social practices, it is key to develop systems that weave Inuit perspectives and knowledge with other scientific methods to ensure a holistic approach to wildlife management (Berkes and Usher 2000; Ban et al. 2018; Snook et al. 2018; Kutz and Tomaselli 2019; Breton-Honeyman et al. 2021). This is particularly true given the increasing uncertainty caused by climate change and environmental contaminants, which requires hunters, researchers, and managers to be responsive to the rapidly changing environment and its impacts on wildlife and humans alike (Worden et al. 2020). Eliminating power differentials and equitably incorporating Indigenous voices in future research, policies, and planning will require expanded research funding, capacity bridging, and strong advocacy efforts (Greenwood and Lindsay 2019).
Gendered beluga consumption practices may explain selenoneine concentrations among Nunavimmiut
Our research team previously discovered that selenoneine is abundant in beluga mattaaq and the RBCs of Nunavimmiut (Achouba et al. 2019; Little et al. 2019). RBC concentrations of selenoneine were positively associated with mattaaq consumption, age, and female gender in a multivariable model (Little et al. 2019). Additionally, women exhibited considerably higher levels of selenoneine in RBCs compared with men (Little et al. 2019). When these data were presented to a group of Nunavimmiut leaders and hunters at the RNUK in November 2017, it was suggested that differences in RBC selenoneine concentrations may be due to gender-based dietary differences. Specifically, hunters hypothesized that the beluga mattaaq from the tail is higher in selenoneine, as this is typically reserved for women. The current study supports this hypothesis. All participants in this qualitative study described the long-standing tradition of gender-based consumption practices, in which women consume the tail of the beluga during the “women's feast”. Results from laboratory tissue analyses indicated higher levels of selenoneine in the beluga tail compared with the dorsal and pectoral samples, but additional analyses are needed to confirm the initial findings. These unique findings highlight the importance of weaving together Inuit knowledge and western science, as both knowledge bases contributed to the conceptualization of this study and the resulting research findings. This process reflects growing trends in the role of Indigenous individuals as leaders of research efforts (Johnson et al. 2020; Breton-Honeyman et al. 2021), and our project provides strong justification for further research collaborations that incorporate multiple ways of knowing to inform decision-making for hunting and conservation efforts, sustainable development, and health in Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities (Iwama et al. 2009; Armitage et al. 2011; Johnson et al. 2020; Roher et al. 2021).
Evidence suggests that dietary intake of Se mitigates MeHg toxicity in humans (Ayotte et al. 2011; Lemire et al. 2011; Hu et al. 2017). Selenoneine may play a role in this process due to its ability to bind to and enhance demethylatylation of MeHg, as noted in the blood cells of zebrafish embryos (Yamashita et al. 2013). In light of our results, it is crucial that future research investigate the health implications of gender-based dietary practices among Inuit, including the heightened intake (and accumulation) of selenoneine among Inuit women (Lemire et al. 2015; Little et al. 2019; Pontual et al. 2021). Additionally, future research should explore the possibility that gender-based country food consumption is a biocultural adaptation to sex-based nutrient requirements or to afford protection against MeHg toxicity among Inuit women. Further, in coordination with Inuit knowledge holders, there is a need to further characterize beluga feeding and moulting behaviours, as well as the biosynthesis, accumulation, and distribution of selenoneine (especially in beluga mattaaq), to identify the possible environmental sources of selenoneine as it is not synthesized by mammals (Jones et al. 2014).
Limitations of study
While this study provided important insights on the lived experiences and knowledge of Nunavimmiut beluga harvesting in Quaqtaq, the transferability of results to other regions in Nunavik and Inuit Nunangat may be limited due to the study's relatively small group of participants from one community. The interviews captured a few hunters visiting Quaqtaq from other communities, increasing the transferability of the findings. It should be noted, however, that there are differences across Inuit communities and regions in terms of harvest management efforts, cultural traditions, and harvest and consumption practices of beluga. While the interviewer has a strong relationship with community leaders and hunters in Quaqtaq, his positionality as a male, settler, and outsider (Joseph et al. 2021) who does not share Inuit culture, language, or experiences may have impacted interviewee responses. Further, while participants were given the choice to conduct interviews in Inuktitut, many chose to speak English, even though this was their second or third language; such language barriers may contribute to the mischaracterization of participant's perspectives and/or knowledge. A final and important limitation is the small number of beluga tissue samples analyzed, as sampling activities were cut short by the Covid-19 pandemic. Our research team is working with regional partners to conduct further beluga tissue sampling and analysis activities to quantify selenoneine content in various localized tissues from beluga whales. The tissue sample selenoneine concentrations presented in this manuscript should therefore be considered preliminary and provisional.
Conclusion
This study captured perceptions and experiences of beluga hunting, sharing, preparation, and consumption in Nunavik and confirmed the crucial importance of beluga for culture, social networks, food security, and nutrition. Further, this study highlighted how beluga management efforts have health, cultural, and social ramifications for Inuit, including implications for food access and the transfer of Inuit knowledge to younger generations. Finally, we wove together traditional Inuit knowledge with scientific research to confirm that the selenoneine-rich beluga tail is consumed primarily by women, which likely explains the gender differences in blood selenoneine levels in Nunavimmiut. This study demonstrates the utility of integrating Inuit and scientific knowledge to inform future environmental health research, public health efforts related to food security and food safety, and decision-making for marine wildlife conservation efforts.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to all Quaqtaqmiut interview participants. We thank members of the Nunavik Nutrition and Health Committee, the Nunavik Regional Board of Health and Social Services, the RNUK (also known as the Nunavik Hunting Fishing and Trapping Association), Makivik Corporation, and the NMRWB for their support in developing and facilitating this research and reviewing drafts of the manuscript.
Footnote
1
Misaraq and igunaq are general terms for fermented blubber and tissue, respectively, of any sea mammal, although they are typically made with walrus or beluga. Note that nikku is also a general term for thinly sliced dried meat and can be made from marine mammals or land mammals. During our interviews, we only discussed beluga nikku.
Community involvement
This research was conducted in response to an identified community need through a collaborative community engagement process. The research questions and methodology were developed in coordination with (and approved by) the RNUK (also known as the Nunavik Hunting, Fishing and Trapping Association), the Nunavik Research Centre, the NMRWB, and the NNHC. Research activities in Quaqtaq were carried out in coordination with local hunters and community leaders, who were paid or provided honoraria for their involvement as per locol protocols. Results were shared back to the participating organizations and research participants in 2020–2022 through community presentations, radio interviews, and plain language reports. Preliminary drafts of this manuscript were also reviewed by Nunavimmiut hunters and representatives of NMRWB and NNHC. The first author is in communication with local leaders to transfer the raw data back to the community for stewardship.
References
Achouba A., Dumas P., Ouellet N., Little M., Lemire M., Ayotte P. 2019. Selenoneine is a major selenium species in beluga skin and red blood cells of Inuit from Nunavik. Chemosphere, 229: 549–558.
Alexander S.M., Provencher J.F., Henri D.A., Taylor J.J., Lloren J.I., Nanayakkara L., et al. 2019. Bridging Indigenous and science-based knowledge in coastal and marine research, monitoring, and management in Canada. Environ. Evid. 8: 36.
AMAP. 2016. AMAP assessment 2015: temporal trends in persistent organic pollutants in the Arctic. AMAP, Oslo.
Armitage D., Berkes F., Dale A., Kocho-Schellenberg E., Patton E. 2011. Co-management and the co-production of knowledge: learning to adapt in Canada's Arctic. Global Environ. Change, 21: 995–1004.
Austin J.W., Leclair D. 2011. Botulism in the north: a disease without borders. Clin. Infect. Dis. 52: 593–594.
Ayotte P., Carrier A., Ouellet N., Boiteau V., Abdous B., Sidi E.A.L., et al. 2011. Relation between methylmercury exposure and plasma paraoxonase activity in inuit adults from Nunavik. Environ. Health Perspect. 119: 1077–1083.
Ban N.C., Frid A., Reid M., Edgar B., Shaw D., Siwallace P. 2018. Incorporate Indigenous perspectives for impactful research and effective management. Nature Ecol. Evol. 2: 1680–1683.
Bell M. 2002. Nunavut literacy development in the context of Inuit Qaujimajatuqanginnut (IQ) (Inuit Traditional Knowledge): a discussion paper. Inukshuk Management Consultants, Yellowknife. [Online]. Available from http://www.nunavutliteracy.ca/english/resource/reports/paper/cover.htm.
Berkes F., Usher P.J. 2000. Sacred knowledge, traditional ecological knowledge & resource management. Arctic, 53: 198.
Bharucha Z., Pretty J. 2010. The roles and values of wild foods in agricultural systems. Philoso. Trans. R. Soc., B, 365: 2913–2926.
Blanchet C., Rochette L. 2008. Nutrition and food consumption among the Inuit of Nunavik: abstract. Régie régionale de la santé et des services sociaux, Nunavik.
Braun V., Clarke V. 2009. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3: 77–101.
Breton-Honeyman K., Furgal C.M., Hammill M.O. 2016a. Systematic review and critique of the contributions of traditional ecological knowledge of beluga whales in the marine mammal literature. Arctic, 69: 37–46.
Breton-Honeyman K., Hammill M.O., Furgal C.M., Hickie B. 2016b. Inuit knowledge of beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas) foraging ecology in nunavik (Arctic Quebec), Canada. Can. J. Zool. 94: 713–726.
Breton-Honeyman K., Huntington H.P., Basterfield M., Campbell K., Dicker J., Gray T., et al. 2021. Beluga whale stewardship and collaborative research practices among Indigenous peoples in the Arctic. Polar Res. 40.
Byers T., Reist J.D., Sawatzky C.D. 2019. Compilation and synopsis of literature on the traditional knowledge of Aboriginal peoples in the N.W.T. concerning Dolly Varden char. Fisheries and Coeans Canada.
Calvo-Lerma J., Hulst J., Boon M., Colombo C., Masip E., Ruperto M., et al. 2019. Clinical validation of an evidence-based method to adjust pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy through a prospective interventional study in paediatric patients with cystic fibrosis. PLoS One, 14.
Carlos I., Fikret B. 2019. Pangnirtung Inuit and the Greenland shark: co-producing knowledge of a little discussed species. Hum. Ecol. 40: 405–414.
Clayden M.G., Arsenault L.M., Kidd K.A., O'Driscoll N.J., Mallory M.L. 2015. Mercury bioaccumulation and biomagnification in a small Arctic polynya ecosystem. Sci. Total Environ. 509–510: 206–215.
COSEWIC. 2004. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the beluga whale Delphinapterus leucas in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada.
Cuerrier A., Brunet N.D., Gérin-Lajoie J., Downing A., Lévesque E. 2015. The study of Inuit knowledge of climate change in Nunavik, Quebec: a mixed methods approach. Hum. Ecol. 43: 379–394.
Cuvin-Aralar M.L.A., Furness R.W. 1991. Mercury and selenium interaction: a review. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 21: 348–364.
Dale A., Armitage D. 2011. Marine mammal co-management in Canada's Arctic: knowledge co-production for learning and adaptive capacity. Mar. Policy, 35: 440–449.
Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 2021. Beluga management system - regional rules in the Nunavik marine region.
DFO. 2010. Nunavik and Adjacent Waters 2010 Beluga Management Plan. [Online]. Available from http://www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/pub/docs/BELUGA_MANAGEMENT_PLAN_2010_final_draft.pdf.
DFO. 2018. Harvest advice for eastern and western Hudson Bay beluga (Delphinapterus leucas).
Donaldson S.G., Van Oostdam J., Tikhonov C., Feeley M., Armstrong B., Ayotte P., et al. 2010. Environmental contaminants and human health in the Canadian Arctic. Sci. Total Environ. 408: 5165–5234.
Ducrocq J., Proulx J.-F., Simard M., Lévesque B., Iqaluk M., Elijassiapik L., et al. 2020. The unique contribution of a local response group in the field investigation and management of a trichinellosis outbreak in Nunavik (Québec, Canada). Can. J. Public Health, 111: 31–39.
Egeland G., Charbonneau-Roberts G., Kuluguqtuq J., Kilabuk J., Okalik L., Soueida R., Kuhnlein H. 2009. Back to the future: using traditional food and knowledge to promote a healthy future among Inuit, 9–22.
Fa J.E., Currie D., Meeuwig J. 2003. Bushmeat and food security in the Congo Basin: linkages between wildlife and people's future. Environ. Conserv. 30: 71–78.
Fagan R.P., McLaughlin J.B., Castrodale L.J., Gessner B.D., Jenkerson S.A., Funk E.A., et al. 2011. Endemic foodborne botulism among Alaska Native persons-alaska, 1947–2007. Clin. Infect. Dis. 52: 585–592.
Ferguson M., O'Dea K., Chatfield M., Moodie M., Altman J., Brimblecombe J. 2016. The comparative cost of food and beverages at remote Indigenous communities, Northern Territory, Australia. Aust. N. Z. J. Public Health 40: S21–S26.
Fletcher C., Riva M., Lyonnais M., Saunders I., Baron A., Lynch M., Baron M. 2017. Definition of an Inuit cultural model and social determinants of health for Nunavik. Community component. Nunavik Inuit Health Survey.
Furgal C., Laing R. 2011. A synthesis and critical review of the traditional ecological knowledge literature on narwhal (Monodon monoceros) in the Eastern Canadian Arctic. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 131: 2012.
Furgal C.M., Powell S., Myers H. 2005. Digesting the message about contaminants and country foods in the Canadian North: a review and recommendations for future research and action. Arctic, 58: 103–114.
Gagné D., Blanchet R., Lauzière J., Vaissière É., Vézina C., Ayotte P., et al. 2012. Traditional food consumption is associated with higher nutrient intakes in Inuit children attending childcare centres in Nunavik. Int. J. Circumpolar Health, 71: 1–9.
Greene E.A., Zawadski K.U. 2022. More than needle and thread: Inuit knowledge sharing and well-being through community-based programs. Am. Rev. Can. Stud. 52: 277–292.
Greenwood M., Lindsay N.M. 2019. A commentary on land, health, and Indigenous knowledge(s). Global Health Promot. 26: 82–86.
Hammill M.O., Stenson G.B., Doniol-Valcroze T. 2017. A management framework for Nunavik beluga. Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat (CSAS).
Henri D.A., Martinez-Levasseur L.M., Provencher J.F., Debets C.D., Appaqaq M., Houde M. 2022. Engaging Inuit youth in environmental research: Braiding Western science and Indigenous knowledge through school workshops. J. Environ. Educ. 53: 261–279.
Hoover C., Ostertag S., Hornby C., Parker C., Hansen-Craik K., Loseto L., Pearce T. 2016. The continued importance of hunting for future Inuit food security. Solutions, 7: 40–50.
Hu X.F., Eccles K.M., Chan H.M. 2017. High selenium exposure lowers the odds ratios for hypertension, stroke, and myocardial infarction associated with mercury exposure among Inuit in Canada. Environ. Int. 102: 200–206.
Hughes R., Lawrence M. 2005. Globalisation, food and health in Pacific Island countries. Asia Pac. J. Clin. Nutr. 14: 298–306.
Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami. 2018a. National Inuit strategy on research. Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami.
Iwama M., Marshall M., Marshall A., Bartlett C. 2009. Two-eyed seeing and the language of healing in community-based research. Can. J. Native Educ. 32: 3–23.
Jamieson J.A., Weiler H.A., Kuhnlein H.V., Egeland G.M. 2012. Traditional food intake is correlated with iron stores in Canadian Inuit men. J. Nutr. 142: 764–770.
Jodoin S., Snow S., Corobow A. 2020. Realizing the right to be cold? Framing processes and outcomes associated with the Inuit petition on human rights and global warming. Law Soc. Rev. 54: 168–200.
Johnson N., Pearce T., Breton-Honeyman K., Etiendem D.N., Loseto L.L. 2020. Knowledge co-production and co-management of Arctic wildlife. Arct. Sci. 6.
Johnson-Down L., Egeland G.M. 2010. Adequate nutrient intakes are associated with traditional food consumption in Nunavut Inuit children aged 3–5 years. J. Nutr. 140: 1311–1316.
Jones G.W., Doyle S., Fitzpatrick D.A. 2014. The evolutionary history of the genes involved in the biosynthesis of the antioxidant ergothioneine. Gene, 549: 161–170.
Joseph F.I., Earland J., Ahmed M.A. 2021. Experience of conducting sensitive qualitative research as a cultural outsider: formulation of a guide for reflexivity. Int. J. Qual. Methods, 20: 16094069211058616.
Kenny T.A., Fillion M., Simpkin S., Wesche S.D., Chan H.M. 2018. Caribou (Rangifer tarandus) and Inuit nutrition security in Canada. EcoHealth, 15: 590–607.
Khan M.A.K., Wang F. 2009. Mercury–selenium compounds and their toxicological significance: toward a molecular understanding of the mercury–selenium antagonism. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 28: 1567–1577.
Kishigami N. 2005. Co-managment of beluga whales in Nunavik (Arctic Quebec), Canada. Senri Ethnol. Stud. 67: 121–144.
Kral M.J., Idlout L., Minore J.B., Dyck R.J., Kirmayer L.J. 2011. Unikkaartuit: meanings of well-being, unhappiness, health, and community change among Inuit in Nunavut, Canada. Am. J. Community Psychol. 48: 426–438.
Krü Krümmel E.-M., Gilman A. 2016. Arctic monitoring and assessment programme: an update on risk communication in the Arctic. Int. J. Circumpolar Health, 75: 33822.
Kuhnlein H.V., Receveur O. 1996. Dietary change and traditional food systems of Indigenous peoples. Ann. Rev. Nutr. 16: 417–442.
Kuhnlein H.V., Chan H.M. 2000. Environment and contaminants in traditional food systems of northern indigenous peoples. Ann. Rev. Nutr. 20: 595.
Kuhnlein H.V., Receveur O., Soueida R., Egeland G.M. 2004. Arctic Indigenous peoples experience the nutrition transition with changing dietary patterns and obesity. J. Nutr. 134: 1447–1453.
Kuhnlein H.V., Receveur O. 2007. Local cultural animal food contributes high levels of nutrients for Arctic Canadian Indigenous adults and children. J. Nutr. 137: 1110–1114. [pii].
Kutz S., Tomaselli M. 2019. “Two-eyed seeing” supports wildlife health. Science, 364: 1135–1137.
Laird B.D., Goncharov A.B., Egeland G.M., Chan H.M. 2013. Dietary advice on Inuit traditional food use needs to balance benefits and risks of mercury, selenium, and n3 fatty acids. J. Nutr. 146: 923–930.
Leclair D., Fung J., Isaac-Renton J.L., Proulx J.F., May-Hadford J., Ellis A., et al. 2013. Foodborne botulism in Canada, 1985–2005. Emerging Infect. Dis. 19: 961–968.
Lemire M., Fillion M., Frenette B., Passos C.J.S., Guimarães J.R.D., Barbosa F.J., Mergler D. 2011. Selenium from dietary sources and motor functions in the Brazilian Amazon. Neurotoxicology, 32: 944–953.
Lemire M., Kwan M., Laouan-Sidi A.E., Muckle G., Pirlde C., Ayotte P., Dewailly E. 2015. Local country food sources of methylmercury, selenium and omega-3 fatty acids in Nunavik, Northern Quebec. Sci. Total Environ. 509: 248–259.
Little M., Achouba A., Dumas P., Ouellet N., Ayotte P., Lemire M. 2019. Determinants of selenoneine concentration in red blood cells of Inuit from Nunavik (Northern Québec, Canada). Environ. Int. 127: 243–252.
Little M., Hagar H., Zivot C., Dodd W., Skinner K., Kenny T.-A., et al. 2021. Drivers and health implications of the dietary transition among Inuit in the Canadian Arctic: a scoping review. Public Health Nutr. 24: 2650–2668.
Lockhart W.L., Stern G.A., Wagemann R., Hunt R.V., Metner D.A., DeLaronde J., et al. 2005. Concentrations of mercury in tissues of beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) from several communities in the Canadian Arctic from 1981 to 2002. Sci Total Environ. 351–352: 391–412.
Loseto L.L., Stern G.A., Deibel D., Connelly T.L., Prokopowicz A., Lean D.R.S., et al. 2008. Linking mercury exposure to habitat and feeding behaviour in Beaufort Sea beluga whales. J. Mar. Syst. 74: 1012–1024.
Lougheed T. 2010. Changing landscape Arctic traditional. Environ. Health Perspect. 9: 388–393.
Martinez-Levasseur L.M., Simard M., Furgal C.M., Burness G., Bertrand P., Suppa S., et al. 2020. Towards a better understanding of the benefits and risks of country food consumption using the case of walruses in Nunavik (Northern Quebec, Canada). Sci. Total Environ. 719: 137307.
McAuley C., Knopper L.D. 2011. Impacts of traditional food consumption advisories: compliance, changes in diet and loss of confidence in traditional foods. Environ. Health, 10: 55.
McGregor H. 2012. Curriculum change in Nunavut: towards Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit. McGill J. Educ. 47: 285–302.
McHugh S. 2013. “A flash point in Inuit memories”: endangered knowledges in the Mountie sled dog massacre. ESC: English Stud. Can. 39: 149–175.
Morseth C.M. 1997. Twentieth-century changes in beluga whale hunting and butchering by the kanigmiut of Bckland, Alaska. Arctic, 50: 241–255.
Myers H., Furgal C. 2006. Long-range transport of information: are Arctic residents getting the message about contaminants? Arctic, 59: 47–60. Available from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40512767.
Mymrin N.I., Huntington H.P. 1999. Traditional knowledge of the ecology of beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) in the Northern Bering Sea, Chukotka, Russia. Arctic, 52: 62–70.
Nunavik Marine Region Wildlife Board. 2010. Rationale and support for the NMRWB and EMRWB resolutions for a total allowable take for Eastern Hudson Bay beluga whales and associated non-quota limitations in the Nunavik marine region.
Nunavik Marine Region Wildlife Board. 2019. About us.
Odland J.Ø., Donaldson S., Dudarev A.A., Carlsen A. 2016. AMAP assessment 2015: human health in the Arctic. Int. J. Circumpolar Health, 75: 33949.
O'Neil J.D., Elias B., Yassi A. 1997. Poisoned food: cultural resistance to the contaminants discourse in Nunavik. Arct. Anthropol. 34: 29–40.
Ostertag S.K., Loseto L.L., Snow K., Lam J., Hynes K., Gillman D.V. 2018. “That's how we know they're healthy”: the inclusion of traditional ecological knowledge in beluga health monitoring in the Inuvialuit Settlement Region. Arct. Sci. 320: 1–29.
Palmisano F., Cardellicchio N., Zambonin P.G. 1995. Speciation of mercury in dolphin liver: a two-stage mechanism for the demethylation accumulation process and role of selenium. Mar. Environ. Res. 40: 109–121.
Pfeifer P. 2018. Redefining the northern research landscape. Northern Public Affairs: 29–34.
Pirkle C.M., Muckle G., Lemire M. 2016. Managing mercury exposure in northern Canadian communities. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 188: 1015.
Pontual M., de M., Ayotte P., Little M., Furgal C., Boyd A.D., et al. 2021. Seasonal variations in exposure to methylmercury and its dietary sources among pregnant Inuit women in Nunavik, Canada. Sci. Total Environ. 755: 143196.
Pufall E.L., Jones A.Q., McEwen S.A., Lyall C., Peregrine A.S., Edge V.L. 2011. Perception of the importance of traditional country foods to the physical, mental, and spiritual health of Labrador Inuit. Artic, 64: 242–250.
Reeves R.R., Mitchell E.D. 1987. History of white whale (Delphinapterus leucas) exploitation in eastern Hudson Bay and James Bay. Fisheries and Oceans, Information and Publications Branch.
Roher S.I.G., Yu Z., Martin D.H., Benoit A.C. 2021. How is Etuaptmumk/two-eyed seeing characterized in Indigenous health research? A scoping review. PloS One, 16: e0254612.
Rosol R., Powell-Hellyer S., Chan L.H.M. 2016. Impacts of decline harvest of country food on nutrient intake among Inuit in Arctic Canada: impact of climate change and possible adaptation plan. Int. J. Circumpolar Health, 75.
Snook J., Cunsolo A., Dale A. 2018. Co-management led research and sharing space on the pathway to Inuit self-determination in research. Northern Public Affairs, 6: 52–56.
Tengö M., Brondizio E.S., Elmqvist T., Malmer P., Spierenburg M. 2014. Connecting diverse knowledge systems for enhanced ecosystem governance: the multiple evidence base approach. Ambio, 43: 579–591.
Tester F.J., Irniq P. 2008. Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit: social history, politics and the practice of resistance. Arctic, 61: 48–61.
Thornton T.F., Scheer A.M. 2012. Collaborative engagement of local and traditional knowledge and science in marine environments: a review. Ecol. Soc. 17.
Tyrrell M. 2005. Inuit perception, knowledge and use of the sea in Arviat, Nunavut. PQDT, UK. p. 265.
Tyrrell M. 2007. Sentient beings and wildlife resources: Inuit, beluga whales and management regimes in the Canadian arctic. Hum. Ecol. 35: 575–586.
Tyrrell M. 2008. Nunavik Inuit perspectives on beluga whale management in the Canadian Arctic. Hum. Organ. 67: 322–334.
Watt-Cloutier S. 2015. The right to be cold: one woman's story of protecting her culture, the Arctic and the whole planet. Penguin, Canada.
Waugh D., Pearce T., Ostertag S.K., Pokiak V., Collings P., Loseto L.L. 2018. Inuvialuit traditional ecological knowledge of beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas) under changing climatic conditions in Tuktoyaktuk, NT. Arct. Sci. 258: 242–258.
Weatherhead E., Gearheard S., Barry R.G. 2010. Changes in weather persistence: Insight from Inuit knowledge. Global Environ. Change, 20: 523–528.
Wein E.E., Freeman M.M.R., Makus J.C. 1996. Use of and preference for traditional foods among the Belcher Island Inuit. Arctic, 49: 256–264.
Weiss K., Hamann M., Marsh H. 2013. Bridging knowledges: understanding and applying Indigenous and Western scientific knowledge for marine wildlife management. Soc. Natural Resour. 26: 285–302.
Wenzel G.W. 2004. From TEK to IQ: Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and Inuit cultural ecology. Arct. Anthropol. 41: 238–250.
White G. 2006. Cultures in collision: traditional knowledge and Euro-Canadian governance processes in northern land-claim boards. Arctic, 59: 401–414.
Wilson K.J., Bell T., Arreak A., Koonoo B., Angnatsiak D., Ljubicic G.J. 2020. Changing the role of non-Indigenous research partners in practice to support Inuit self-determination in research. Arct. Sci. 6: 127–153.
Worden E., Pearce T., Gruben M., Ross D., Kowana C., Loseto L. 2020. Social-ecological changes and implications for understanding the declining beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas) harvest in Aklavik, Northwest Territories. Arct. Sci. 6: 229–246.
Yamashita M., Yamashita Y., Suzuki T., Kani Y., Mizusawa N., Imamura S., et al. 2013. Selenoneine, a novel selenium-containing compound, mediates detoxification mechanisms against methylmercury accumulation and toxicity in zebrafish embryo. Mar. Biotechnol. 15: 559–570.
Yamashita Y., Yabu T., Yamashita M. 2010. Discovery of the strong antioxidant selenoneine in tuna and selenium redox metabolism. World J. Biol. Chem. 1: 144–150.
Yamashita Y., Yamashita M. 2010. Identification of a novel selenium-containing compound, selenoneine, as the predominant chemical form of organic selenium in the blood of bluefin tuna. J. Biol. Chem. 285: 18134–18138.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Arctic Science
Volume 9 • Number 3 • September 2023
Pages: 616 - 634
History
Received: 18 August 2022
Accepted: 17 January 2023
Accepted manuscript online: 27 March 2023
Version of record online: 28 April 2023
Copyright
© 2023 The Author(s). This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are currently unavailable as per the current research ethics certificate, which ensures confidentiality of the study participants. Data are included in ongoing research ethics board protocol amendments and collaborative negotiations to establish a data-sharing agreement between researchers, RNUK, and the NMRWB.
Key Words
Authors
Author Contributions
Conceptualization: MLi, AA, AM, PA, TP, WJ, MLe
Data curation: NW
Formal analysis: AM
Funding acquisition: MLi, PA, MLe
Investigation: MLi, AM, PA, WJ, MLe
Methodology: MLi, NW, AM, PA, MLe
Project administration: MLi
Supervision: MLi, PA, MLe
Validation: MLi, TP, WJ
Visualization: AN
Writing – original draft: MLi, NW
Writing – review & editing: MLi, AA, AM, PA, AN, MLe
Competing Interests
The authors declare there are no competing interests.
Funding Information
This research was funded by a postdoctoral fellowship through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, ArcticNet grant No. P74, and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada Northern Contaminants Program grants No. H-12 and H-02. MLi is a Michael Smith Health Research BC Scholar. MLe is a member of Quebec Océan and also received a salary grant from the Fonds de recherche du Québec—Santé (FRQS): Junior 1 (2015–2019) and Junior 2 (2019–2023). She is the titular of the Littoral Research Chair—the Sentinel North Partnership Research Chair in Ecosystem Approaches to Health (2019–2024), which is mainly funded by Sentinel North and by the Northern Contaminants Program (NCP) of the Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada.
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Other Metrics
Citations
Cite As
Matthew Little, Nicole Winters, Adel Achouba, Adriano Magesky, Pierre Ayotte, Tommy Palliser, Angus Naylor, Willie Jararuse, and Mélanie Lemire. 2023. Weaving together Inuit knowledge and western science: a mixed-methods case study of qilalugaq (beluga whale) in Quaqtaq, Nunavik. Arctic Science.
9(3): 616-634. https://doi.org/10.1139/as-2022-0039
Export Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
Cited by
1. Reflecting on the use of
Etuaptmumk
/Two-Eyed seeing in a study examining hospital-based Indigenous wellness services in the Northwest Territories, Canada
2. “We call it soul food”: Inuit women and the role of country food in health and well-being in Nunavut