Competing Hypotheses and Scientific Non-Recognition: Investigating the Hector’s and Māui Dolphin Decline in the Context of Wartime Chemical Legacies
Abstract
This e-poster examines the decline of Hector’s and Māui dolphins in New Zealand as a case of fragmented ecological knowledge and competing causal explanations. It does not argue that herbicide-related contamination caused the decline. Instead, it explores how competing hypotheses should be evaluated when evidence is incomplete, unevenly distributed, and institutionally sensitive. The dominant explanation emphasizes fishing-related mortality, including bycatch and net entanglement. An alternative hypothesis considers possible exposure to organochlorine contaminants, including dioxins, furans, PCBs, DDT-related compounds, and residues associated with chlorinated herbicides linked to the wider Vietnam War-era chemical production economy. The central issue is methodological rather than causal. Different hypotheses may receive unequal scientific attention under conditions of incomplete evidence. Drawing on the concept of regimes of scientific recognition, the poster examines how evidence is selected, connected, excluded, or downgraded when explanations are politically, institutionally, or scientifically inconvenient. The poster proposes a comparative framework that evaluates fishing, demographic fragility, habitat change, and contamination-related hypotheses according to available evidence, explanatory power, and remaining uncertainties. Its contribution is methodological: to promote fair and transparent testing of competing explanations when ecological evidence is fragmented and causation remains contested.
Related
- Emotion recognition in neurotechnology: A scientific and technical fact check
- Investigating biotic, chemical, and physical drivers of periphyton and invertebrate biomass in boreal streams supporting juvenile Atlantic salmon
- Mate recognition in orchid bees is mediated by acquired chemical signals.
- Selective Recognition, Covalent Linkage and Chemical Exchange of Artificial Cells through Engineered α-Hemolysin
- Debate, Not Voting: Agentic Arbitration over Weak Optical Chemical Structure Recognition Models
BibTeX
@article{gibbs2026competing,
title = {{Competing Hypotheses and Scientific Non-Recognition: Investigating the Hector’s and Māui Dolphin Decline in the Context of Wartime Chemical Legacies}},
author = {Andrew Gibbs and Dmitry Nikolaenko},
journal = {Pollution and Diseases},
year = {2026},
month = jun,
doi = {10.66659/10csws50},
url = {https://doi.org/10.66659/10csws50},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Competing Hypotheses and Scientific Non-Recognition: Investigating the Hector’s and Māui Dolphin Decline in the Context of Wartime Chemical Legacies
AU - Andrew Gibbs
AU - Dmitry Nikolaenko
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/06/18
JO - Pollution and Diseases
DO - 10.66659/10csws50
UR - https://doi.org/10.66659/10csws50
AB - This e-poster examines the decline of Hector’s and Māui dolphins in New Zealand as a case of fragmented ecological knowledge and competing causal explanations. It does not argue that herbicide-related contamination caused the decline. Instead, it explores how competing hypotheses should be evaluated when evidence is incomplete, unevenly distributed, and institutionally sensitive. The dominant explanation emphasizes fishing-related mortality, including bycatch and net entanglement. An alternative hypothesis considers possible exposure to organochlorine contaminants, including dioxins, furans, PCBs, DDT-related compounds, and residues associated with chlorinated herbicides linked to the wider Vietnam War-era chemical production economy. The central issue is methodological rather than causal. Different hypotheses may receive unequal scientific attention under conditions of incomplete evidence. Drawing on the concept of regimes of scientific recognition, the poster examines how evidence is selected, connected, excluded, or downgraded when explanations are politically, institutionally, or scientifically inconvenient. The poster proposes a comparative framework that evaluates fishing, demographic fragility, habitat change, and contamination-related hypotheses according to available evidence, explanatory power, and remaining uncertainties. Its contribution is methodological: to promote fair and transparent testing of competing explanations when ecological evidence is fragmented and causation remains contested.
SN - 3029-9039
ER -