Otolith Morphology Description of some Reef Fishesin the Coastal Areas of Cat Ba and Tho Chu Islands

Received: 03-11-2021

Accepted: 01-03-2022

DOI:

Views

0

Downloads

0

Issue: Vol. 20 No. 5 (2022)

Section:

CHĂN NUÔI – THÚ Y – THỦY SẢN

How to Cite:

Thanh, V., Dat, T., Gioi, P., Huong, T., & Thinh, T. (2024). Otolith Morphology Description of some Reef Fishesin the Coastal Areas of Cat Ba and Tho Chu Islands. Vietnam Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 20(5), 603–613. http://testtapchi.vnua.edu.vn/index.php/vjasvn/article/view/989

Otolith Morphology Description of some Reef Fishesin the Coastal Areas of Cat Ba and Tho Chu Islands

Vu Quyet Thanh (*) 1 , Tran Van Dat 1 , Phung Van Gioi 1 , Tran Van Huong 2 , Tran Cong Thinh 3

  • 1 Trung tâm Nhiệt đới Việt Nga
  • 2 Viện Nghiên cứu Hải sản
  • 3 Viện Hải dương học

    • Keywords

     Reeffish, otolith morphology, otolith size, otolith structure

    Abstract


    The study focused on describing the otolith morphology of 14 fish species in the territorial sea areas of Cat Ba (Hai Phong) and Tho Chu (Kien Giang) islands. Using the descriptive method of the authors Harkonen, Campana, Svetocheva; Brodeur. The results showed that otoliths had various shapes and structures such as bow-shaped ellipse (Sargocentron rubrum…), leaf-shaped (Hemiramphus sp…), disc-shaped (Plotosus lineatus…); rostrum,antirostrum(Pentapodus setosus - long;Sargocentron rubrum - unclear), ostium, cauda - shallow, deep(Selaroides leptolepis -shallow; Crenimugil pedaraki- deep…). The otolith size measured using the software Olympus cellSens Standard 2.2 and the ShapeR package in the R programming language.The results indicated thatthere existed differences in otolith size between species (F >> 1; P<0,05).The average size OL, OW, P of Longfin mullet (Crenimugil pedaraki) was highest (OL = 8.03 ± 0.12; OW = 4.07 ± 0.08; P = 24.38 ± 0.15) and the size of Decorated ponyfish(Nuchequula gerreoides)wassmallest (OL = 0.75 ± 0.01; OW = 0.37 ± 0.02; P = 1.35 ± 0.112). The ratio OL/OW has the highest value for tropical sand goby (Acentrogobius caninus)(0,84) and the lowest value for shrimp scad (Alepes djedaba)(0.34).This ratio was different between species (F = 169.1; P <0.05).

    References

    Allen G.R., Steene R., Humann H. & Deloach N. (2003). Reef Fish Identification Tropical Pacific. New World Publications, Inc.

    Campana S.E. (2004). Photographic Atlas of Fish Otoliths of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean. Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences No 133. NRC Research. press. https://doi.org/10.1139/9780660191089

    Froese R. & Pauly D. (2021). FishBase - World Wide Web electronic publication. Retrieved fromwww.fishbase.orgon Feb. 08, 2021.

    Gurova L.A. & Pastuhov V.D. (1974). A feeding and food mutual relations of the pelagic fishes and the seals of Baikal. Novosibirsk Nauka.

    Harkonen T. (1986). Guide to the Otoliths of the Bony Fishes of the Northeast Atlantic. Hellerup Danbiu ApS.

    He T., Cheng J., Qin J., Li Y. & Gao T. (2017). Comparative analysis of otolith morphology in three species of Scomber. Ichthyol Res. 65: 192-201.http://doi.org/10.1007/s10228-017-0605-4.

    Kimura S., Imamura H., Nguyen V.Q. & Pham T.D. (2018). Fishes of Ha Long Bay, the natural heritage site in northern Vietnam. Fisheries Research Laboratory, Mie University, Shima, Japan.

    Lieske E. & Meyers R. (1996). Coral Reef Fishes (Caribbean, Indian Ocean and facific Ocean including the Red Sea). Princeton University Presss, America.

    Lin C., Gracia B.D., Pierotti M.E.R., Andrews A.H., Griswold K. & O’Dea A. (2019). Reconstructing reef fish communities using fish otoliths in coral reef sediments. PLoSOne. 14(6): Article e0218413. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218413

    Libungan L.A. & Pálsson S. (2015). ShapeR: An R package to study otolith shape variation among fish populations. PLoSOne. 10(3): Article e0121102. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121102.

    McBride B.R.S., Hauser J.W. & Sutherland S.J. (2010). Guide to Otoliths of Some Northwest Atlantic Fishes. National Marine Fisheries Serv.

    Nakabo T. (2002). Fishes of Japan with pictorial keys to the species, English. Tokai University Press, Japan.

    Popper A.N. & Lu Z. (2000). Structure function relationships in fish otolith organs. Fish. Res. 46(1): 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-7836(00)00129-6.

    Secor D.H., Dean J.M. & Campana S.E. (Editors). (1995). Recent developments in fish otolith research. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC.

    Summerfelt R.C. & Hall G.E. (1987). Age and growth of fish. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.

    Svetocheva O., Stasenkova N. & Gennadiy F. (2002). The morphological characteristic of the otoliths some fishes of the White Sea. Ichthyology issues. 42(3): 350-359.

    Svetocheva O.N., Stasenkova & Fooks G. (2007). Guide to the bony fishes otoliths of the white sea. IMR/PINRO.

    Tuset V.M., Lozano I., Gonzalez J., Pertusa J. & Garcia-Diaz M. (2003) Shape indices to identify regional differences in otolith morphology of comber, Serranus cabrilla (L., 1758). J Appl Ichthyol. 19: 88-93.

    Vu Quyet Thanh & Kartavtseva Yu. Ph. (2021). Otolith Shape Analysis and its Utilily for Identification of Two Smelt Species, Hypomesus japonicusand H. nipponensis(Osteichthyes, Osmeridae) from the Northwestern Sea of Japan with Inferences in Stock Discrimination of H. japonicus. Russian Journal of Marine Biology. 46(6): 431-440. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1063074020060115.