DOCSLIB.ORG

Feeding Habits of the Common Snook, Centropomus Undecimalis, In

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Feeding Habits of the Common Snook, Centropomus Undecimalis, In Fisheries-Independent Monitoring in the Estero Bay Estuary project funded by the South Florida Water Management District Philip Stevens, Bob McMichael, Marin Greenwood, and Tim MacDonald Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, Charlotte Harbor Field Laboratory FIM program Field Labs St. Johns River Choctawhatchee Bay & 2001 Santa Rosa Sound Apalachicola 1992 - 1997 1997 Cedar Key Northern Indian 1996 River Lagoon 1990 Tampa Bay 1989 Southern Indian River Lagoon 1997 Charlotte Harbor 1989 Florida Keys 1998 Myakka River Peace River Gulf of Mexico Caloosahatchee River Research vessel - mullet skiff Sampling gears used by the FIM program Small fish sampling gears 21-m Seine 6.1-m Otter Trawl Example of a small fish sample Large fish sampling gears 183-m Haul Seine Examples of a large fish sample Estero Bay estuary Fisheries-Independent Monitoring 3 years (2005-2007) 1000 1500 2000 2500 500 0 1/1/2004 3/1/2004 5/1/2004 7/1/2004 9/1/2004 11/1/2004 1/1/2005 3/1/2005 Inflow Freshwater 5/1/2005 7/1/2005 Mean Daily Flow (CFS) Flow Mean Daily 9/1/2005 11/1/2005 1/1/2006 3/1/2006 5/1/2006 Period Study 7/1/2006 9/1/2006 11/1/2006 1/1/2007 3/1/2007 5/1/2007 7/1/2007 9/1/2007 11/1/2007 Study Design Study Design 158 Fishes and Swimming Invertebrates Multi-bay Comparison Multi-bay Comparison Multi-bay Comparison Small Seines – Total Fish Multi-bay Comparison Small Seines MDS; 2D Stress: 0.09 Bay 2007 Gasparilla Sound Pine Island Sound 2007 2006 San Carlos Bay 2007 2007 Estero Bay Similarity 65 2006 2006 2005 2006 2005 2005 2005 Multi-bay Comparison Small Seines SIMPER; 81% 81% SIMPER; Dissimilarity Multi-bay Comparison Large Haul Seines – Total Fish Multi-bay Comparison Large Haul Seines MDS; 2D Stress: 0.08 Bay Gasparilla Sound 20072007 Pine Island Sound 2007 San Carlos Bay Estero Bay 2006 2006 Similarity 2007 60 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006 2006 Multi-bay Comparison Large Haul Seines SIMPER; 81% 81% SIMPER; Dissimilarity Multi-bay Comparison Trawl – Total Fish Multi-bay Comparison Trawl 2007 MDS; 2D Stress: 0.07 Bay Gasparilla Sound Pine Island Sound 2007 San Carlos Bay 2007 Estero Bay 2007 Similarity 2006 2005 60 2005 2006 2006 2006 2005 2005 Multi-bay Comparison Trawl SIMPER; 84% 84% SIMPER; Dissimilarity Estero Bay Tributaries Mullock 2D Stress: 0.14 season_wateryear MayOct_2005 NovApr_2006 MayOct_2006 Mullock NovApr_2007 MayOct_2007 Imperial Mullock Mullock Imperial Hendry Imperial Hendry Hendry Imperial Mullock Hendry Imperial Hendry Species Profiles Blue crab Red drum Striped mullet Pink shrimp Common snook Striped mojarra Bay anchovy Hogchoker Southern kingfish Pinfish Species Profiles •When are species present? 12 18 16 10 14 ± 95% CL (bars) •e.g., pink shrimp from the -2 8 12 Estero Bay estuary (21.3-m seines) 10 6 (points/lines)± SE 8 4 6 4 2 2 length Mean (mm) 0 0 Geometric mean abundance.100 m Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Species Profiles •Where are species found? 0.5 •e.g., common snook from the Estero Bay ± 95% CL 0.4 -2 estuary (21.3-m seines) 0.3 0.2 0.1 Geometric mean abundance.100 m 0.0 Estero Bay Hendry CreekMullock Creek Estero RiverSpring CreekImperial River Species Profiles •At what salinities are species found in the river? 14 12 •e.g., Striped anchovy ± 95% CL from the Estero Bay -2 10 estuary (21.3-m seines) 8 6 4 2 Geometric mean abundance.100 m 0 5-12 0-0.5 0.5-5 12-18 18-30 >=30 Salinity Species Profiles •What habitats do they occupy? 14 12 ± 95% CL -2 •e.g., pink shrimp from 10 the Estero Bay estuary (21.3-m seines) 8 6 4 2 Geometric mean abundance.100 m 0 other >50% veg. mangrove unvegetated <=50% veg. Habitat Species Profiles •Response to Inflow? Lagodon rhomboides (21.3-m seine): Bay 5.5 Sizes:<=150mm ) Feb. to Jun. -2 5.0 y = 6.7633 - 0.7368x Adj. r2 = 0.482 4.5 •e.g., pinfish in the Estero 4.0 Bay (21.3-m seines) 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 ln(catch-per-unit-effort, animals.100m ln(catch-per-unit-effort, 1.5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ln(168-day-lagged inflow + 1, cfs) Species Profiles •Response to Inflow? Farfantepenaeus duorarum (21.3-m seine): Tributaries 3.0 ) -2 2.5 •e.g., pink shrimp in the 2.0 Estero Bay tributaries (21.3- m seines) 1.5 1.0 Sizes:<=150mm Jun. to Oct. 0.5 y = - 3.6567 + 2.2834x - 0.2267 x2 Adj. r2 = 0.4199 ln(catch-per-unit-effort, animals.100m ln(catch-per-unit-effort, 0.0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ln(7-day-lagged inflow + 1, cfs) Estero Bay estuary Current Knowledge Fish assemblages under current water management Baseline indices of relative abundance for important species Distribution and abundance of exotic fishes Fish health background levels Stochastic events regional or specific to river Thank you! Charlotte Harbor Field Lab 585 Prineville St. Port Charlotte, FL 33954 Phone: (941) 613-0945 Staff: Philip Stevens Chuck Idelberger Dave Blewett Bill Curnow Gregg Poulakis Sarah Erickson John Hadden Toni Yard Julia Shaw Amy Timmers Scott Leonard Chrystal Murray.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • WALTON COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE: CHAPTER 4 | Resource Protection Standards Revised September 10, 2019 Page 2 of 55
    Revised September 10, 2019 Page 1 of 55 CHAPTER IV. RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS 4.00.00. OVERALL PURPOSE AND INTENT The purpose of this chapter is to protect, conserve and enhance Walton County's natural and historical features. It is the intent of the County to enhance resource protection by utilizing development management techniques to control potential negative impacts from development and redevelopment on the resources addressed herein. Specifically, it is the intent of the County to limit the specific impacts and cumulative impacts of development or redevelopment upon historic sites, wetlands, coastal dune lakes, coastal dune lines, water quality, water quantity, wildlife habitats, living marine resources, or other natural resources through the use of site design techniques, such as clustering, elevation on pilings, setbacks, and buffering. The intent of this policy is to avoid such impact and to permit mitigation of impacts only as a last resort. 4.00.01. Permits Required. A. Local Development Order. Unless exempt under Section 1.15.00, a development order is required for all development or redevelopment of real property within the County. As a part of the application process defined in Chapter 1 of this Code, a landowner or developer must apply the provisions of this chapter before any other design work is done for any proposed land development. Application of the provisions of this chapter will divide a proposed development site into zones or areas that may be developed with minimal regulation, zones that may be developed under more stringent regulation and zones that must generally be left free of development activity.
    [Show full text]
  • Monophyly and Interrelationships of Snook and Barramundi (Centropomidae Sensu Greenwood) and five New Markers for fish Phylogenetics ⇑ Chenhong Li A, , Betancur-R
    Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 60 (2011) 463–471 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ympev Monophyly and interrelationships of Snook and Barramundi (Centropomidae sensu Greenwood) and five new markers for fish phylogenetics ⇑ Chenhong Li a, , Betancur-R. Ricardo b, Wm. Leo Smith c, Guillermo Ortí b a School of Biological Sciences, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68588-0118, USA b Department of Biological Sciences, The George Washington University, Washington, DC 200052, USA c The Field Museum, Department of Zoology, Fishes, 1400 South Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605, USA article info abstract Article history: Centropomidae as defined by Greenwood (1976) is composed of three genera: Centropomus, Lates, and Received 24 January 2011 Psammoperca. But composition and monophyly of this family have been challenged in subsequent Revised 3 May 2011 morphological studies. In some classifications, Ambassis, Siniperca and Glaucosoma were added to the Accepted 5 May 2011 Centropomidae. In other studies, Lates + Psammoperca were excluded, restricting the family to Available online 12 May 2011 Centropomus. Recent analyses of DNA sequences did not solve the controversy, mainly due to limited taxonomic or character sampling. The present study is based on DNA sequence data from thirteen Keywords: genes (one mitochondrial and twelve nuclear markers) for 57 taxa, representative of all relevant Centropomidae species. Five of the nuclear markers are new for fish phylogenetic studies. The monophyly of Centrop- Lates Psammoperca omidae sensu Greenwood was supported by both maximum likelihood and Bayesian analyses of a Ambassidae concatenated data set (12,888 bp aligned). No support was found for previous morphological hypothe- Niphon spinosus ses suggesting that ambassids are closely allied to the Centropomidae.
    [Show full text]
  • Feeding Habits of Centropomus Undecimalis (Actinopterygii, Centropomidae) in the Parnaíba River Delta, Piauí, Brazil
    Brazilian Journal of Development 39536 ISSN: 2525-8761 Feeding habits of Centropomus undecimalis (Actinopterygii, Centropomidae) in the Parnaíba river delta, Piauí, Brazil Alimentação do Centropomus undecimalis (Actinopterygii, Centropomidae) no estuário do delta do rio Parnaíba, Piauí, Brasil DOI:10.34117/bjdv7n4-423 Recebimento dos originais: 07/03/2021 Aceitação para publicação: 16/04/2021 José Rafael Soares Fonseca Doutorando em Recursos Pesqueiros e Engenharia de Pesca Programa de Pós-Graduação em Recursos Pesqueiros e Engenharia de Pesca, Centro de Engenharias e Ciências Exatas, Universidade Estadual do Oeste do Paraná – UNIOESTE, Rua da Faculdade, 645, 85903-000 – Toledo– PR – Brasil E-mail: [email protected] Cezar Augusto Freire Fernandes Doutorado em Recursos Pesqueiros e Aquicultura Universidade Federal do Delta do Parnaíba – UFDPAR, Av. São Sebastião, 2819 Bairro Nossa Senhora de Fátima– CEP: 64.202-020 – Parnaíba – PI – Brasil E-mail: [email protected] Francisca Edna de Andrade Cunha Doutorado em Ciências Biológicas Universidade Federal do Delta do Parnaíba – UFDPAR, Av. São Sebastião, 2819 Bairro Nossa Senhora de Fátima– CEP: 64.202-020 – Parnaíba – PI – Brasil E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT The objective of this work was to evaluate the feeding of Centropomus undecimalis in the estuary of the Parnaíba river delta, with emphasis on diet composition during seasonal variations between dry and rainy seasons. The samples were obtained from artisanal fishing with gillnets, from June 2014 - July 2015. The individuals were measured, weighed and dissected to remove the stomachs. The fish diet was analyzed using the methods: Gravimetric, Frequency of Occurrence, Dominance of the item and Food Index.
    [Show full text]
  • Estero River for the Village of Estero
    The Significance of the Estero River for the Village of Estero Photo: Florida Department of Environmental Protection Estuary = “Estero” Estero Bay Watershed Estero Bay Watershed: 360 square miles Pine Island Caloosahatchee Sound Matlacha Watershed Pass Watershed Estero River Basin: 66 square miles (45,000 acres) Estero River: Approximately 8 miles long Mean depth of 3.99 feet and a max depth of 12.06 feet (USF, 2013) Estero Bay Aquatic Preserve: 18,829 acres Source: Estero Bay Agency on Bay Management, State of the Bay Update 2014 Halfway Headwaters Wild Turkey Pond Strand Preserve Imperial Marsh Preserve To Estero River Flows (Source, South Lee County Watershed Plan Update, May 14, 2009) History Source: Estero Historical Society Estero River 1957, State Archives of Florida Historical Collection Estero River, Circa 1900 source: FGCU Collection / Koreshan “A Historical Geography of Southwest Florida Waterways , Vol. II Source: Estero Historical Society Pre-Development Conditions 1944 1953 1998 Courtesy: Lee County Natural Resources What happens in the DRGR affects Estero River and Estero Bay 1953 Hydropatterns 2007 Hydropatterns Source: Kevin Erwin, Consulting Ecologist Vegetation (Source: USF, West-Central Florida Tidal Stream Assessment Study, p. 123) Wildlife Listed Animal Species Gulf sturgeon roseate spoonbill American alligator peregrine falcon loggerhead turtle southeastern American kestrel common snook gopher tortoise Number of Known Atlantic green turtle American oystercatcher Native Species leatherback bald eagle Mammals: 37
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 COLA
    Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 COL Application Part 2 — FSAR SUBSECTION 2.4.1: HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.4 HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING ..................................................................2.4.1-1 2.4.1 HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION ............................................................2.4.1-1 2.4.1.1 Site and Facilities .....................................................................2.4.1-1 2.4.1.2 Hydrosphere .............................................................................2.4.1-3 2.4.1.3 References .............................................................................2.4.1-12 2.4.1-i Revision 6 Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 COL Application Part 2 — FSAR SUBSECTION 2.4.1 LIST OF TABLES Number Title 2.4.1-201 East Miami-Dade County Drainage Subbasin Areas and Outfall Structures 2.4.1-202 Summary of Data Records for Gage Stations at S-197, S-20, S-21A, and S-21 Flow Control Structures 2.4.1-203 Monthly Mean Flows at the Canal C-111 Structure S-197 2.4.1-204 Monthly Mean Water Level at the Canal C-111 Structure S-197 (Headwater) 2.4.1-205 Monthly Mean Flows in the Canal L-31E at Structure S-20 2.4.1-206 Monthly Mean Water Levels in the Canal L-31E at Structure S-20 (Headwaters) 2.4.1-207 Monthly Mean Flows in the Princeton Canal at Structure S-21A 2.4.1-208 Monthly Mean Water Levels in the Princeton Canal at Structure S-21A (Headwaters) 2.4.1-209 Monthly Mean Flows in the Black Creek Canal at Structure S-21 2.4.1-210 Monthly Mean Water Levels in the Black Creek Canal at Structure S-21 2.4.1-211 NOAA
    [Show full text]
  • Movements, Fishery Interactions, and Unusual Mortalities of Bottlenose Dolphins
    MOVEMENTS, FISHERY INTERACTIONS, AND UNUSUAL MORTALITIES OF BOTTLENOSE DOLPHINS by STEVE F. SHIPPEE B.S. University of West Florida, 1983 Professional Certificate in Natural Resource Management, University of California San Diego, 2001 A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Biology in the College of Sciences at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Spring Term 2014 Major Professor: Graham A.J. Worthy © 2014 Steve F. Shippee ii ABSTRACT Bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) inhabit coastal and estuarine habitats across the globe. Well-studied dolphin communities thrive in some peninsular Florida bays, but less is known about dolphins in the Florida panhandle where coastal development, storms, algal blooms, fishery interactions, and catastrophic pollution have severely impacted their populations. Dolphins can react to disturbance and environmental stressors by modifying their movements and habitat use, which may put them in jeopardy of conflict with humans. Fishery interaction (FI) plays an increasing role in contributing to dolphin mortalities. I investigated dolphin movements, habitat use, residency patterns, and frequency of FI with sport fishing. Dolphins were tracked using radio tags and archival data loggers to determine fine-scale swimming, daily travels, and foraging activity. Dolphin abundance, site fidelity, ranging, stranding mortality, and community structure was characterized at Choctawhatchee and Pensacola Bays in the Florida Panhandle via small boat surveying and photo-identification. Reported increases in dolphin interactions with sport anglers were assessed at deep sea reefs and coastal fishing piers near Destin, FL and Orange Beach, AL. Results from these studies yield insights into the ranging and foraging patterns of bottlenose dolphins, and increase our knowledge of them in the northern Gulf of Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • Do Coastal Land Alterations Impact Estuarine Food Webs?
    Do coastal land alterations impact estuarine food webs? Aaron J. Adams Center for Fisheries Enhancement Fisheries Habitat Ecology Program Mote Marine Laboratory Charlotte Harbor Field Station P.O. Box 2197 Pineland, FL 33945 Phone: 239-283-1622 Fax: 239-283-2466 Email: [email protected] R. Kirby Wolfe Center for Fisheries Enhancement Fisheries Habitat Ecology Program Mote Marine Laboratory Charlotte Harbor Field Station P.O. Box 2197 Pineland, FL 33945 Craig A. Layman Marine Sciences Program Department of Biological Sciences Florida International University 3000 NE 151st Street North Miami, FL 33181 Phone: 786-390-0578 Email: [email protected] Abstract In estuarine ecosystems, maintaining the proper balance of freshwater and marine inputs is essential for proper ecosystem function, and anthropogenic alterations of this balance (namely, freshwater flows into estuaries) are of particular concern to resource managers. Differences in freshwater flows and associated salinity patterns can influence biodiversity or the relative abundance of organisms. Freshwater flows are especially important to small tributaries that transverse the margin between uplands and estuaries and are important habitats for many young- of-the-year marine finfish and shellfish. Little is known, however, about the effects of these habitat alterations on trophic ecology of coastal fishes. We used stomach contents and stable isotope analysis (δ13C, δ15N) to examine the effects of freshwater flow alterations on the trophic ecology of juvenile common snook (Centropomus undecimalis) in four mangrove creeks with different freshwater flow regimes: two creeks considered ‘less degraded’ (their drainages are largely intact) and two creeks are ‘more degraded’ (drainages have been altered by development and drainage ditches).
    [Show full text]
  • Gulf of Mexico Estuary Program Restoration Council (EPA RESTORE 003 008 Cat1)
    Gulf Coast Gulf-wide Foundational Investment Ecosystem Gulf of Mexico Estuary Program Restoration Council (EPA_RESTORE_003_008_Cat1) Project Name: Gulf of Mexico Estuary Program – Planning Cost: Category 1: $2,200,000 Responsible Council Member: Environmental Protection Agency Partnering Council Member: State of Florida Project Details: This project proposes to develop and stand-up a place-based estuary program encompassing one or more of the following bays in Florida’s northwest panhandle region: Perdido Bay, Pensacola Bay, Escambia Bay, Choctawhatchee Bay, St. Andrews Bay and Apalachicola Bay. Activities: The key components of the project include establishing the host organization and hiring of key staff, developing Management and Technical committees, determining stressors and then developing and approving a Comprehensive Plan. Although this Estuary Program would be modeled after the structure and operation of National Estuary Programs (NEP) it would not be a designated NEP. This project would serve as a pilot project for the Council to consider expanding Gulf-wide when future funds become available. Environmental Benefits: If the estuary program being planned by this activity were implemented in the future, projects undertaken would directly support goals and outcomes focusing on restoring water quality, while also addressing restoration and conservation of habitat, replenishing and protecting living coastal and marine resources, enhancing community resilience and revitalizing the coastal economy. Specific actions would likely include,
    [Show full text]
  • Southwest Florida Environmental Initiatives Conference PRACTICUM BACKGROUND
    Agency For Bay Management Presents: Southwest Florida Environmental Initiatives Conference PRACTICUM BACKGROUND Johnson Engineering, Inc. •Almost 60 Years Experience – Founded In 1946. •One of The Largest Engineering Firms In Southwest Florida •Provides Engineering, Survey, Planning, Landscape Architecture And Environmental Services •Over 210 Employees PRACTICUM BACKGROUND Agency for Bay Management (ABM) •Created by Settlement Agreement for Florida Gulf Coast University •Assesses Overall Land Use and Natural Systems, Environmental Protection and Mitigation tools in the Estero bay Watershed Concerned Citizen Goals • Communicate environmental programs to public • Bridge gaps between policy and real world • Identify project for funding Who should present issues? •Environmental Protection Agency – Water Quality •Florida Department Of Environmental Protection – Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) •South Florida Water Management District – Lake Okeechobee, Babcock, etc. •Conservancy Of Southwest Florida – Rule Challenges. •U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers – Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), Watershed Approach •Lee County – Best Management Practices (BMP), Master Mitigation Plan Who to sponsor? •Consultants •Non-profit Agencies •Attorneys •Developers How to invite attendees? •E-mail •Mail •Post Event set-Up •Moderator •Fee •Location •Food •Entertainment Final Line Up •FDEP – Karen Bickford •U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers – Chuck Scheppell •Lee County – Roland Ottolini •SFWMD – Jacque Rippe •Estero Bay Nutrient Management Partnership – Janet Strutzel
    [Show full text]
  • Seagrass Integrated Mapping and Monitoring for the State of Florida Mapping and Monitoring Report No. 1
    Yarbro and Carlson, Editors SIMM Report #1 Seagrass Integrated Mapping and Monitoring for the State of Florida Mapping and Monitoring Report No. 1 Edited by Laura A. Yarbro and Paul R. Carlson Jr. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Fish and Wildlife Research Institute St. Petersburg, Florida March 2011 Yarbro and Carlson, Editors SIMM Report #1 Yarbro and Carlson, Editors SIMM Report #1 Table of Contents Authors, Contributors, and SIMM Team Members .................................................................. 3 Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................... 4 Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 7 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 31 How this report was put together ........................................................................................... 36 Chapter Reports ...................................................................................................................... 41 Perdido Bay ........................................................................................................................... 41 Pensacola Bay .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • And Centropomus Parallelus (Poey, 1860) in Two Tropical Estuaries in Northeastern Brazil
    Feeding ecology of Centropomus undecimalis (Bloch, 1792) and Centropomus parallelus (Poey, 1860) in two tropical estuaries in Northeastern Brazil ALEX SOUZA LIRA*, FLÁVIA LUCENA FRÉDOU, ANDRÉA PONTES VIANA, LEANDRO NOLÉ EDUARDO & THIERRY FRÉDOU Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco. Av. Dom Manuel de Medeiros, s/n, Departamento de Pesca e Aquicultura, Dois Irmãos, Recife, PE, Brasil. CEP: 52171-900. Corresponding author: [email protected] Abstract: This study provides information on the feeding habitats of Centropomus undecimalis and Centropomus parallelus in two estuaries of Pernambuco, Northeast Brazil. Specimens were collected every three months from February 2013 to June 2014 in the estuary of Sirinhaém River (south coast) and the Estuarine Complex of Santa Cruz Channel (north coast). To access diet composition we used frequency of occurrence %Fo; numerical frequency %N and weight percentage %W. Multivariate analysis of MDS, ANOSIM and SIMPER were used to evaluate the similarity and differences of the diet between species and regions. A total of 390 individuals were evaluated. The results indicate that the Estuary of Sirinhaém River and the Estuarine Complex of Santa Cruz Channel are used as a feeding ground by the Centropomus species. The diet of the C. undecimalis and C.parallelus in both areas was based primarily on Crustaceans - Decapoda and teleosts. C. undecimalis appeared as a predator with piscivorous tendency in the two study regions, whereas C. parallelus was classified as zoobentivorous in the south coast and as piscivorous in the north coast. Key-words: Estuaries, overlap, trophic ecology, snook Resumo: Ecologia alimentar do Centropomus undecimalis (BLOCH, 1792) and Centropomus parallelus (POEY, 1860) em dois estuários tropicais no Nordeste do Brasil.
    [Show full text]
  • Intrinsic Vulnerability in the Global Fish Catch
    The following appendix accompanies the article Intrinsic vulnerability in the global fish catch William W. L. Cheung1,*, Reg Watson1, Telmo Morato1,2, Tony J. Pitcher1, Daniel Pauly1 1Fisheries Centre, The University of British Columbia, Aquatic Ecosystems Research Laboratory (AERL), 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4, Canada 2Departamento de Oceanografia e Pescas, Universidade dos Açores, 9901-862 Horta, Portugal *Email: [email protected] Marine Ecology Progress Series 333:1–12 (2007) Appendix 1. Intrinsic vulnerability index of fish taxa represented in the global catch, based on the Sea Around Us database (www.seaaroundus.org) Taxonomic Intrinsic level Taxon Common name vulnerability Family Pristidae Sawfishes 88 Squatinidae Angel sharks 80 Anarhichadidae Wolffishes 78 Carcharhinidae Requiem sharks 77 Sphyrnidae Hammerhead, bonnethead, scoophead shark 77 Macrouridae Grenadiers or rattails 75 Rajidae Skates 72 Alepocephalidae Slickheads 71 Lophiidae Goosefishes 70 Torpedinidae Electric rays 68 Belonidae Needlefishes 67 Emmelichthyidae Rovers 66 Nototheniidae Cod icefishes 65 Ophidiidae Cusk-eels 65 Trachichthyidae Slimeheads 64 Channichthyidae Crocodile icefishes 63 Myliobatidae Eagle and manta rays 63 Squalidae Dogfish sharks 62 Congridae Conger and garden eels 60 Serranidae Sea basses: groupers and fairy basslets 60 Exocoetidae Flyingfishes 59 Malacanthidae Tilefishes 58 Scorpaenidae Scorpionfishes or rockfishes 58 Polynemidae Threadfins 56 Triakidae Houndsharks 56 Istiophoridae Billfishes 55 Petromyzontidae
    [Show full text]