A Contribution to the Trophic Biology of the Blue Marlin (Makaira Nigricans Lacepede, 1802) in Hawaii 1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Pacific Science (1984), vol. 38, no. 2 © 1984 by the University of Hawaii Press. All rights reserved A Contribution to the Trophic Biology of the Blue Marlin (Makaira nigricans Lacepede, 1802) in Hawaii 1 RICHARD E. BROCK 2 ABSTRACT: A study of the trophic biology of 87 blue marlin caught in Hawaiian waters indicates that these opportunistic predators consume a diverse array of prey. The data suggest that the diet of blue marlin is influenced by the locality of capture. Thus, surface (troll)-caught blue marlin from near the Hawaiian Islands consume numerous larvae, postlarvae, and juveniles ofinshore species, prey relatively rare in marlin taken on the high seas. Volumetrically, these inshore forms are oflittle consequence and probably contribute little to the energy requirements of blue marlin. As shown in other studies, small tunas are the single most important component of Hawaiian blue marlin diets. THERE HAS BEEN CONSIDERABLE interest in ecological information (size, location, and the feeding habits ofthe blue marlin (Makaira time of catch) to obtain a better understand nigricans). This is probably due to its large ing of their trophic biology. size (to 800 kg), game qualities, reputed pug nacity, and its position as a terminal predator in the ocean. Most trophic studies of this MATERIALS AND METHODS species have simply identified and determined the relative importance of food items con Stomachs for analysis were obtained from sumed in a given geographic region. Usually blue marlin caught in the 27-29 July 1981 and there ha s been little other concurrent eco 16-20 August 1982 Hawaiian International logical information available to the investi Billfish Tournaments (HIBT). In these tour gator, and sample sizes are often small. These naments fish are taken off the Kona, Hawaii, difficulties have resulted in a situation where coast in an area from Upolu Point (20018'N some information is available on what is con lat.) to South Point (19°00' N lat.) and from sumed by blue marlin from a number of geo the shore westward to 156°20' W long. The graphical localities but little else is known of HIBT rules require records of catch location, their trophic biology. time of hookup, fight time, and gear used. This paper reports on the food and feeding Effort in both years was similar with 75 boats habits of 87 blue marlin taken off Hawaii each fishing an 8-hour day. Small variations in during one-week tournaments in each of two effort expended could be due to differences in consecutive summers utilizing concomitant the number of lines fished per boat, the method offishing (live bait or plastic lures), or due to the time spent fighting an individual I This is Hawaii Institut e of Marine Biology Contri fish. These differences are probably small , bution no. 689 and Ocean Resource s OfficeContribution however, thus allowing direct comparison of no. 15. This research was supported by the University of catches. Once landed all fish were weighed , Hawaii Sea Grant College Program under Institutional Gr ant No. NA81-AA-D-0070 from NOAA, Officeof Sea length measurements taken, sex determined, Gran t, U.S. Department of Commerce, and the Office of stomach removed and cut open and the con the Marine Affairs Coordinator, subsequently the Ocean tents labeled and placed in 0.5 mm mesh bags Resourc es Office (Hawaii Department of Planning and which were immersed in 10 percent formalin. Economic Development). Manuscript accepted 22 December 1983. All stomachs were sampled on the day ofcap 2 University of Hawaii, Hawaii Institute of Marine ture. At the time of sampling care was taken Biology, P.O. Box 1346, Kaneohe, Hawaii 96744. not to confuse any bait with other stomach 141 142 PACIFIC SCIENCE, Volume 38, April 1984 35 30 25 ·.·; · • • 1 .. • •• .!!)20 ell ::l "0 .::: "0 I:: ....-15 o 5 50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250 270 290 310 330 Midpoint of Size Class (kg) FIGURE I . Frequency distribution ofsize classes (by 20 kg intervals) ofblue marlin sampled in this study (fish caught in 1981 = shaded, 1982 = unshaded). materials. Small tunas were the usual bait and Martin and Drewry (1978), and Miller, were readily discerned as such by the presence Watson, and Leis (1979). Following identifi ofbridles or wounds caused by hooks. All bait cation, a volumetric determination was made was discarded. on all taxonomic categories. All material was In the laboratory all material was rinsed in labeled and preserved in isopropyl alcohol for fresh water and identified to the lowest taxo later reference. nomic category possible. Taxonomic works consulted include Berry (1914) for cepha lopods, Townsley (1953) and Barnes (1974) for crustaceans, and for fish Gilbert (1905), RESULTS Weber and De Beaufort (1913-1936), De Most blue marlin sampled in this study Beaufort (1940), De Beaufort and Chapman were relatively small. The average size in 1981 (1951), Gosline and Brock (1960), Fritzsche was 95 kg and in 1982, 114 kg. The size fre (1978), Hardy (1978a, 1978b), Johnson quency distribution of sampled fish by year is (1978), Jones, Martin, and Hardy (1978), given in Figure I. !I' Jo ' i . ·;:# 1:; q:> @t. _ Trophic Biology of the Blue Marlin-BROCK 143 In total 108 fish were sampled, 52 from the marlin stomachs in 1981 , and in 1982, 3.6 1981 tournament and 56 from the 1982 tour percent. nament. In 1981 eight fish had everted stom Table 2 presents the distribution of achs and were not considered in any further stomach content volumes. The large per analysis. Of the remaining 44, seventeen (39 centage of low food volume stomachs (near percent) had empty stomachs and with the empty) in blue marlin may be related to the remainder the average volume of food per fish rate of digestion/or infrequent feeding. The was 418 m!. In 1982 thirteen blue marlin had weight of individual fish bears little relation everted stomachs leaving 43 fish for further ship to the volume of food present; it is best analysis. Of the 43 marlin (12 percent), 5 had described by a logarithmic function, however, empty stomachs, and in the remaining fish, the correlation coefficient is low (r = 0.33). the average volume of food present was 403 There is a wide variation in the stomach ml per fish. volumes among fish of the same size, which Representatives of23 fish families and four masks any relationship between fish size and major invertebrate groups were found in the the amount offood consumed. This variation stomach contents of65 blue marlin (Table I). is related to the fact that large blue marlin eat Fish comprised 99.4 percent of the total organisms of greater dimensions than those volume of food remains in 1981 and 98.5 per consumed by smaller marlin, but that both cent in 1982. The remaining material was groups feed on the same minute organisms, made up of arthropods and molluscs (par such as crab and fish larvae. ticularly squids of the Family Ommas There was no discernible relationship be trephidae). tween the hour of capture (i.e., time of hook The scombrids were the most important up), the average volume of food present, and identifiable fishes by volume ofmaterial (86.4 the number of blue marlin caught (Table 3). percent in 1981, 67.8 percent in 1982). By These data suggest that blue marlin are in count of individuals or entities, the unidenti the surface waters taking food during all fied fish remains were the most important hours of the day. More blue marlin were group followed by the scombrids. Again by caught, however, near low ebb tide (about 47 number, squids were the most important in percent of the total) than during any other vertebrate taxon, probably due to the reten part of the tidal cycle (Table 4). Similarly, tion of their nondigestible radulae. good catches (about 25 percent of the total) A wide range of fish species was consumed were made during the period of near peak high including the larvae and juveniles ofa number tide. Collectively, the low slack tide period of inshore forms. These juveniles were in represents 38 percent of the total time (and the families Fistulariidae, Holocentridae, effort) available for fishing during 1981 and Priacanthidae, Mullidae, Chaetodontidae, 1982 tournaments, but these data are not sta Pomacentridae, Acanthuridae, Balistidae, tistically significant. The volume of food pre and Tetraodontidae. These fishes contributed sent in marlin stomachs was not related to the heavily to the number of identifiable indi state of the tide (Table 4). This is because the viduals consumed, occurring in 78 percent of material in stomachs may have been con the blue marlin examined, but added little to sumed at any time from many hours before to the total volume of prey material (Table I). just prior to capture. Few postlarvae of pelagic species were en countered in the stomach contents ofthe blue marlin. Exceptions were postlarvae of the DISCUSSION ocean sunfishes (Family Molidae) and juve nile scombrids and coryphaenids. In both There are many uncontrollable variables in years a number of juvenile istiophorids were any study of the food habits of fishes. found in the stomachs of adults. Thus , can However, food items that rank large in nibalism at the family level accounted for 1.8 number and volume, as wellas in frequency of percent of the total volume of food found in occurrence, are foods important at the time 144 PACIFIC SCIENCE, Volume 38,April 1984 TABLE 1 CHECKLIST OF FOOD ORGANISMS INTHE STOMACHS OF65 BLUE MAR LI N TAK EN IN THE HAWAIIAN INTERNATIONAL BILLFISH TOUR NAM ENT(27 INDI VIDUALS FROM 1981 AN D38 FROM 1982) STOMACHS INWHICHOCCU RRED AGG REGATE TOTALVO LUM E NUM BEROF ORGAN ISMS NUMBE RPERCENT ml PERCENT FOOD ORGA NISMS 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 ARTHROPODA 4.4 2.1 0.1 0.1 Stomatopoda Squillidae Pseudosquilla ciliata 0.5 Odondactylus hanseni 0.5 Decapoda Unidentified Crab Megalops or Zoea 3 52 2 1.2 6.5 MOLLU SCA 17.4 23.5 0.5 1.4 Decapoda 3 49 I 11 5.9 57.2 Ommastrephidae 4 41 3 10 23.6 13.6 Symplectoteuthis oualaniensis 3 7 2 2 13.5 70 Symplectoteuthis sp.