DOCSLIB.ORG

Modeling Gag Grouper (Mycteroperca Microlepis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Modeling Gag Grouper (Mycteroperca Microlepis Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2009 Modeling gag grouper (Mycteroperca microlepis) in the Gulf of Mexico: exploring the impact of marine reserves on the population dynamics of a protogynous grouper Robert D. Ellis Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Oceanography and Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Commons Recommended Citation Ellis, Robert D., "Modeling gag grouper (Mycteroperca microlepis) in the Gulf of Mexico: exploring the impact of marine reserves on the population dynamics of a protogynous grouper" (2009). LSU Master's Theses. 4146. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/4146 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MODELING GAG GROUPER (MYCTEROPERCA MICROLEPIS) IN THE GULF OF MEXICO: EXPLORING THE IMPACT OF MARINE RESERVES ON THE POPULATION DYNAMICS OF A PROTOGYNOUS GROUPER A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in The Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences by Robert D. Ellis B.S., University of California Santa Barbara, 2004 August 2009 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the State of Louisiana Board of Regents for funding this research with an 8G Fellowship. My research and thesis were greatly improved by the comments and assistance of many people, first among them my advisor Dr. Joseph Powers who provided valuable insight into the research process as well as general guidance and advice regarding my education. Thanks also to my committee members Dr. Dubravko Justic and Dr. Jay Geaghan whose comments throughout the process helped me to improve this thesis, and to Dr. Kenny Rose, in whose class the first version of the IBM was written, who provided not only valuable assistance with coding but also was a constant competitor on the basketball court. Thanks go out to all the assorted graduate students from the Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences and the members of the Marine Environmental Researchers, especially the other members of the Powers Lab, Shane Abeare and Melissa Hedges, and my office-mate Christian Briseno. Lastly, thanks to my mom for her unflagging confidence in her son, and to my grandfather for his constant encouragement throughout my academic life. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ ii ABSTRACT .....................................................................................................................................v CHAPTER 1: GENERAL INTRODUCTION ................................................................................1 1.1 Gag Life History .....................................................................................................................1 1.2 Review of Protogyny ..............................................................................................................5 1.3 Marine Reserves .....................................................................................................................8 1.4 Managing Protogynous Fish Stocks .....................................................................................11 1.5 Objectives and Modeling Approaches .................................................................................13 CHAPTER 2: AGE-STRUCTURED MODEL ............................................................................16 2.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................16 2.2 Methods ................................................................................................................................18 2.2.1 Model Description .......................................................................................................18 2.2.2 Management Options ..................................................................................................23 2.2.3 Model Simulations ......................................................................................................25 2.3 Results ..................................................................................................................................26 2.4 Discussion ............................................................................................................................32 CHAPTER 3: INDIVIDUAL BASED MODEL ..........................................................................37 3.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................37 3.2 Methods ................................................................................................................................39 3.2.1 Model Description .......................................................................................................39 3.2.2 Management Options ...................................................................................................44 3.2.3 Model Simulations.......................................................................................................47 3.3 Results ..................................................................................................................................48 3.4 Discussion ............................................................................................................................56 CHAPTER 4: DENSITY-DEPENDENT SEX CHANGE ...........................................................60 4.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................60 4.2 Methods ................................................................................................................................64 4.2.1 Age-Structured Model .................................................................................................64 4.2.2 Individual Based Model ..............................................................................................67 4.3 Results ..................................................................................................................................69 4.3.1 Age-Structured Model .................................................................................................71 4.3.2 Individual Based Model ..............................................................................................76 4.4 Discussion ............................................................................................................................80 4.4.1 Age-Structured Model .................................................................................................80 4.4.2 Individual Based Model ..............................................................................................82 4.4.3 General Considerations ...............................................................................................84 CHAPTER 5: MODEL COMPARISON AND CONCLUSION .................................................86 5.1 Model Comparison ...............................................................................................................86 5.1.1 Fixed Sex Change ........................................................................................................86 iii 5.1.2 Density-Dependent Sex Change ..................................................................................92 5.2 Management Recommendations ..............................................................................................93 5.3 Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................95 REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................97 APPENDIX A: AGE-STRUCTURED MODEL CODE .............................................................102 APPENDIX B: INDIVIDUAL BASED MODEL CODE ...........................................................113 VITA ............................................................................................................................................124 iv ABSTRACT The gag grouper (Mycteroperca microlepis) population in the Gulf of Mexico supports both a commercial and recreational fishery but has experienced a decrease in the male to female sex ratio over the past thirty years. Protogynous fish populations naturally have a smaller male to female ratio than gonochoristic fish populations; however the decline in the gag population is such that sperm limitation may be occurring. In an effort to correct the decline in sex ratio, fishery managers have recently implemented two marine reserves designed specifically to protect gag spawning aggregations. Results from two population models (an age-structured model and an individual based model) suggest that utilizing marine reserves in the management of gag (a female-first protogynous grouper) may be an effective method to increase the male
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Diet Composition of Juvenile Black Grouper (Mycteroperca Bonaci) from Coastal Nursery Areas of the Yucatán Peninsula, Mexico
    BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, 77(3): 441–452, 2005 NOTE DIET COMPOSITION OF JUVENILE BLACK GROUPER (MYCTEROPERCA BONACI) FROM COASTAL NURSERY AREAS OF THE YUCATÁN PENINSULA, MEXICO Thierry Brulé, Enrique Puerto-Novelo, Esperanza Pérez-Díaz, and Ximena Renán-Galindo Groupers (Epinephelinae, Epinephelini) are top-level predators that influence the trophic web of coral reef ecosystems (Parrish, 1987; Heemstra and Randall, 1993; Sluka et al., 2001). They are demersal mesocarnivores and stalk and ambush preda- tors that sit and wait for larger moving prey such as fish and mobile invertebrates (Cailliet et al., 1986). Groupers contribute to the ecological balance of complex tropi- cal hard-bottom communities (Sluka et al., 1994), and thus large changes in their populations may significantly alter other community components (Parrish, 1987). The black grouper (Mycteroperca bonaci Poey, 1860) is an important commercial and recreational fin fish resource in the western Atlantic region (Bullock and Smith, 1991; Heemstra and Randall, 1993). The southern Gulf of Mexico grouper fishery is currently considered to be deteriorated and M. bonaci, along with red grouper (Epinephelus morio Valenciennes, 1828) and gag (Mycteroperca microlepis Goode and Bean, 1880), is one of the most heavily exploited fish species in this region (Co- lás-Marrufo et al., 1998; SEMARNAP, 2000). Currently, M. bonaci is considered a threatened species (Morris et al., 2000; IUCN, 2003) and has been classified as vul- nerable in U.S. waters because male biomass in the Atlantic dropped from 20% in 1982 to 6% in 1995 (Musick et al., 2000). The black grouper is usually found on irregular bottoms such as coral reefs, drop- off walls, and rocky ledges, at depths from 10 to 100 m (Roe, 1977; Manooch and Mason, 1987; Bullock and Smith, 1991; Heemstra and Randall, 1993).
    [Show full text]
  • 011706 Status Report on the Goliath Grouper
    Status report on the continental United States distinct population segment of the goliath grouper (Epinephelus itajara) January 2006 National Marine Fisheries Service Southeast Regional Office 263 13th Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Acknowledgements The authors acknowledge and appreciate the efforts of all who contributed to the contents of this report. In particular, we wish to recognize Lew Bullock, Felicia Coleman, Chris Koenig, and Rich McBride for reviewing the draft document. The participation and considerable contributions to the contents of the report by Andy Strelcheck and Peter Hood are also greatly appreciated. The team responsible for compiling this report included: Michael Barnette, Stephania Bolden, Jennifer Moore, Clay Porch, Jennifer Schull, and Phil Steele. This document should be cited as: NMFS. 2006. Status report on the continental United States distinct population segment of the goliath grouper (Epinephelus itajara). January 12, 2006. 49 pp. Cover: goliath grouper illustration courtesy of Diane Peebles. ii Table of Contents List of Tables.................................................................................................................... iv Abbreviations and Acronyms ......................................................................................... vi Summary ............................................................................................................................ 1 Introduction......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Assemblages Associated with Red Grouper Pits at Pulley Ridge, A
    419 Abstract—Red grouper (Epineph- elus morio) modify their habitat by Fish assemblages associated with red grouper excavating sediment to expose rocky pits, providing structurally complex pits at Pulley Ridge, a mesophotic reef in the habitat for many fish species. Sur- Gulf of Mexico veys conducted with remotely op- erated vehicles from 2012 through 2015 were used to characterize fish Stacey L. Harter (contact author)1 assemblages associated with grouper Heather Moe1 pits at Pulley Ridge, a mesophotic 2 coral ecosystem and habitat area John K. Reed of particular concern in the Gulf Andrew W. David1 of Mexico, and to examine whether invasive species of lionfish (Pterois Email address for contact author: [email protected] spp.) have had an effect on these as- semblages. Overall, 208 grouper pits 1 Southeast Fisheries Science Center were examined, and 66 fish species National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA were associated with them. Fish as- 3500 Delwood Beach Road semblages were compared by using Panama City, Florida 32408 several factors but were considered 2 Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute to be significantly different only on Florida Atlantic University the basis of the presence or absence 5600 U.S. 1 North of predator species in their pit (no Fort Pierce, Florida 34946 predators, lionfish only, red grou- per only, or both lionfish and red grouper). The data do not indicate a negative effect from lionfish. Abun- dances of most species were higher in grouper pits that had lionfish, and species diversity was higher in grouper pits with a predator (lion- The red grouper (Epinephelus morio) waters (>70 m) of the shelf edge and fish, red grouper, or both).
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Ecology Progress Series 573:215
    This authors' personal copy may not be publicly or systematically copied or distributed, or posted on the Open Web, except with written permission of the copyright holder(s). It may be distributed to interested individuals on request. Vol. 573: 215–228, 2017 MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Published June 21 https://doi.org/10.3354/meps12164 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Diet shifts in a native mesopredator across a range of invasive lionfish biomass Joseph S. Curtis1,*, Kara R. Wall1, Mark A. Albins2, Christopher D. Stallings1 1College of Marine Science, University of South Florida, St. Petersburg, FL 33705, USA 2University of South Alabama, Mobile, AL 36608, USA ABSTRACT: In marine ecosystems, little is known about how competition with invasive fishes may affect the resource use of native predators. Throughout the western Atlantic, invasive Indo-Pacific lionfishes (Pterois spp.) are likely to compete with native mesopredators such as the graysby Cephalopholis cruentata, an ecologically similar serranid. In conjunction with a before-after- control- impact lionfish removal experiment, this study measured whether graysby population size, diet, and condition varied in relation to cohabitant lionfish biomass. Lionfish, graysby, and prey popu- lations were surveyed and sampled along a contiguous reef ledge in Biscayne National Park, south Florida. Mesopredator diet was measured with stable isotope (δ13C and δ15N) and gut con- tent analyses, and isotopic niches were used to compare patterns of inter- and intraspecific resource use diversity. The isotopic niches of graysby and lionfishes overlapped by 67%, suggest- ing similar population-level resource use. On sites with higher lionfish biomass, graysby isotopic niche was 34% smaller and overlapped 47% less with that of lionfishes, possibly indicating both a narrower breadth of resource use and associated interspecific niche segregation.
    [Show full text]
  • Age, Growth and Reproduction of the Galapagos Sailfin Grouper [I
    A peer-reviewed version of this preprint was published in PeerJ on 17 September 2015. View the peer-reviewed version (peerj.com/articles/1270), which is the preferred citable publication unless you specifically need to cite this preprint. Usseglio P, Friedlander AM, DeMartini EE, Schuhbauer A, Schemmel E, Salinas de Léon P. 2015. Improved estimates of age, growth and reproduction for the regionally endemic Galapagos sailfin grouper Mycteroperca olfax (Jenyns, 1840) PeerJ 3:e1270 https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1270 Age, growth and reproduction of the Galapagos sailfin grouper Mycteroperca olfax (Jenyns, 1840): an overdue and needed comprehensive baseline Paolo Usseglio, Alan M. Friedlander, Edward E. DeMartini, Anna Schuhbauer, Pelayo Salinas de Léon The Galapagos Sailfin grouper, Mycteroperca olfax, locally known as bacalao and listed as vulnerable by IUCN, is culturally, economically, and ecologically important to the Galapagos archipelago and its people. It is regionally endemic to the Eastern Tropical Pacific, and, while an important fishery resource that has shown substantial declines in recent years, to date no effective management regulations are in place to ensure the sustainability of its Galapagos fishery. Previous estimates of longevity and size of maturity for bacalao are inconsistent with estimates for congeners, which questions the accuracy of PrePrints prior estimates. We set out to rigorously assess the age, growth, and reproductive biology of bacalao in order to provide more accurate life history information to inform more effective fisheries management for this species. The oldest fish in our sample was 24 years old, which is 2-3 times greater than previously reported estimates of longevity.
    [Show full text]
  • Mycteroperca Phenax) Life History for the Gulf of Mexico
    Summary Table of Scamp, (Mycteroperca phenax) life history for the Gulf of Mexico. Associations and interactions with environmental and habitat variables are listed with citations. Trophic relationships Habitat Associations and Interactions Life Stage Season Location Temp(oC) Salinity(ppt) Oxygen Depth(m) Food Predators Habitat Selection Growth Mortality Production Eggs Spring Offshore Pelagic Citation 1 1 9 Larvae Spring Offshore Pelagic Citation 1 1 9 Early and About 12 to 33 m Inshore hard Late bottoms and reefs Juveniles Citation 11 5,11 Adults Widely distributed 14-28 C 12-189m; most are Predominately Sharks and other Ledges and high- Reach maximum Catch and release on shelf areas of captured at 40-80 fishes; also large fishes relief hard bottoms; size slowly mortality reported Gulf, especially off m crustaceans and prefer complex for scamp taken of Florida cephalopods structures such as from depths Oculina coral reefs greater than 44 m. Repopulation of overfished sites is slow Citation 1,3,5 8 1,8 1,7 5 1,4,5 7 6,10 Scamp, (Mycteroperca phenax) cont. Trophic relationships Habitat Associations and Interactions Life Stage Season Location Temp(oC) Salinity(ppt) Oxygen Depth(m) Food Predators Habitat Selection Growth Mortality Production Spawning Protogynous Absent from 60-100 m Prefer to spawn at Fishing pressure Availability of Adults hermaphrodite; spawning shelf edge habitat may reduce shelf edge, spawn from grounds below of maximum proportion of males especially late Feb. to 8.6 C; most complexity; Oculina in population Oculina, habitat early June in spawning activity formations a key may be important Gulf; April- occurs above spawning habitat factor Aug.
    [Show full text]
  • FAU Institutional Repository
    FAU Institutional Repository http://purl.fcla.edu/fau/fauir This paper was submitted by the faculty of FAU’s Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute. Notice: ©1992 Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami. This manuscript is available at http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/bms and may be cited as: Gilmore, R.G. & Jones, R. S. (1992). Color variation and associated behavior in the epinepheline groupers, Mycteroperca microlepis (Goode and Bean) and M. phenax Jordan and Swain. Bulletin of Marine Science, 51(1), 83-103. BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, 51(1): 83-103,1992 CORAL REEF PAPER COLOR VARIATION AND ASSOCIATED BEHAVIOR IN THE EPINEPHELINE GROUPERS, MYCTEROPERCA MICROLEPIS (GOODE AND BEAN) AND M. PHENAX JORDAN AND SWAIN R. Grant Gilmore and Robert S. Jones ABSTRACT Color variants and behavior of scamp, Mycteroperca phenax. and gag, M, microlepis, are described from 64 submersible dives made on reef structures at depths between 20 and 100 m off the east coast of Florida from February 1977 to September 1982. These dives yielded 146 h of observations augmented with video and 35 mm photography. Both species display a variety of color phases associated with social behavior. They are expressed in each case by an aggressive, dominant territorial individual which displays to a group of smaller subor- dinates. Social hierarchy is evident in both species, with the alpha individual being a male in the gag and of undetermined sex in the scamp. Although actual spawning was not docu- mented, hierarchical behavior and displays are interpreted as courtship associated with spawn- ing activity. Courtship is further implied based on the similarity of these behaviors to those recorded for a variety of other fishes including serranids.
    [Show full text]
  • Snapper and Grouper: SFP Fisheries Sustainability Overview 2015
    Snapper and Grouper: SFP Fisheries Sustainability Overview 2015 Snapper and Grouper: SFP Fisheries Sustainability Overview 2015 Snapper and Grouper: SFP Fisheries Sustainability Overview 2015 Patrícia Amorim | Fishery Analyst, Systems Division | [email protected] Megan Westmeyer | Fishery Analyst, Strategy Communications and Analyze Division | [email protected] CITATION Amorim, P. and M. Westmeyer. 2016. Snapper and Grouper: SFP Fisheries Sustainability Overview 2015. Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation. 18 pp. Available from www.fishsource.com. PHOTO CREDITS left: Image courtesy of Pedro Veiga (Pedro Veiga Photography) right: Image courtesy of Pedro Veiga (Pedro Veiga Photography) © Sustainable Fisheries Partnership February 2016 KEYWORDS Developing countries, FAO, fisheries, grouper, improvements, seafood sector, small-scale fisheries, snapper, sustainability www.sustainablefish.org i Snapper and Grouper: SFP Fisheries Sustainability Overview 2015 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The goal of this report is to provide a brief overview of the current status and trends of the snapper and grouper seafood sector, as well as to identify the main gaps of knowledge and highlight areas where improvements are critical to ensure long-term sustainability. Snapper and grouper are important fishery resources with great commercial value for exporters to major international markets. The fisheries also support the livelihoods and food security of many local, small-scale fishing communities worldwide. It is therefore all the more critical that management of these fisheries improves, thus ensuring this important resource will remain available to provide both food and income. Landings of snapper and grouper have been steadily increasing: in the 1950s, total landings were about 50,000 tonnes, but they had grown to more than 612,000 tonnes by 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Use of Roving Diver and Transect Surveys to Assess the Coral Reef Fish Assemblage Off Southeastern Hispaniola
    DOI 10.1007/s0033 8-002-0216-y Page 1 sur 1 Coral Reefs vdt L41z 14&-22Z Springer-Verlag 2002 DOI 10.1007/s00338-002-0216-y Report Evaluating the use of roving diver and transect surveys to assess the coral reef fish assemblage off southeastern Hispaniola E. F. Schmitt1 , 2 ' A R. D. Sluka1,3 and K. M. Sullivan-Sealey1 (1) Department of Biology and The Nature Conservancy, Florida and Caribbean Marine Conservation Science Center, University of Miami, P.O. Box 249118, Coral Gables, Florida 33124, USA (2) Present address : Math, Science and Technology Department, Nova Southeastern University, Farquhar Center for Undergraduate Studies, 3301 College Avenue, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33314-7796, USA, e-mail: [email protected], Tel.: +1-954-2628349 (3) Present address'. Center for Applied Science, PHRA No. 12, Pothujanam Road, Kumarapuram, Trivadrum, Kerala 695011, India Received: 4 January 1999 / Accepted: 12 November 2001 / Published online: 9 May 2002 Abstract. The relatively little-studied fish fauna off southeastern Hispaniola was rapidly assessed using a combination of visual survey techniques including transects and roving diver surveys. It was found that when combined, both methods provided a more complete overall species assessment than either method was able to provide in isolation. Being able to conduct rapid species assessments is becoming increasingly more important as a conservation tool. Data on species composition, sighting frequency, and abundance of all fishes were collected using both methods. Abundance was recorded in four logarithmic-based categories (roving diver method) while the number of fishes were counted within 40-m transects (transect method). Both methods were similar in recording the most abundant species, while a greater number of rare species (especially fishery-targeted species) were recorded with the roving diver method.
    [Show full text]
  • Life History Demographic Parameter Synthesis for Exploited Florida and Caribbean Coral Reef Fishes
    Please do not remove this page Life history demographic parameter synthesis for exploited Florida and Caribbean coral reef fishes Stevens, Molly H; Smith, Steven Glen; Ault, Jerald Stephen https://scholarship.miami.edu/discovery/delivery/01UOML_INST:ResearchRepository/12378179400002976?l#13378179390002976 Stevens, M. H., Smith, S. G., & Ault, J. S. (2019). Life history demographic parameter synthesis for exploited Florida and Caribbean coral reef fishes. Fish and Fisheries (Oxford, England), 20(6), 1196–1217. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12405 Published Version: https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12405 Downloaded On 2021/09/28 21:22:59 -0400 Please do not remove this page Received: 11 April 2019 | Revised: 31 July 2019 | Accepted: 14 August 2019 DOI: 10.1111/faf.12405 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Life history demographic parameter synthesis for exploited Florida and Caribbean coral reef fishes Molly H. Stevens | Steven G. Smith | Jerald S. Ault Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami, Abstract Miami, FL, USA Age‐ or length‐structured stock assessments require reliable life history demo‐ Correspondence graphic parameters (growth, mortality, reproduction) to model population dynamics, Molly H. Stevens, Rosenstiel School of potential yields and stock sustainability. This study synthesized life history informa‐ Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami, 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, tion for 84 commercially exploited tropical reef fish species from Florida and the Miami, FL 33149, USA. U.S. Caribbean (Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands). We attempted to identify a Email: [email protected] useable set of life history parameters for each species that included lifespan, length Funding information at age, weight at length and maturity at length.
    [Show full text]
  • Saltwater Fish Identification Guide
    Identification Guide To South Carolina Fishes Inshore Fishes Red Drum (Spottail, redfish, channel bass, puppy drum,) Sciaenops ocellatus May have multiple spots along dorsal surface.. RKW Black Drum Pogonias cromis Broad black vertical bars along body. Barbells on chin. Spotted Seatrout (Winter trout, speckled trout) Cynoscion nebulosus Numerous distinct black spots on dorsal surface. Most commonly encountered in rivers and estuaries. RKW Most commonly encountered just offshore around live bottom and artificial reefs. Weakfish (Summer trout, Gray trout) Cynoscion regalis RKW Silver coloration with no spots. Large eye Silver Seatrout Cynoscion nothus RKW Spot Leiostomus xanthurus Distinct spot on shoulder. RKW Atlantic Croaker (Hardhead) Micropogonias undulatus RKW Silver Perch (Virginia Perch) Bairdiella chrysoura RKW Sheepshead Archosargus probatocephalus Broad black vertical bars along body. RKW Pinfish (Sailors Choice) Lagodon rhomboides Distinct spot. RKW Southern Kingfish (Whiting) Menticirrhus americanus RKW Extended 1st dorsal filament Northern Kingfish SEAMAP- Menticirrhus saxatilis SA:RPW Dusky 1st dorsal-fin tip Black caudal fin tip Gulf Kingfish SEAMAP- Menticirrhus littoralis SA:RPW Southern flounder Paralichthys lethostigma No ocellated spots . RKW Summer flounder Paralichthys dentatus Five ocellated spots in this distinct pattern. B. Floyd Gulf flounder Paralichthys albigutta B. Floyd Three ocellated spots in a triangle pattern. B. Floyd Bluefish Pomatomus saltatrix RKW Inshore Lizardfish Synodus foetens RKW RKW Ladyfish Elops saurus Florida Pompano Trachinotus carolinus RKW Lookdown Selene vomer RKW Spadefish Chaetodipterus faber Juvenile RKW Juvenile spadefish are commonly found in SC estuaries. Adults, which look very similar to the specimen shown above, are common inhabitants of offshore reefs. Cobia Rachycentron canadum Adult D. Hammond Juvenile RKW D.
    [Show full text]
  • Mycteroperca Bonaci (Black Grouper)
    UWI The Online Guide to the Animals of Trinidad and Tobago Ecology Mycteroperca bonaci (Black Grouper) Family: Serranidae (Groupers and Sea Basses) Order: Perciformes (Perch and Allied Fish) Class: Actinopterygii (Ray-finned Fish) Fig. 1. Black grouper, Mycteroperca bonaci. [http://reefguide.org/carib/blackgrouper.html, downloaded 2 April 2015] TRAITS. The black grouper or marbled rockfish is a solitary marine fish which grows up to 150cm in length and 100kg in weight. The adults have a yellow or very pale orange margin across the pectoral fin and hexagonal pattern of brown spots on the head and along the ventral side of the body, which can vary from light tan to reddish black (Heemstra et al., 2002). The dorsal caudal and anal fins all have black or dark blue bands with white margins. The juveniles can be distinguished from the adults by lighter markings and blotches. Mycteroperca bonaci also frequently changes from light phase to dark phase such that sometimes the lower half of the body is covered with brownish spots and sometimes the spots disappear and the fish appears completely black (Grace and Rademacher, 1994). Mycteroperca bonaci is the largest fish in the UWI The Online Guide to the Animals of Trinidad and Tobago Ecology Mycteroperca genus. Mycteroperca bonaci is a protogynous hermaphrodite, the young are female but as they mature they transform into male (Teixeira et al., 2004). DISTRIBUTION. Central Atlantic, from Bermuda to Brazil, including the West Indies and Gulf of Mexico. Most prevalent in Belize (Grace and Rademacher, 1994). HABITAT AND ACTIVITY. This fish is usually found in coral reefs at anywhere from 20- 100m deep.
    [Show full text]