4.5 Article

Population structure of the stone crab Xantho poressa (Olivi, 1792) in a human-restricted access area

期刊

REGIONAL STUDIES IN MARINE SCIENCE
卷 53, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.rsma.2022.102375

关键词

Sex ratio; Intertidal; Mating; Size distribution; Boulder; Polygyny

资金

  1. Universidad Simon Bolivar
  2. Asociacion Universi-taria Iberoamericana de Posgrado (AUIP) , Spain

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the population structure of the intertidal stone crab in a human-restricted area along the rocky shore of the SW Atlantic Spanish coast was analyzed. It was found that males were significantly larger than females and the sex ratio was biased towards females. The distribution of the species is primarily determined by the size and weight of boulders.
Some of the elements in the rocky intertidal zone, such as boulders, act as a refuge, mating, feeding and nursery area for marine fauna. In the present study, we analysed the population structure of the intertidal stone crab Xantho poressa in a human-restricted area, between March 2019 and February 2020, comprised of a rocky shore along the SW Atlantic Spanish coast. The study aims to provide information about the size distribution and identify which environmental factors shape the distribution, sex ratio and mating system of the species. The males were significantly larger than the females and no significant difference in size was observed between ovigerous and non-ovigerous females. The sex ratio was biased towards females. Groups constituted by one large male and several females were observed coexisting under a boulder. Other groups of two or more males and various females were also observed during the study. The distribution of the species is mainly determined by the size and weight of the boulder. The complexity of the study area, and the key role of boulders in the distribution of the species, suggests that X. poressa might have a refuge-defence polygynous mating system. (c) 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据