4.5 Article

The use of parasites as biological tags for stock identification of blue jack mackerel, Trachurus picturatus, in the North-eastern Atlantic

期刊

FISHERIES RESEARCH
卷 193, 期 -, 页码 1-6

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.fishres.2017.03.015

关键词

Blue jack mackerel; Trachurus picturatus; Parasites; Biological tags; Stock identification; Northeast Atlantic

资金

  1. ARDITI - Regional Agency for the Development of Research Technology and Innovation [22/1080/1974]
  2. ARDITI [M1420-09-5369-FSE-000001]
  3. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia (FCT) [UID/MAR/04292/2013]
  4. Oceanic Observatory of Madeira Project (Observatorio Oceanico da Madeira-OOM) [M1420-01-0145-FEDER-000001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of parasites as biological tags for discriminating stocks of blue jack mackerel, Trachurus picturatus (Osteichthyes, Carangidae), in the northeast Atlantic Ocean is assessed herein. In this study the following parasites have been selected as possible biological tags: Anisakis spp. (Nematoda: Anisakidae), Rhadinorhynchus sp. (Acanthocephala: Rhadinorhynchidae), Nybelinia sp. (Cestoda: Tentaculariidae) and Bolbosoma sp. (Acanthocephala: Polymorphidae). Anisakis spp. was the most prevalent parasite taxon found in all localities, attaining higher values in fish from Peniche, mainland Portugal. The occurrence of Rhadinorhynchus sp. in fish from all studied areas was rare (prevalence <10%) but significantly different between localities, with higher values in both archipelagos. Nybelinia sp. specimens were only detected in fish from Madeira and cystacanths of the genus Bolbosoma were never detected. The distinctive pattern of infection of these parasite species points to the existence of three stocks of blue jack mackerel in the northeast Atlantic: one in Portuguese mainland waters, one in Madeira archipelago and another in the Canary archipelago. These results support the management strategy which treats the three populations studied as separate stocks. (C) 2017 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