4.4 Article

Feeding ecology of central Baltic Sea herring and sprat

期刊

JOURNAL OF FISH BIOLOGY
卷 65, 期 6, 页码 1563-1581

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.0022-1112.2004.00566.x

关键词

Baltic Sea; dietary overlap; diet composition; herring; sprat; stomach fullness

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A unique dataset of stomach contents sampled between 1977 and 1999 ill the central Baltic Sea was used to perform a comprehensive study of the feeding ecology of Central Baltic herring Clupea harengus and sprat Sprattus sprallus. Both fish species were mainly preying upon calanoid copepods with Pseudocalanus sp. dominating the diet of herring, whereas sprat generally preferred Temora longicornis. Sprat preyed upon older copepodite stages, indicating size-selective particulate feeding, whereas herring additionally fed on smaller copepodite stages, indicating occasional low food supply inducing filter-feeding. Additional food sources other than copepods were mysids in winter and autumn for medium to large herring, as well as cladocerans for sprat in spring and summer, determined by the seasonal Occurrence of these plankton species. Seasonally the highest feeding activity of both fishes species occurred in spring and summer, the main reproductive periods of calanoid copepods. The most important food item for both predators in spring was Pseudocalanus sp. In summer sprat switched to T. longicornis and Acartia spp. Since the late 1970s, the total stomach fullness decreased and the fraction of empty stomachs increased. In parallel the amount of Pseudocolanus sp. in the diets of both fish species decreased. Further, a considerable dietary overlap between both species in spring indicated considerable competition for food resources, especially due to an enlarged sprat stock. The results of this study support the hypothesis that growth reductions observed in Baltic herring and sprat are due to combination of a change in food availability and an increase in density-dependent competition. (C) 2004 The Fisheries Society of the British Isles.

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

4.4
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