4.3 Article

Growth differences of Japanese eels Anguilla japonica between fresh and brackish water habitats in relation to annual food consumption in the Kojima Bay-Asahi River system, Japan

期刊

ECOLOGY OF FRESHWATER FISH
卷 22, 期 1, 页码 127-136

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/eff.12010

关键词

Anguilla; catadromy; conservation; food consumption; growth rate

资金

  1. Sasakawa Scientific Research Grant from The Japan Science Society
  2. Environment Research and Technology Development Fund of the Ministry of the Environment, Japan [D-0910]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [21228005] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To learn about the relationships between feeding and growth of temperate eels in freshwater and brackish water habitats, we analysed 533 yellow-phase Japanese eels Anguilla japonica collected in both types of habitats in southeastern Japan. Because male eels were very rare in each habitat (FW, N = 1; BW, N = 20), characteristics of female eels were compared between the different habitats. Annual food consumption was evaluated with the consideration of instantaneous food consumption and annual activity period. Stomach fullness index (stomach content weight/body weight) was used as an indicator of instantaneous food consumption. The ratios of number of months with eel catch to those when eel sampling was conducted were used as an indicator of activity period. Female yellow eels tended to be older and slower growing in fresh water (N = 78; age, mean +/- SD = 7.9 +/- 2.4 years; growth rate, 59.8 +/- 14.0 mm year-1) than in brackish water (N = 229; age, 5.5 +/- 1.8 years; growth rate, 90.1 +/- 24.4 mm year-1). Irrespective of sex, yellow eels in brackish water had a higher stomach fullness index and a greater ratio of months with eel catches, indicating greater annual food consumption by brackish water eels. These results indicate that greater annual food consumption contributes to the greater growth rates of Japanese eels in brackish water habitats.

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

4.3
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