Main Article Content
Abstract
Otolith morphology is important for species identification, fishery management and stock assessment. In this study, otolith (Sagitta) morphology of four fish species viz. Pomatomus saltatrix, Sarpa salpa, Trachurus trachurus, and Belone belone was investigated. The length (mm), width (mm), area (mm2) and perimeter (mm) measurements of the otoliths were made and four different shape indices, including form factor (FF), aspect ratio (AR), roundness (RD) and circularity (Cİ) were calculated. In addition, relationships between total fish length and otolith morphology were investigated. Measurements of sagittal otoliths of four species were obtained by image analysis using tri-ocular microscope. Based on the results, the morphometric measurements and four examined shape factors of otolith varied among species. Coefficients of correlations (r) between total fish length and otolith morphology and otolith length-otolith morphology were generally highly significant (P<0.05) for studied fishes. The results show that the shape indices were significantly different in analyzed species even they indicated a similar pattern with maximal otolith length. These data provide information for species identification using sagittal otoliths in the fossils and diets of fish predators and also will contribute to the region's sustainable fisheries management.
Keywords
Otolith morphology
Species identification
Sustainable fisheries management.
Article Details
License
The authors transfer the copyrights of their papers to the Iranian Society of Ichthyology. However, the information could be used in accordance with the Creative Commons licence (Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)
How to Cite
BAL, H., TURKER, D., & ZENGIN, K. (2019). Morphological characteristics of otolith for four fish species in the Edremit Gulf, Aegean Sea, Turkey. Iranian Journal of Ichthyology, 5(4), 303–311. https://doi.org/10.22034/iji.v5i4.312
References
-
Altın, A. & Ayyıldız, H. 2018. Relationships between total length and otolith measurements for 36 fish species from Gökçeada Island, Turkey. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 34:136-141.
Bal, H.; Yanık, T. & Türker, D. 2018. Relationships between total length and otolith size of bluefish Pomatomus saltatrix (Linnaeus, 1766) in the Marmara Sea of Turkey. Natural and Engineering Sciences 3(1): 38-44.
Boehlert, G.W. 1985. Using objective criteria and multiple regression models for age determination in fishes. Fishery bulletin 83(2): 103-117.
Campana, S.E. & Thorrold, S.R. 2001. Otoliths, increments, and elements: keys to a comprehensive understanding of fish populations? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 58: 30-38.
Cengiz, Ö.; Özekinci, U. & Öztekin, A. 2012. Çanakkale Boğazı ve Gelibolu Yarımadası (Kuzeydoğu Akdeniz, Türkiye) kıyılarında yakalanan lüfer balığının Pomatomus saltatrix (Linnaeus, 1766) total boy-otolit boyu arasındaki ilişki. Iğdır Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi 2: 31-34.
Esmaeili, H.R.; Teimori, A.; Gholami, Z. & Reichenbacher, B. 2014. Two new species of the tooth-carp Aphanius (Teleostei: Cyprinodontidae) and the evolutionary history of the Iranian inland and inland-related Aphanius species. Zootaxa 3786: 246–268.
Fitch J.E. 1964. The fish fauna of the Playa del Rey Locality, a southern California marine Pleistocene deposit, Los Angeles City Museum of Contemporary Science 82: 3-35.
Gauldie, R.W. 1994. The morphological basis of fish age estimation methods based on the otolith of Nemadactylus macropterus. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 51: 2341-2362.
Härkönen, T. 1986. Guide to the otoliths of the bony fishes of the Northeast Atlantic. Danbiu ApS. Biological Consultants Henningsens Alle 58. DK-2900, Hellerup, Denmark.
Harvey, J.T.; Loughlin, T.R.; Perez, M.A. & Oxman D.S. 2000. Relationship between fish size and otolith length for 63 species of fishes from the eastern North Pacific Ocean. NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle (NOAA Technical Report NMFS, 150).
Labeelund, J.H. 1988. Otolith shape discriminates between juvenile Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., and brown trout, Salmo trutta L. Journal of Fish Biology 33: 899-903.
Lombarte, A. & Lleonart, J. 1993. Otolith size changes related with body growth, habitat depth and temperature. Environmental biology of fishes 37: 297-306.
Nolf, D. 1985. Otolith piscium. In: H.P. Schultze (Ed). Handbook of Paleoichthyology. Vol. X, Stuttgart and New York. 145 p.
Ponton, D. 2006. Is geometric morphometric efficient for comparing otolith shape of different fish species? Journal of Morphology 267: 750-757.
Popper, A.N.; Ramcharitar, J. & Campana, S.E. 2005. Why otoliths? Insights from inner ear physiology and fisheries biology. Marine and freshwater Research 56: 497-504.
Reichenbacher, B.; Kamrani, E.; Esmaeili, H.R. & Teimori, A. 2009. The endangered cyprinodont Aphanius ginaonis (Holly, 1929) from southern Iran is a valid species: evidence from otolith morphology. Environmental Biology of Fishes 86: 507-521.
Rodríguez Mendoza, R.P. 2006. Otoliths and their applications in fishery science. Croatian Journal of Fisheries. Ribarstvo 64: 89-102.
Rosin, P.L. 2005. Computing global shape measures. In: C.H. Chen, P.S.P. Wang (Eds). Handbook of Pattern Recognition and Computer Vision, 3rd Edition. World Scientific Publishing. Singapore.
Sokal, R.R. & Rohlf, F.J. 1981. Biometry, 2nd Edition, Freeman, W.H. & Company. New York.
Summerfelt, R.C. & Hall, G.E. 1987. Age and growth of fish. In International Symposium on Age and Growth of Fish1õ1985. Des Moines, Lowa.
Torres, G.J.; Lombarte, A. & Morales-Nin, B. 2000. Sagittal otolith size and shape variability to identify geographical intraspecific differences in three species of the genus Merluccius. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 80: 333-342.
Treacy, S.D. & Crawford, T.W. 1981. Retrieval of otoliths and statoliths from gastrointestinal contents and scats of marine mammals. The Journal of Wildlife Management 45: 990-993.
Trippel, E.A. & Beamish, F.W.H. 1987. Characterizing piscivory from ingested remains. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 116: 773-776.
Vignon, M. & Morat, F. 2010. Environmental and genetic determinant of otolith shape revealed by a non-indigenous tropical fish. Marine Ecology Progress Series 411: 231-241.
Yoshinaga, J.; Nakama, A.; Morita, M. & Edmonds, J.S. 2000. Fish otolith reference material for quality assurance of chemical analyses. Marine Chemistry 69: 91-97.
Zorica B.; Sinovčić, G. & Keč, V.Č. 2010. Preliminary data on the study of otolith morphology of five pelagic fish species from the Adriatic Sea (Croatia). Acta Adriatica 51: 89.
References
Altın, A. & Ayyıldız, H. 2018. Relationships between total length and otolith measurements for 36 fish species from Gökçeada Island, Turkey. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 34:136-141.
Bal, H.; Yanık, T. & Türker, D. 2018. Relationships between total length and otolith size of bluefish Pomatomus saltatrix (Linnaeus, 1766) in the Marmara Sea of Turkey. Natural and Engineering Sciences 3(1): 38-44.
Boehlert, G.W. 1985. Using objective criteria and multiple regression models for age determination in fishes. Fishery bulletin 83(2): 103-117.
Campana, S.E. & Thorrold, S.R. 2001. Otoliths, increments, and elements: keys to a comprehensive understanding of fish populations? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 58: 30-38.
Cengiz, Ö.; Özekinci, U. & Öztekin, A. 2012. Çanakkale Boğazı ve Gelibolu Yarımadası (Kuzeydoğu Akdeniz, Türkiye) kıyılarında yakalanan lüfer balığının Pomatomus saltatrix (Linnaeus, 1766) total boy-otolit boyu arasındaki ilişki. Iğdır Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi 2: 31-34.
Esmaeili, H.R.; Teimori, A.; Gholami, Z. & Reichenbacher, B. 2014. Two new species of the tooth-carp Aphanius (Teleostei: Cyprinodontidae) and the evolutionary history of the Iranian inland and inland-related Aphanius species. Zootaxa 3786: 246–268.
Fitch J.E. 1964. The fish fauna of the Playa del Rey Locality, a southern California marine Pleistocene deposit, Los Angeles City Museum of Contemporary Science 82: 3-35.
Gauldie, R.W. 1994. The morphological basis of fish age estimation methods based on the otolith of Nemadactylus macropterus. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 51: 2341-2362.
Härkönen, T. 1986. Guide to the otoliths of the bony fishes of the Northeast Atlantic. Danbiu ApS. Biological Consultants Henningsens Alle 58. DK-2900, Hellerup, Denmark.
Harvey, J.T.; Loughlin, T.R.; Perez, M.A. & Oxman D.S. 2000. Relationship between fish size and otolith length for 63 species of fishes from the eastern North Pacific Ocean. NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle (NOAA Technical Report NMFS, 150).
Labeelund, J.H. 1988. Otolith shape discriminates between juvenile Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., and brown trout, Salmo trutta L. Journal of Fish Biology 33: 899-903.
Lombarte, A. & Lleonart, J. 1993. Otolith size changes related with body growth, habitat depth and temperature. Environmental biology of fishes 37: 297-306.
Nolf, D. 1985. Otolith piscium. In: H.P. Schultze (Ed). Handbook of Paleoichthyology. Vol. X, Stuttgart and New York. 145 p.
Ponton, D. 2006. Is geometric morphometric efficient for comparing otolith shape of different fish species? Journal of Morphology 267: 750-757.
Popper, A.N.; Ramcharitar, J. & Campana, S.E. 2005. Why otoliths? Insights from inner ear physiology and fisheries biology. Marine and freshwater Research 56: 497-504.
Reichenbacher, B.; Kamrani, E.; Esmaeili, H.R. & Teimori, A. 2009. The endangered cyprinodont Aphanius ginaonis (Holly, 1929) from southern Iran is a valid species: evidence from otolith morphology. Environmental Biology of Fishes 86: 507-521.
Rodríguez Mendoza, R.P. 2006. Otoliths and their applications in fishery science. Croatian Journal of Fisheries. Ribarstvo 64: 89-102.
Rosin, P.L. 2005. Computing global shape measures. In: C.H. Chen, P.S.P. Wang (Eds). Handbook of Pattern Recognition and Computer Vision, 3rd Edition. World Scientific Publishing. Singapore.
Sokal, R.R. & Rohlf, F.J. 1981. Biometry, 2nd Edition, Freeman, W.H. & Company. New York.
Summerfelt, R.C. & Hall, G.E. 1987. Age and growth of fish. In International Symposium on Age and Growth of Fish1õ1985. Des Moines, Lowa.
Torres, G.J.; Lombarte, A. & Morales-Nin, B. 2000. Sagittal otolith size and shape variability to identify geographical intraspecific differences in three species of the genus Merluccius. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 80: 333-342.
Treacy, S.D. & Crawford, T.W. 1981. Retrieval of otoliths and statoliths from gastrointestinal contents and scats of marine mammals. The Journal of Wildlife Management 45: 990-993.
Trippel, E.A. & Beamish, F.W.H. 1987. Characterizing piscivory from ingested remains. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 116: 773-776.
Vignon, M. & Morat, F. 2010. Environmental and genetic determinant of otolith shape revealed by a non-indigenous tropical fish. Marine Ecology Progress Series 411: 231-241.
Yoshinaga, J.; Nakama, A.; Morita, M. & Edmonds, J.S. 2000. Fish otolith reference material for quality assurance of chemical analyses. Marine Chemistry 69: 91-97.
Zorica B.; Sinovčić, G. & Keč, V.Č. 2010. Preliminary data on the study of otolith morphology of five pelagic fish species from the Adriatic Sea (Croatia). Acta Adriatica 51: 89.
Bal, H.; Yanık, T. & Türker, D. 2018. Relationships between total length and otolith size of bluefish Pomatomus saltatrix (Linnaeus, 1766) in the Marmara Sea of Turkey. Natural and Engineering Sciences 3(1): 38-44.
Boehlert, G.W. 1985. Using objective criteria and multiple regression models for age determination in fishes. Fishery bulletin 83(2): 103-117.
Campana, S.E. & Thorrold, S.R. 2001. Otoliths, increments, and elements: keys to a comprehensive understanding of fish populations? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 58: 30-38.
Cengiz, Ö.; Özekinci, U. & Öztekin, A. 2012. Çanakkale Boğazı ve Gelibolu Yarımadası (Kuzeydoğu Akdeniz, Türkiye) kıyılarında yakalanan lüfer balığının Pomatomus saltatrix (Linnaeus, 1766) total boy-otolit boyu arasındaki ilişki. Iğdır Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi 2: 31-34.
Esmaeili, H.R.; Teimori, A.; Gholami, Z. & Reichenbacher, B. 2014. Two new species of the tooth-carp Aphanius (Teleostei: Cyprinodontidae) and the evolutionary history of the Iranian inland and inland-related Aphanius species. Zootaxa 3786: 246–268.
Fitch J.E. 1964. The fish fauna of the Playa del Rey Locality, a southern California marine Pleistocene deposit, Los Angeles City Museum of Contemporary Science 82: 3-35.
Gauldie, R.W. 1994. The morphological basis of fish age estimation methods based on the otolith of Nemadactylus macropterus. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 51: 2341-2362.
Härkönen, T. 1986. Guide to the otoliths of the bony fishes of the Northeast Atlantic. Danbiu ApS. Biological Consultants Henningsens Alle 58. DK-2900, Hellerup, Denmark.
Harvey, J.T.; Loughlin, T.R.; Perez, M.A. & Oxman D.S. 2000. Relationship between fish size and otolith length for 63 species of fishes from the eastern North Pacific Ocean. NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle (NOAA Technical Report NMFS, 150).
Labeelund, J.H. 1988. Otolith shape discriminates between juvenile Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., and brown trout, Salmo trutta L. Journal of Fish Biology 33: 899-903.
Lombarte, A. & Lleonart, J. 1993. Otolith size changes related with body growth, habitat depth and temperature. Environmental biology of fishes 37: 297-306.
Nolf, D. 1985. Otolith piscium. In: H.P. Schultze (Ed). Handbook of Paleoichthyology. Vol. X, Stuttgart and New York. 145 p.
Ponton, D. 2006. Is geometric morphometric efficient for comparing otolith shape of different fish species? Journal of Morphology 267: 750-757.
Popper, A.N.; Ramcharitar, J. & Campana, S.E. 2005. Why otoliths? Insights from inner ear physiology and fisheries biology. Marine and freshwater Research 56: 497-504.
Reichenbacher, B.; Kamrani, E.; Esmaeili, H.R. & Teimori, A. 2009. The endangered cyprinodont Aphanius ginaonis (Holly, 1929) from southern Iran is a valid species: evidence from otolith morphology. Environmental Biology of Fishes 86: 507-521.
Rodríguez Mendoza, R.P. 2006. Otoliths and their applications in fishery science. Croatian Journal of Fisheries. Ribarstvo 64: 89-102.
Rosin, P.L. 2005. Computing global shape measures. In: C.H. Chen, P.S.P. Wang (Eds). Handbook of Pattern Recognition and Computer Vision, 3rd Edition. World Scientific Publishing. Singapore.
Sokal, R.R. & Rohlf, F.J. 1981. Biometry, 2nd Edition, Freeman, W.H. & Company. New York.
Summerfelt, R.C. & Hall, G.E. 1987. Age and growth of fish. In International Symposium on Age and Growth of Fish1õ1985. Des Moines, Lowa.
Torres, G.J.; Lombarte, A. & Morales-Nin, B. 2000. Sagittal otolith size and shape variability to identify geographical intraspecific differences in three species of the genus Merluccius. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 80: 333-342.
Treacy, S.D. & Crawford, T.W. 1981. Retrieval of otoliths and statoliths from gastrointestinal contents and scats of marine mammals. The Journal of Wildlife Management 45: 990-993.
Trippel, E.A. & Beamish, F.W.H. 1987. Characterizing piscivory from ingested remains. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 116: 773-776.
Vignon, M. & Morat, F. 2010. Environmental and genetic determinant of otolith shape revealed by a non-indigenous tropical fish. Marine Ecology Progress Series 411: 231-241.
Yoshinaga, J.; Nakama, A.; Morita, M. & Edmonds, J.S. 2000. Fish otolith reference material for quality assurance of chemical analyses. Marine Chemistry 69: 91-97.
Zorica B.; Sinovčić, G. & Keč, V.Č. 2010. Preliminary data on the study of otolith morphology of five pelagic fish species from the Adriatic Sea (Croatia). Acta Adriatica 51: 89.