The Relationships Between Otolith Dimensions-Total Length and Otolith Features of European Perch (Perca fluviatilis L.,1758) Sampled from Yedikır Dam Lake (Turkey)

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 3, 348 - 353, 30.12.2019

Canan Şimşek Nazmi Polat Melek Özpiçak , Semra Saygın , Savaş Yılmaz

https://doi.org/10.35229/jaes.594985

Cited By: 2

Öz

Bu
çalışmanın amacı Yedikır Baraj Gölü’nde yaşayan tatlısu levreğinin otolit
özelliklerinin belirlenmesi, total boy ve otolit özellikleri arasındaki
ilişkilerin ortaya çıkarılmasıdır. Yedikır Baraj Gölü’nden yakalanan 195 adet
örneğin total, çatal ve standart boyları (±0,1 cm) ölçülmüş, ağırlıkları
tartılmıştır (±0,01g).  Sagittal otolitler sağ ve sol ayrımları yapılarak
çıkarılmıştır. Otolitler distal yüzeylerinden fotoğraflanmış ve ağırlıkları
(OA) tartılmıştır (± 0,0001
g). Daha
sonra otolitlerin eni (OE) ve boyu (OB) (±0,001 mm) ölçümleri Leica Application
Suit Ver. 3.8 marka görüntü analiz programı ile ölçülmüştür.  Otolit ölçümleri ile total boy arasındaki
ilişkilerin hesaplanması için (TB-OE, TB-OB, TB-OA) doğrusal ) ve üssel regresyon  modelleri
uygulanmıştır.  P. fluvialitis türünün sağ ve sol otolitleri arasında OE, OL ve OA
bakımından fark olmadığı (P˃0,05) ancak dişi ve erkek bireylerin otolitleri
arasında önemli derecede fark olduğu tespit edilmiştir (P<0,05). Otolit ölçümleri ve TB
arasındaki ilişkilerin oldukça önemli olduğu belirlenmiştir (P<0,001).
İlişkilerin r² değerleri 0,957-0,969 arasında değişmiştir. Dişi,
erkek ve tüm bireylerde TB-OB arasındaki ilişki diğerlerinden daha kuvvetli
bulunmuştur. Bu veriler balıkçılık biyolojisi çalışmalarında önem taşımaktadır.
Son yıllarda otolit morfolojisi ile ilgili çalışmalar oldukça yaygındır.
Otolitin oluşumu ve büyümesi, balığın büyümesi ile ilişkilidir. Bu çalışmanın
tür ile ilgili olarak gerçekleştirilecek çalışmalara veri sağlaması ve
özellikle stok ayrım çalışmalarında kullanılması düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Otolith features, Perca fluviatilis, total length

Kaynakça

• Annabi, A., Said, K. & Reichenbacher, B. (2013). Interpopulation differences in otolith morphology are genetically encoded in the killifish Aphanius fasciatus (Cyprinodontiformes). Scientia Marina, 77, 269–279.
• Başusta A., Bal, H. & Aslan, E. (2013). Otolith biometry-total length relationships in the population of Hazar Bleak, Alburnus heckeli (Battalgil, 1943) inhabiting Lake Hazar, Elazig, Turkey. Pakistan Journal of Zoology, 45, 1180-1182.
• Battaglia P, Malara D, Romeo T. & Andaloro F. (2010). Relationship between otolith size and fish size in some mesopelagic and bathypelagic species from the Mediterranean Sea (Strait of Messina). Ital Sci Mar., 74, 605-612.
• Beğburs, C. R. (2010). Investigation of growth features of Perch (Perca fluviatilis L. 1758) population in Urkmez Dam Lake (Izmir-Turkey). 2nd International Symposium on Sustainable Develeopment, Sarajevo. 693-699.
• Bergenius, M.A.J., Begg, G.A. & Mapstone, B.D. (2006). The use of otolith morphology to indicate the stock structure of common coral trout (Plectropomus leopardus) on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Fish. Bull., 104, 498–511.
• Bose, A., Adragna, J. & Balshine, S. (2017). Otolith morphology varies between populations, sexes, and male alternative reproductive tactics in a vocal toadfish Porichthys notatus. Journal of Fish Biology, 90, 311-325.
• Bostancı, D. (2009). Otolith biometry-body length relationships in four fish species (chub, pikeperch, crucian carp, and common carp). J. Freshwater Ecol. 24, 619-624.
• Bostancı, D., Yılmaz, S. & Polat, N. (2009). Otolit biyometrisinin aynı balıkta ve farklı eşeyde değişimine bir örnek: Uranoscopus scaber L., 1758. XV. Ulusal Su Ürünleri Sempozyumu, 1-4 Temmuz, 1-13, Rize (In Turkish).
• Bostancı, D., Polat N., Kurucu, G., Yedier S., Kontaş, S. & Darcın, M. (2015). Using otolith shape and morphometry to identify four Alburnus species (A. chalcoides, A. escherichii, A. mossulensis and A. tarichi) in Turkish inland waters. Journal of Applied Ichthyology, 31, 1013-1022.
• Brazner, J.C., Campana, S.E., Tanner, D.K. & Schram, S.T., (2004). Reconstructing habitat use and wetland nursery origin of yellow perch from Lake Superior using otolith elemental analysis. J. Great Lakes Res., 30: 492–507.
• Campana, S. E. (2005). Otolith science entering the 21st century. Marine and Freshwater Research, 56, 485–495.
• Cengiz, Ö., Özekinci, U. & Öztekin, A. (2012). The relationships between total lenght-otolith length of bluefish, Pomatomus saltatrix, (Linnaeus, 1766) from Gallipoli Peninsula and Dardanelles (North-eastern Mediterranean, Turkey). Iğdır University Journal of the Institute of Scienceand Technology, 2, 31-34.
• Doğan, Y. & Şen, D. (2017). Keban Baraj Gölü’nde yaşayan Capoeta trutta (Heckel, 1843)’da otolit biyometrisi-balık boyu ilişkisi. Fırat Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 29, 33-38.
• Dönel, K. E. & Yılmaz, E. (2016). The fish fauna of Gaga Lake (Ordu-Turkey) and identification of four species by morphometric characteristics. Turkish Journal of Maritime and Marine Sciences, 2, 63-74.
• Dörtbudak, M. Y. & Özcan, G. (2015). İkizce Çayı’ndaki (Şırnak) siraz balığının [Capoeta umbla (Heckel, 1843)] otolit biyometrisi-balık boyu arasındaki ilişki. Yunus Araştırma Bülteni, 15, 67-72.
• Duncan, R., Brophy, D. & Arrizabalaga, H. (2018). Otolith shape analysis as a tool for stock separation of albacore tuna feding in the Northeast Atlantic. Fisheries Research, 200, 68–74.
• Felix, V.R, Martinez-Perez J.A., Molina, J.R., Zuniga, R.E.Q. & Lopez J.F. (2013). Morphology and morphometric relationships of the sagitta of Diapterus auratus (Perciformes: Gerreidae) from Veracruz, Mexico. Rev Biol Trop., 61, 139-147.
• Geldiay, R. & Balık, S. (2007). Türkiye tatlısu balıkları. Ege Üniversitesi Su Ürünleri Fakültesi Yayınları, İzmir, Turkey. (in Turkish).
• Granadeiro, J.P. & Silva, M.A. (2000). The use of otoliths and vertebrae in the identification and size-estimation of fish in predator-prey studies. Cybium, 24, 383-393.
• 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. Tech. Rep. NMFS 150.
• Ibáñez, A.L., Hernández-Fraga, K. & Alvarez-Hernández, S. (2017). Discrimination analysis of phenotypic stocks comparing fish otolith and scale shapes. Fish Res., 185, 6-13.
• Jawad, L.A., Al-Mamry, J.M., Al-Mamari, H.M., Al-Yarubi, M.M., Al-Busaidi, H.K. (2011). Relationships between fish length and otolith length, width and weight of Rhynchorhamphus georgi (Valenciennes, 1846) (Family: Hemiramphidae) collected from Oman Sea. Rom J Biol. 56, 189–200.
• Jawad, L.A., Sabatino, G., Ibáñez, A.L., Andoloro, F. & Battaglia, P. (2017). Morphology and ontogenetic changes in otoliths of the mesopelagic fishes Ceratoscopelus maderensis (Myctophidae), Vinciguerria attenuata and V. poweriae (Phosichthyidae) from the Strait of Messina (Mediterranean Sea). Acta Zool-Stockholm., 1-17.
• Kanjuh, T., Mrdak, D., Piria, M., Tomljanović, T., Joksimović, A., Talevski, T. & Milošević, D. (2018). Relationships of Otolith Dimension with Body Length of European Eel Anguilla anguilla (Linnaeus, 1758) from Adriatic catchment of Montenegro. Acta Adriatica, 59, 91 –96.
• Kontaş, S. & Bostancı, D. (2015). Morphological and biometrical characteristics on otolith of Barbus tauricus Kessler, 1877 on light and scanning electron microscope. International Journal of Morphology, 33, 1380-1385.
• Kottelat, M. & Freyhof, J. (2007). Handbook of European freshwater fishes. Berlin, 646 p.
• Leguá, J., Plaza, G., Pèrez, D. & Arkhipkin, A. (2013). Otolith shape analysis as a tool for stock identification of the southern blue whiting, Micromesistius australis. Latin American Journal of Aquatic Research, 41, 479-489.
• Lin, C-H., Taviani, M., Angeletti, L., Girone, A. & Nolf, D. (2017). Fish otoliths in superficial sediments of the Mediterranean Sea. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 471, 134-143.
• Mapp, J., Hunter, E., Van Der Kooij, J., Songer, S. & Fisher, M. (2017). Otolith shape and size: the importance of age when determining indices for fish-stock separation. Fish Res., 190, 43-52.
• Mejri, M., Trojette, M., Allaya, H., Ben Faleh, A., Jmil, I., Chalh, A., Quignard J.-P. & Trabelsi M. (2018). Use of otolith shape to differentiate two lagoon populations of Pagellus erythrinus (Actinopterygii: Perciformes: Sparidae) in Tunisian waters. Acta Ichthyol. Piscat., 48, 153–161.
• Mérigot, B., Letourneur, Y. & Lecomte-Finiger, R. (2007). Characterization of local populations of the Common Sole, Solea solea (Pisces, Soleidae) in the NW Mediterranean through otolith morphometrics and shape analysis. Mar Biol., 151, 997-1008.
• Munday, P.L., Hodges, A.L., Choat, J.H. & Gust, N. (2004). Sex-specific growth effect in protogynous hermaphrodites. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 61, 323-327.
• Ozpicak, M., Saygin, S., Aydin, A, Hançer, E., Yilmaz, S. & Polat, N. (2018). Otolith Shape Analyses of the Squalius cephalus (L., 1758) (Actinopterygii: Cyprinidae) Inhabiting a Few Inland Waters of the Middle Black Sea Region (Turkey), Iran. J. Ichthyol, 5, 293-302.
• Park, J. M., Gaston, T.F., Riedel, R. & Williamson, J.E. (2018). Biometric relationships between body and otolith measurements in nine demersal fishes from north-eastern Tasmanian waters, Australia. Journal of Applied Ichthyology, 34, 801–805.
• Pavlov, D.A. (2016). Differentiation of three species of the Genus Upeneus (Mullidae) based on otolith shape analysis, Journal of Ichthyology, 56, 41-55.
• Pierce, G.J., Boyle, P.R., Diack, J.S.W. (1991). Identification of fish otoliths and bones in faeces and digestive tracts of seals. Journal of Zoology, 224, 320-328.
• Polat, N. & Uğurlu, S. (2011). Samsun İli Tatlı Su Balık Faunası. Samsun: 272 p.
• 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.
• Prichard, C.G., Jonas, J.L., Student, J.J., Watson, N.M. & Pangle, K.L (2018). Same habitat, different species: otolith microchemistry relationships between migratory and resident species support interspecific natal source classification. Environ Biol Fish, 101, 1025–1038.
• Saygın, S., Özpiçak, M., Elp, M., Polat, N., Atıcı, A.A. &, Akçanal Ödün, N. (2017). Comparative analysis of the otolith features of tarek (Alburnus tarichi (Güldenstädt, 1814)) from different lakes across Van Basin (Van, Erçek, Nazik, Aygır) (Turkey). LimnoFish, 3, 91-99.
• Secor, D.H. (2010). Is otolith science transformative? New views on fish migration. Environmental Biology of Fishes, 89, 209-220.
• Sen, D., Aydın, R. & Çatla M. (2001). Relationships between fish length and otolith length in the population of Capoeta capoeta umbla (Heckel, 1843) inhabiting Hazar Lake, Elazığ, Turkey. Arch Pol Fish., 9, 267-272.
• Souza, G.M., Tubino, R. A., Monteiro-Neto, C. & da Costa, M.R. (2019). Relationships between fish and otolith dimensions of Pomatomus saltatrix (Linnaeus, 1766) (Perciformes: Pomatomidae) in southeastern Brazil. Neotropical Ichthyology, 17(1): e180032.
• Stevenson, D.K. & Campana, S.E. (1992). Otolith microstructure examination and analysis. Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 117, 126.
• Thorpe, J. (1977). Synopsis of biological data on the perch Perca fluviatilis Linnaeus, 1758 and Perca flavescens Mitchill, 1814. FAO Fish. Synop., 113, Rome.
• Tollit, D. J., Steward, P.M, Thompson, P.M., Pierce, G.J., Santos, M.B. & Hughes, S. (1997). Species and size differences in the digestion of otoliths and beaks: Implications for estimates of pinniped diet composition. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science, 54, 105-119.
• Tuset, V.M., Lombarte, A., González, J.A., Pertusa, J.F. & Lorente, M.J. (2003). Comparative morphology of the sagittal otolith in Serranus spp. Journal of Fish Biology, 6, 1491-1504.
• Tuset, V.M., Lombarte, A. & Assis, C.A. (2008). Otolith atlas for the western Mediterranean, north and central eastern Atlantic. Sci. Mar., 72, 7-198.
• Vallisneri, M., Trotta, V., Cavicchi, S. & Piccinetti, C., 2008. Sex-specific somatic-otolith growth relationship in two Gadidae. J. Fish Biol., 72, 724-730.
• Vignon, M. & Morat, F. (2010). Environmental and genetic determinant of otolith shape revealed by a non-indigenous tropical fish. Mar Ecol Prog Ser., 411, 231-241.
• Woydack, A. & Morales-Nin, B. (2001). Growth patterns and biological information in fossil fish otoliths. Paleobiology, 27, 369-378.
• Yazicioğlu, O., Yilmaz, S., Erbaşaran, M., Uğurlu S. & Polat, N. (2017). Bony structure dimensions-fish length relationships of pike (Esox lucius L., 1758) in Lake Ladik (Samsun, Turkey). North-West J Zool., 13, 149-153.
• Yılmaz, S., Yazicioglu, O., Saygin (Ayaydin), S. & Polat, N. (2014). Relationships of otolith dimensions with body length of European perch, Perca fluviatilis L., 1758 from Lake Ladik, Turkey. Pak J Zool., 46, 1231-1238.
• Yılmaz, S., Yazıcıoğlu, O., Yazıcı, R. &Polat, N. (2015). Relationships between fish length and otolith size for five cyprinid species from Lake Ladik, Samsun, Turkey. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 39, 438–446.
• Zar, J.H. (1999). Biostatistical analysis. New Jersey, Prentice-Hall.
• Zengin Özpiçak, M., Saygın, S., Aydın, A., Hançer, E., Yılmaz, S. &, Polat, N. (2018). the relationships between otolith dimensions-total length of chub Squalius cephalus, L.1758) sampled from some inland waters of the Middle Black Sea Region. LimnoFish, 4, 17-24.
• Zengin, M., Saygin S. & Polat, N. (2015). Otolith shape analysis and dimensions of the anchovy Engraulis encrasicolus L. in the Black and Marmara Seas. Sains Malaysiana, 44, 657-662.
• Zengin, M., Saygin, S. & Polat, N. (2017). Relationships between otolith size and total length of bluefish, Pomatomus saltatrix (Linnaeus, 1766) in Black Sea (Turkey). North-West J Zool. 13, 169-171.
• Zhao, B., Lıu J., Song J., Cao L. & Dou S. (2017). Otolith shape analysis for stock discrimination of two Collichthys genus croaker (Pieces: Sciaenidae,) from the northern Chinese coast. Chinese Journal of Oceanology and Limnology, 36, 981-989.