Does diet in Celtic Sea fishes reflect prey availability?

Journal of Fish Biology

Volumn 63, Issue SUPPL. A, 2003, Pages 197-212

  Pinnegar, J K ^a   Trenkel, V M ^b   Tidd, A N ^a   Dawson, W A ^a   Du Buit, M H ^c  

^a CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT   (United Kingdom)

^b IFREMER   (France)

^c CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

Availability; Celtic Sea; Diet; Preference; Stomach contents

Indexed keywords

DIET; FOOD PREFERENCE; GADOID; PREY AVAILABILITY; STOMACH CONTENT;

ATLANTIC OCEAN; CELTIC SEA;

ANIMALIA; ARGENTINA; CALLIONYMUS; CLUPEIFORMES; EQUUS CABALLUS; GADUS; GADUS MORHUA; LEPIDORHOMBUS; LEPIDORHOMBUS WHIFFIAGONIS; MERLANGIUS MERLANGUS; MERLUCCIUS; MERLUCCIUS MERLUCCIUS; MICROMESISTIUS; MICROMESISTIUS POUTASSOU; PISCES; POLLACHIUS; POLLACHIUS VIRENS; REXEA SOLANDRI; SCOMBER; SCOMBER SCOMBRUS; TRISOPTERUS;

EID: 2342615457     PISSN: 00221112     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8649.2003.00204.x     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (43)

1. Anthony, J. A., Roby, D. D. & Turco, K. R. (2000). Lipid content and energy density of forage fishes from the northern Gulf of Alaska. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 248, 53-78.
2. Armstrong, M. J. (1982). The predator-prey relationships of Irish Sea poor-cod (Trisopterus minutus L.), pouing (Trisopterus luscus L.), and cod (Gadus morhua L.). Journal du Conseil International pour l'Exploration de la Mer 40, 135-152.
3. Botsford, L. W., Castilla, J. C. & Peterson, C. H. (1997). The management of fisheries and marine ecosystems. Science 277, 509-515.
4. Bowman, R. E. (1986). Effect of regurgitation on stomach content data of marine fisheries. Environmental Biology of Fishes 16, 171-181.
5. Cade, B. S. & Richards, J. D. (1996). Permutation tests for least absolute deviation regression. Biometrics 52, 886-902.
6. Cade, B. S., Terrell, J. W. & Schroeder, R. L. (1999). Estimating effects of limiting factors with regression quantiles. Ecology 80, 311-323.
7. Charnov, E. L. (1976). Optimal foraging: attack strategy of a mantid. American Naturalist 110, 141-151.
8. Chesson, J. (1978). Measuring preference in selective predation. Ecology 59, 211-215.
9. Chesson, J. (1983). The estimation and analysis of preference and its relationship to foraging models. Ecology 64, 1297-1304.
10. Christensen, V., Walters, C. J. & Pauly, D. (2000). Ecopath with Ecosim: a User's Guide, Vancouver: Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia and Penang: ICLARM.
11. Cohen, J. E. & Newman, C. M. (1988). Dynamic basis of food web organization. Ecology 69, 1655-1664.
12. Confer, J. L. & Moore, M. V. (1987). Interpreting selectivity indexes calculated from field data or conditions of prey replacement. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 44, 1529-1533.
13. nd edn. New York: Wiley.
14. Deb, D. (1997). Trophic uncertainty vs parsimony in food web research. Oikos 78, 191-194.
15. Du Buit, M. H. (1982). Essai d'évaluation de la prédation de quelques téléostéens en Mer Celtique. Journal du Conseil International pour l'Exploration de la Mer 40, 37-46.
16. Du Buit, M. H. (1992) Alimentation de la Cardine, Lepidorhombus whiffiagonis en Mer Celtique. Cahiers de Biologie Marine 33, 501-514.
17. Du Buit, M. H. (1995). Food and feeding of cod (Gadus morhua L.) in the Celtic Sea. Fisheries Research 22, 227-241.
18. Du Buit, M. H. (1996). Diet of hake (Merluccius merluccius) in the Celtic Sea. Fisheries Research 28, 381-394.
19. Engås, A. & Godø, O. R. (1989). Escape of fish under the fishing line of a Norwegian sampling trawl and its influence on survey results. Journal du Conseil International pour l'Exploration de la Mer 45, 269-276.
20. Greenstreet, S. P. R., McMillan, J. A. & Armstrong, E. (1998). Seasonal variation in the importance of pelagic fish in the diet of piscivorous fish in the Moray Firth, NE Scotland: a response to variation in prey abundance? ICES Journal of Marine Science 55, 121-133.
21. Floeter, J. & Temming, A. (2003). Explaining diet composition of North Sea cod (Gadus morhua): prey size preference vs. prey availability. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 60, 140-150.
22. Hart, P. J. B. & Connellan, B. (1984). Cost of prey capture, growth rate and ration size in pike, Esox lucius L., as functions of prey weight. Journal of Fish Biology 25, 279-292.
23. Insightful (2001). S-Plus 6 for Windows Guide to Statistics, Vol. 1. Seattle, WA: Insightful Corporation.
24. Jennings, S., Grrenstreet, S. P. R., Hill, L., Piet, G. J., Pinnegar, J. K. & Warr, K. J. (2002). Long-term trends in the trophic structure of the North Sea fish community: evidence from stable-isotope analysis, size-spectra and community metrics. Marine Biology 141, 1085-1097.
25. Juanes, F., Buckel, J. A. & Scharf, F. S. (2002). Feeding ecology of piscivorous fishes. In Handbook of Fish and Fisheries, Vol. 1 (Hart, P. J. B. & Reynolds, J. D., eds), pp. 267-283. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
26. Magnusson, K. G. & Palsson, O. K. (1991). Predator-prey interactions of cod and capelin in Icelandic waters. ICES Marine Science Symposium 193, 153-170.
27. Manly, B. F. J., Miller, P. & Cook, L. M. (1972). Analysis of a selective predation experiment. American Naturalist 106, 719-736.
28. Marchal, P. & Horwood, J. (1996). Long-term targets for the Celtic Sea mixed-species multi-metiers fisheries. Aquatic Living Resources 9, 81-94.
29. Mittelbach, G. C. (2002). Fish foraging and habitat choice: a theoretical perspective. In Handbook of Fish and Fisheries, Vol. 1 (Hart, P. J. B. & Reynolds, J. D., eds), pp. 251-266. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
30. O'Neill, R. V. (1969). Indirect estimation of energy fluxes in animal food webs. Journal of Theoretical Biology 22, 284-290.
31. 2. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 39, 914-923.
32. Pinnegar, J. K., Polunin, N. V. C., Francour, P., Badalamenti, F., Chemello, R., Harmelin-Vivien, M.-L., Hereu, B., Milazzo, M., Zabala, M., D'Anna, G. & Pipitone, C. (2000). Trophic cascades in benthic marine ecosystems: lessons for fisheries and protected-area management. Environmental Conservation 27, 179-200
33. Pinnegar, J. K., Jennings, S., O'Brien, C. M. & Polunin, N. V. C. (2002). Long-term changes in the trophic level of the Celtic Sea fish community and fish market price distribution. Journal of Applied Ecology 39, 377-390. doi: 10.1046/ j.1365-2664.2002.00723.x
34. Pope, J. G. (1991). The ICES multispecies assessment working group: evolution, insights, and future problems. ICES Marine Science Symposia 193, 22-33.
35. Scharf, F. S., Juanes, F. & Sutherland, M. (1998). Inferring ecological relationships from the edges of scatter diagrams: comparison of regression techniques. Ecology 79, 448-460.
36. Scharf, F. S., Juanes, F. & Rountree, R. A. (2000). Predator size-prey size relationships of marine fish predators: interspecific variation and effects of ontogeny and body size on trophic niche breadth. Marine Ecology-Progress Series 208, 229-248.
37. Schoener, T. W. (1979). Generality of the size-distance relation in models of optimal feeding. American Naturalist 114, 902-914.
38. Sih, A. & Christensen, B. (2001). Optimal diet theory: when does it work, and when and why does it fail? Animal Behaviour 61, 379-390.
39. Stephens, D. W. & Krebs, J. R. (1986). Foraging Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
40. Van Pelt, T. I., Piatt, J. F., Lance, B. K. & Roby, D. D. (1997). Proximate composition and energy density of some North Pacific forage fishes. Comparative Biochemistry & Physiology, Series A 118A, 1398.
41. Warnes, S. & Jones, B. W. (1995). Species Distributions from English Celtic Sea Groundfish Surveys, 1984-1991. Fisheries Research Technical Report No. 58. Lowestoft: Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Directorate of Fisheries Research.
42. WGMHSA (2002). Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Mackerel, Hoise-mackerel, Sardine and Anchovy. http://www.ices.dk/iceswork/wgdetailacfm. asp?wg=WGMHSA
43. WGNPBW (2002). Report of the Northern Pelagic and Blue-whiting Working Group. http://www.ices.dk/iceswork/wgdetailacfm.asp?wg=WGNPBW