Environmental and genetic determinant of otolith shape revealed by a non-indigenous tropical fish

Marine Ecology Progress Series

Volumn 411, Issue , 2010, Pages 231-241

  Vignon, Matthias ^a,b,d,e,f   Morat, Fabien ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE PERPIGNAN   (France)

^b Centre de Biologie et d Ecologie Tropicale et Méditerranéenne   (French Polynesia)

^c STATION MARINE D ENDOUME   (France)

^d Ecologie Comportementale et Biologie des Populations de Poissons   (France)

^e CEMAGREF   (France)

^f UNIVERSITÉ DE PAU ET DES PAYS DE L'ADOUR   (France)

Author keywords

Evolutionary; Fisheries management; French Polynesia; Geometric morphometrics; Hawaiian archipelago; Lutjinidae; Stocks

Indexed keywords

CORAL REEF; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; INVASIVE SPECIES; MARINE RESOURCE; MORPHOLOGY; MORPHOMETRY; OTOLITH; PERCIFORM; STOCK ASSESSMENT;

FRENCH POLYNESIA; HAWAII [(ISL) HAWAIIAN ISLANDS]; HAWAII [UNITED STATES]; HAWAIIAN ISLANDS; UNITED STATES;

ANTHOZOA; LUTJANUS KASMIRA;

EID: 77955885424     PISSN: 01718630     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3354/meps08651     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Begg GA, Brown RW (2000) Stock identification of haddock Melanogrammus aeglefinus on Georges Bank based on otolith shape analysis. Trans Am Fish Soc 129:935-945
2. Begg GA, Waldman JR (1999) An holistic approach to fish stock identification. Fish Res 43:35-44
3. Begg GA, Overholtz WJ, Munroe NJ (2001) The use of internal otolith morphometrics for identification of haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus) stocks on Georges Bank. Fish Bull 99:1-14
4. Begg GA, Campana SE, Fowler AJ, Suthers IM (2005) Otolith research and application: current directions in innovation and implementation. Mar Freshw Res 56:477-483
5. Berg E, Sarvas TH, Harbitz A, Fevolden SE, Salberg AB (2005) Accuracy and precision in stock separation of north-east Arctic and Norwegian coastal cod by otoliths- comparing readings, image analyses and a genetic method. Mar Freshw Res 56:753-762
6. Bolger T, Connolly PL (1989) The selection of suitable indices for the measurement and analysis of fish condition. J Fish Biol 34:171-182
7. Bookstein FL (1991) Morphometric tools for landmark data: geometry and biology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
8. Bookstein FL (1997) Landmark methods for forms without landmarks: localizing group differences in outline shape. Med Image Anal 1:225-243
9. Burke N, Brophy D, King PA (2008) Shape analysis of otolith annuli in Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus); a new method for tracking fish populations. Fish Res 91:133-143
10. Cadrin SX (2000) Advances in morphometric identification of fishery stocks. Rev Fish Biol Fish 10:91-112
11. Cadrin SX, Friedland KD (1999) The utility of image processing techniques for morphometric analysis and stock identification. Fish Res 43:129-139
12. Campana SE (2005) Otolith science entering the 21st century. Mar Freshw Res 56:485-495
13. Campana SE, Casselman JL (1993) Stock discrimination using otolith shape analysis. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 50:1062-1083
14. Campana SE, Thorrold SR (2001) Otoliths, increments, and elements: keys to a comprehensive understanding of fish populations? Can J Fish Aquat Sci 58:30-38
15. Cardinale M, Doering-Arjes P, Kastowsky M, Mosegaard H (2004) Effects of sex, stock and environment on the shape of known-age Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) otoliths. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 61:158-167
16. Carvalho GR, Hauser L (1994) Molecular genetics and the stock concept in fisheries. Rev Fish Biol Fish 4:326-350
17. Castonguay M, Simard P, Gagnon P (1991) Usefulness of Fourier analysis of otolith shape for Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus) stock discrimination. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 48:296-302
18. Coleman FC, Koenig CC, Huntsman GR, Musick JA and others (2000) Long-lived reef fishes: the grouper-snapper complex. Fisheries 25:14-21
19. Coyle T (1998) Stock identification and fisheries management: the importance of using several methods in a stock identification study. In: Hancock DA (ed) Taking stock: defining and managing shared resources. ASFB, Sydney, p 173-182
20. Dankel DJ, Skagen DW, Ulltang ø (2008) Fisheries management in practice: review of 13 commercially important fish stocks. Rev Fish Biol Fish 18:201-233
21. DeVries DA, Grimes CB, Prager MH (2002) Using otolith shape analysis to distinguish eastern Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean stocks of king mackerel. Fish Res 57:51-62
22. Foote M (1993) Contributions of individual taxa to overall morphological disparity. Paleobiology 19:403-419
23. Friedland KD, Reddin DG (1994) Use of otolith morphology in stock discriminations of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Can J Fish Aquat Sci 51:91-98
24. Friedlander AM, Parrish JD, DeFelice RC (2002) Ecology of the introduced snapper Lutjanus kasmira (Forsskal) in the reef fish assemblage of a Hawaiian bay. J Fish Biol 60:28-48
25. Gagliano M, McCormick MI (2004) Feeding history influences otolith shape in tropical fish. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 278: 291-296
26. Gaither MR, Toonen RJ, Robertson DR, Planes S, Bowen BW (2009) Genetic evaluation of marine biogeographical barriers: perspectives from two widespread Indo-Pacific snappers (Lutjanus kasmira and Lutjanus fulvus). J Biogeogr 37:133-147
27. Gaither MR, Bowen BW, Toonen RJ, Planes S, Messmer V, Earle J, Robertson DR (2010) Genetic consequences of introducing allopatric lineages of bluestriped snapper (Lutjanus kasmira) to Hawaii. Mol Ecol 19:1107-1121
28. Galley EA, Wright PJ, Gibb FM (2006) Combined methods of otolith shape analysis improve identification of spawning areas of Atlantic cod. ICES J Mar Sci 63:1710-1717
29. Gauldie RW (1988) Function, form and time keeping properties of fish otoliths. Comp Biochem Physiol A 91:395-402
30. Gauldie RW, Nelson DGA (1990) Otolith growth in fishes. Comp Biochem Physiol A 97:119-135
31. Green WDK (1996) The thin-plate spline and images with curving features. In: Mardia KV, Gill CA, Dryden IL (eds) Proceedings in image fusion and shape variability techniques. Leeds University Press, Leeds, p 79-87
32. Hammer C, Zimmermann C (2005) The role of stock identification in formulating fishery management advice. In: Cadrin SX, Friedland KD, Waldman JR (eds) Stock identification methods. Applications in fishery science. Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego, CA, p 631-658
33. Hüssy K (2008) Otolith shape in juvenile cod (Gadus morhua): ontogenetic and environmental effects. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 364:35-41
34. Katayama S, Isshiki T (2007) Variation in otolith macrostructure of Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus): a method to discriminate between wild and released fish. J Sea Res 57:180-186
35. L'Abée-Lund JH (1988) Otolith shape discriminates between juvenile Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar, and brown trout, Salmo trutta. J Fish Biol 33:899-903
36. Law R (2000) Fishing, selection, and phenotypic evolution. ICES J Mar Sci 57:659-668
37. Lemberget T, McCormick MI (2009) Replenishment success linked to fluctuating asymmetry in larval fish. Oecologia 159:83-93
38. Lombarte A, Castellón A (1991) Interspecific and intraspecific otolith variability in the genus Merluccius as determined by image analysis. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 69:2442-2449
39. Lombarte A, Lleonart J (1993) Otolith size changes related with body growth, habitat depth and temperature. Environ Biol Fishes 37:297-306
40. Lychakov DV, Rebane YT (2000) Otolith regularities. Hear Res 143:83-102
41. 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
42. Monteiro LR, Di Beneditto APM, Guillermo LH, Rivera LA (2005) Allometric changes and shape differentiation of sagitta otoliths in sciaenid fishes. Fish Res 74:288-299
43. Morales-Nin B (1989) Growth determination of tropical marine fishes by means of otolith interpretation and length frequency analysis. Aquat Living Resour 2:241-253
44. Oda DK, Parrish JD (1981) Ecology of commercial snappers and groupers introduced to Hawaiian reefs. Proc 4th Int Coral Reef Symp, Manila 1:59-67
45. Oozeki Y, Watanabe Y (2000) Comparison of somatic growth and otolith increment growth in laboratory-reared larvae of Pacific saury, Cololabis saira, under different temperature conditions. Mar Biol 136:349-359
46. Ovenden JR (1990) Mitochondrial DNA and marine stock assessment: a review. Aust J Mar Freshwater Res 41: 835-853
47. Palmer M, Linde M, Morales-Nin B (2010) Disentangling fluctuating asymmetry from otolith shape. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 399:261-272
48. Parisi-Baradad V, Lombarte A, Garcia-Ladona E, Cabestany J, Piera J, Chic O (2005) Otolith shape contour analysis using affine transformation invariant wavelet transforms and curvature scale space representation. Mar Freshw Res 56:795-804
49. Planes S, Lecaillon G (1998) Consequences of the founder effect in the genetic structure of introduced island coral reef fish populations. Biol J Linn Soc 63:537-552
50. Ponton D (2006) Is geometric morphometrics efficient for comparing otolith shape of different fish species? J Morphol 267:750-757
51. Pothin K, Gonzalez-Salas C, Chabanet P, Lecomte-Finiger R (2006) Distinction between Mulloidichthys flavolineatus juveniles from Reunion Island and Mauritius Island (south-west Indian Ocean) based on otolith morphometrics. J Fish Biol 69:38-53
52. Randall JE (1987) Introductions of marine fishes to the Hawaiian Islands. Bull Mar Sci 41:490-502
53. Reichenbacher B, Feulner GR, Schulz-Mirbach T (2009) Geographic variation in otolith morphology among freshwater populations of Aphanius dispar (Teleostei, Cyprinodontiformes) from the southeastern Arabian Peninsula. J Morphol 270:469-484
54. Rohlf FJ (2006) tpsDig, digitize landmarks and outlines. Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook, NY, available at http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/
55. Rohlf FJ, Corti M (2000) Use of two-block partial leastsquares to study covariation in shape. Syst Biol 49: 740-753
56. Rohlf FJ, Marcus LF (1993) A revolution in morphometrics. Trends Ecol Evol 8:129-132
57. Ryman N (1991) Conservation genetics considerations in fishery management. J Fish Biol 39:211-224
58. Schulz-Mirbach T, Stransky C, Schlickeisen J, Reichenbacher B (2008) Differences in otolith morphologies between surfaceand cave-dwelling populations of Poecilia mexicana (Teleostei, Poeciliidae) reflect adaptations to life in an extreme habitat. Evol Ecol Res 10:537-558
59. Schumacher BD, Parrish JD (2005) Spatial relationships between an introduced snapper and native goatfishes on Hawaii reefs. Biol Inv 7:925-933
60. Sheets HD (2003) IMP CVAGen. Department of physics, Canisius College, Buffalo, NY, available at http://www3.canisius.edu/~sheets/moremorph.html
61. Sheets HD, Covino KM, Panasiewicz JM, Morris S (2006) Comparison of geometric morphometric outline methods in the discrimination of age-related differences in feather shape. Front Zool 3:15
62. Simoneau M, Casselman JM, Fortin R (2000) Determining the effect of negative allometry (length/height relationship) on variation in otolith shape in lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush), using Fourier-series analysis. Can J Zool 78: 1597-1603
63. Söllner C, Burghammer M, Busch-Nentwich E, Berger J, Schwarz H, Riekel C, Nicolson T (2003) Control of crystal size and lattice formation by starmaker in otolith biomineralization. Science 302:282-286
64. Stransky C (2005) Geographic variation of golden redfish (Sebastes marinus) and deep-sea redfish (S. mentella) in the North Atlantic based on otolith shape analysis. ICES J Mar Sci 62:1691-1698
65. Stransky C, MacLellan SE (2005) Species separation and zoogeography of redfish and rockfish (genus Sebastes) by otolith shape analysis. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 62: 2265-2276
66. Strelcheck AJ, Fitzhugh GR, Coleman FC, Koenig CC (2003) Otolith-fish size relationship in juvenile gag (Mycteroperca microlepis) of the eastern Gulf of Mexico: a comparison of growth rates between laboratory and field populations. Fish Res 60:255-265
67. Tracey SR, Lyle JM, Duhamel G (2006) Application of elliptical Fourier analysis of otolith form as a tool for stock identification. Fish Res 77:138-147
68. Turan C (2000) Otolith shape and meristic analysis of herring (Clupea harengus) in the North-East Atlantic. Arch Fish Mar Res 48:213-225
69. Tuset VM, Rosin PL, Lombarte A (2006) Sagittal otolith shape used in the identification of fishes of the genus Serranus. Fish Res 81:316-325
70. Vignon M, Morat F, Galzin R, Sasal P (2008) Evidence for spatial limitation of the bluestripe snapper in French Polynesia from parasite and otolith shape analysis. J Fish Biol 73:2305-2320
71. Waples RS, Naish KA (2009) Genetic and evolutionary considerations in fishery management: research needs for the future. In: Beamish RJ, Rothschild BJ (eds) The future of fisheries science in North America, Vol 31. Fish & Fisheries Series, Springer, p 427-451