Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T05:55:40.659Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Trophic ecology of a coastal fish assemblage in Portuguese waters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2013

Nuno Castro*
Affiliation:
Centro de Oceanografia, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Campo Grande, 1749-016 Lisboa, Portugal INRB/IPIMAR, Instituto de Investigação das Pescas e do Mar, Avenida de Brasília, 1449-006 Lisboa, Portugal
José Lino Costa
Affiliation:
Centro de Oceanografia, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Campo Grande, 1749-016 Lisboa, Portugal Departamento de Biologia Animal, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Edificío C2, 1749-016 Lisboa, Portugal
Isabel Domingos
Affiliation:
Centro de Oceanografia, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Campo Grande, 1749-016 Lisboa, Portugal Departamento de Biologia Animal, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Edificío C2, 1749-016 Lisboa, Portugal
Maria Manuel Angélico
Affiliation:
INRB/IPIMAR, Instituto de Investigação das Pescas e do Mar, Avenida de Brasília, 1449-006 Lisboa, Portugal
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: N. Castro, Centro de Oceanografia, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Campo Grande, 1749-016 Lisboa, Portugal, e-mail: ngcastro@fc.ul.pt
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The diets and trophic ecology of the dominant fish species from the marine coastal region of Aveiro (north-western Portugal) caught during a summer survey were studied. Mysids were the most important prey group for the fish assemblage analysed. As a consequence, there was a high dietary overlap between species and a low incidence of piscivory. Nevertheless, a clear segregation of trophic niches was observed, with one group (comprising the species Chelidonichthys cuculus, Callionymus lyra, Dicologlossa cuneata and Pomatoschistus lozanoi) showing a stronger preference for infaunal epibenthic prey, such as polychaetes and amphipods, another group (including Arnoglossus imperialis, Arnoglossus laterna, Chelidonichthys obscurus, Chelidonichthys lucernus, Echiichthys vipera, Pagellus acarne and Trisopterus luscus) preying mostly upon suprabenthic prey, mainly mysids, and a third group (Engraulis encrasicolus and Trachurus trachurus) feeding largely on planktonic prey like copepods. Some species, including A. imperialis, C. lyra, E. vipera, T. trachurus and T. luscus, showed ontogenic diet shifts that may be related to the habitat occupied by different size-classes and/or to their ability to capture prey of different size.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2013 
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Location of the sampling area in the A veiro coastal region.

Figure 1

Table 1. Number of stomachs analysed, size-classes and respective sample size and median size of individuals, size at maturation (L50%) according to the literature and percentage of juveniles.

Figure 2

Table 2. Importance of each major prey group for the fish assemblage total sample, considering the frequency of occurrence and the numeric and gravimetric indices (%).

Figure 3

Table 3. Diet quantitative analysis of the species and respective size-classes according to the frequency of occurrence (%O) and numeric (%N) and gravimetric (%W) indices. Reference also to the percentage of empty stomachs.

Figure 4

Fig. 2. Diagram of the correspondence analysis performed using the frequency of occurrence of the several species/size-classes to identify major trophic groups. Δ, prey groups; ○, species and/or size-classes (see Table 1 for the size-class details and species abbreviations and Table 3 for prey abbreviations). Eigenvalues of the first two axes (λ1 and λ2), groups formed in the diagram (Groups 1–3) and the relative weight of each prey group in the analysis are also indicated.

Figure 5

Table 4. Results of the PERMANOVA tests performed to compare the diet (index of occurrence) of the trophic groups (1, 2 and 3) identified in the correspondence analysis.

Figure 6

Table 5. Results of the Horn index measuring the diet overlap among the different fish species/size-classes, using the standardized frequency of occurrence of each prey group. Values higher than 0.6 are highlighted because dietary overlap is considered to be significant above this limit (see Table 1 for size-class details and species abbreviations).