“…This apparent hierarchy in the turnover rates of fish muscle, fin and scale tissue was a contrast to Matley et al (2016) who revealed in an adult coral reef fish Table 3 Best-fitting models for (1) time-based models and (2) growth-based models for 15 N turnover in muscle, fin and scale tissues of Barbus barbus, where c, turnover rate constant; m, metabolic constant; k, growth constant; Pm, relative contributions of metabolism to turnover; Pg, relative contributions of growth to turnover; Dm, relative contribution of metabolism to turnover; Dg, relative contribution of growth to turnover; T 0.5 , half-life (days); G 0.5 , half-life (g); df, estimated equilibrium value Plectropomus leopardus (Lacepède, 1802) muscle had a relatively long turnover rate compared with fin tissue. Other studies have, however, revealed that considerable differences in turnover rates can be apparent between fish tissues (Buchheister & Latour, 2010;Xia et al, 2013b), although their differences are often only minor (Hesslein et al, 1993;Sweeting et al, 2005;McIntyre & Flecker, 2006).…”