Discriminant Geographic Variation of Saccular Otolith Shape and Size in the Common Pandora, Pagellus erythrinus (Sparidae) across the Gulf of Gabes, Tunisia

Discriminant inter and intrapopulation variation in sagittal otolith shape and morphometry inChelon ramada(Actinopterygii, Mugilidae) from the Boughrara and El Bibane lagoons in Tunisian waters

“…Therefore, minor differences in the temperature, salinity, and pH between the two lagoons may directly affect the habitat and indirectly affect the chemical composition and shape of the otoliths in C. ramada. These interpretations are consistent with those of previous studies (Lombarte and Lleonart, 1993;Martin and Wuenschel, 2006;Hüssy, 2008;Capoccioni et al, 2011;Ben Labidi et al, 2020a, 2020bKhedher et al, 2021;Mejri et al, 2022aMejri et al, , 2022b. Additionally, Simoneau et al (2000) reported that differences in the fish's age and sex may lead to a significant difference in the otolith shape in fish stocks.…”

“…(2020a, 2020b), Mejri et al . (2020, 2022a), and Khedher et al . (2021) attributed the asymmetry in the otolith shape to the instability of development caused either by environmental stress related to the change in water temperature, salinity, living depth, feeding conditions, and pollutants that have led to abnormalities in the ontogenetic development of individuals or due to poor living conditions of larvae in an unfavourable environment.…”

“…ramada collected from the Boughrara and El Bibane lagoons. Similar findings of the interpopulation variation of the left and right otoliths’ shape have been previously reported in a wide range of fish taxa for which data are available and occurring either in Tunisian waters or elsewhere worldwide (for details, see Ben Labidi et al ., 2020a, 2020b; Khedher et al ., 2021; Mejri et al ., 2022a). In addition, significant intersexual shape difference, i.e.…”

“…ramada . These interpretations are consistent with those of previous studies (Lombarte and Lleonart, 1993; Martin and Wuenschel, 2006; Hüssy, 2008; Capoccioni et al ., 2011; Ben Labidi et al ., 2020a, 2020b; Khedher et al ., 2021; Mejri et al ., 2022a, 2022b). Additionally, Simoneau et al .…”

“…Moreover, variations in otolith microchemistry have been used to estimate spatiotemporal migration and feeding behaviour between species (Lord et al ., 2011). Therefore, information on the shape and morphometry of fish sagittal otolith has long been considered an appropriate method for studying population structure and stock assessment (Pothin et al ., 2006; Gonzalez-Salas and Lenfant, 2007; Duarte-Neto et al ., 2008; Rebaya et al ., 2016; Bose et al ., 2017; Mejri et al ., 2018, 2022a; Mahé et al ., 2019; Ben Labidi et al ., 2020a; Khedher et al ., 2021), species identification (Škeljo and Ferri, 2011; Bani et al ., 2013; Jawad et al ., 2018), assessment of age and growth (Cardinale et al ., 2004; Škeljo et al ., 2015), diet content (Lilliendahl and Solmundsson, 2006), ontogeny (Capoccioni et al ., 2011), spatiotemporal migration (Lord et al ., 2011), and fisheries science and management (Vasconcelos et al ., 2018; Rani et al ., 2019). As the morphological variation of sagittal otoliths is influenced by genetic factors (Vignon and Morat, 2010), external factors, including depth (Lombarte and Lleonart, 1993) and water temperature (Lombarte and Lleonart, 1993; Hüssy, 2008), salinity (Capoccioni et al ., 2011), and food supply (Gagliano and McCormick, 2004; Hüssy, 2008) also play a strong role in reshaping of otoliths (Vignon, 2012; Bremm and Schulz, 2014).…”