2012
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8649.2012.03497.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimating diet in individual pumpkinseed sunfish Lepomis gibbosus using stomach contents, stable isotopes and parasites

Abstract: The diets of 99 pumpkinseed sunfish Lepomis gibbosus from a pair of small, adjacent lakes in Ontario, Canada, were estimated from their stomach contents, trophically transmitted parasites and stable isotopes of carbon and nitrogen in fish tissue. The three methods provided virtually unrelated information. There was no significant correlation in the importance of any prey item across all three methods. Fish with similar diets according to one method of estimating diet showed no tendency to be similar according … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
21
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
2
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The partial discrepancy in the outputs of the dietary analysis between SIA and GCA is also consistent with the study on the diet of Lepomis gibbosus by Locke et al. (), who found little association in diet composition when compared using three methods, including GCA and SIA. They argued this was due to gut contents providing only a dietary snap‐shot in which slowly digested items (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…The partial discrepancy in the outputs of the dietary analysis between SIA and GCA is also consistent with the study on the diet of Lepomis gibbosus by Locke et al. (), who found little association in diet composition when compared using three methods, including GCA and SIA. They argued this was due to gut contents providing only a dietary snap‐shot in which slowly digested items (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…This general application of constant discrimination factors across consumers within mixing models is potentially problematic, as studies increasingly suggest they can vary between species, ages, diet compositions, body sizes, sample preparations and tissue types (Locke et al, 2013;Brush et al, 2012;Busst et al, 2015). The commonly cited values of 3.4±0.98‰ for δ 15 N and 0.39±1.3‰ for δ 13 C (DeNiro and Epstein, 1981;Minagawa and Wada, 1984;Post, 2002) could thus be inappropriate for use in many models, resulting in dietary predictions whose variability within and between species could be due more to inappropriate discrimination factors than actual dietary variation (Busst et al, 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…the isotopic 'discrimination' factor (D; Martínez del Rio & Wolf 2005). The issues that affect discrimination factors within and between consumer species include the age and body size of sampled individuals, their diet composition, the tissues analysed and the sample preparations completed prior to analysis (Brush et al, 2012;Locke et al, 2013;Busst et al, 2015). There can be high uncertainty in the discrimination factors of many species (Moore & Semmens, 2008;Elsdon et al, 2010;Busst & Britton, 2016).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%