2017
DOI: 10.1007/s10499-017-0199-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of swimming behavior of copepod nauplii on feeding of larval turbot (Scophthalmus maximus)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
9
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
1
9
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A wide spectrum of prey swimming be haviours have triggered successful feeding responses by P. hepatus (Lee et al 2018). This supports the idea that fish larvae do not require that prey have a specific swimming action to trigger a feeding response, and a greater range of organisms than previously thought may be useful as live feeds (Bruno et al 2018).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 63%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A wide spectrum of prey swimming be haviours have triggered successful feeding responses by P. hepatus (Lee et al 2018). This supports the idea that fish larvae do not require that prey have a specific swimming action to trigger a feeding response, and a greater range of organisms than previously thought may be useful as live feeds (Bruno et al 2018).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 63%
“…This study highlights the potential for oyster larvae to be used as a live feed for P. hepatus and possibly other fish larvae with small mouth gapes. Oyster larvae have the appropriate size and movement to illicit a feeding response by larval fish, challenging the paradigm that larval fish require live feeds like copepods that have a 'stop-start' swimming movement (Bruno et al 2018). We were able to improve the digestibility of oyster trochophores by conditioning them in acidic seawater.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…An attack event was initiated by the turbot larva perceiving the copepod changing its swimming direction and approaching the copepod. When the fish larva was within strike distance of its prey, it curved its body in an S‐shape or L‐shape posture, as typically observed when a fish attacks its prey (Bruno, Højgaard, Hansen, Munk & Støttrup, ; Domenici & Blake, ; Hoogland, Morris & Tinbergen, ). The fish larva speed during the approach (Figure a) and the distance between the copepod and the fish larva (Figure b) were sorted for successful and unsuccessful attacks.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Calanoid copepods, the natural prey of marine fish larvae, are superior in nutritional value compared to rotifers and Artemia (Evjemo et al, 2003;van der Meeren et al, 2008;Øie et al, 2017). Larval feeding is also influenced by the behavior of copepods (Støttrup and Norsker, 1997;Bruno et al, 2017). Compared to rotifers, higher feeding rates are seen in the presence of copepods, probably because their swimming behavior relative to that of rotifers triggers a better feeding response (Buskey et al, 1993;Wilcox et al, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Larval feeding is also influenced by the behavior of copepods (Støttrup and Norsker, 1997;Bruno et al, 2017). Compared to rotifers, higher feeding rates are seen in the presence of copepods, probably because their swimming behavior relative to that of rotifers triggers a better feeding response (Buskey et al, 1993;Wilcox et al, 2006). Furthermore, the larvae would be offered a broader range of prey sizes when feeding them on different stages of copepods as compared to feeding on rotifers and Artemia only.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%