Relationships between total length and otolith size of bluefish Pomatomus saltatrix (Linnaeus, 1766) in the Marmara Sea of Turkey

Abstract

In the present study, bluefish, Pomatomus saltatrix, was monthly collected from commercial fishing boats operating in the Marmara Sea between January and December 2014. The relationship between total length and otolith size of 346 bluefish samples were examined. Total lengths of females, males and unidentified samples were ranged from between 13.2-37.0, 12.3-34.8 and 13.0-31.6 cm, respectively. Otolith lengths were between 3.82-12.60 mm and otolith width were between 1.59-4.34 mm for all samples. It was found that there is a strong correlations between otolith length-total length (r 2 =0.88) and otolith width-total length (r 2 0.81).

Relationships between fish and otolith dimensions of Pomatomus saltatrix (Linnaeus, 1766) (Perciformes: Pomatomidae) in southeastern Brazil

“…Several studies on the bluefish focused on age and growth (Krug, Haimovici, 1989;Robillard et al, 2009), reproduction (Haimovici, Krug, 1992;Robillard et al, 2008), diet (Haimovici, Krug, 1992) and fisheries (Haimovici, Krug, 1996;Lucena, O'Brien, 2005). Nevertheless, studies on the morphometric relationships of bluefish otoliths are few and geographically limited in the literature (Hare, Cowen, 1995;Ceyhan, Akyol, 2006;Zengin et al, 2017;Bal et al, 2018). The aim of this paper was to provide information on the length-weight relationships (LWR) and condition factor (k) of bluefish, and the relationships between otolith dimensions and fish size, testing the hypothesis that such relations may provide useful predictive equations for estimating fish length and weight.…”

Otolith Shape Analysis of Bluefish, Pomatomus saltatrix (Linnaeus, 1766) in the Black Sea Region (Samsun, Turkey)

“…Zengin et al (2017) investigated the relationships between otolith dimensions (OL, OB and OW) and total length of bluefish and found a strong relationship between TL and OW. However, Bal et al (2018a) found a strong relationship between OL and TL. These differences can be arrise from environmental differences between Marmara and Blacksea regions.…”

“…These differences can be arrise from environmental differences between Marmara and Blacksea regions. And also Bal et al (2018a) have not examined otolith weight. The otolith shapes have been evaluated based on morphometric measurements (Short et al 2006) and the mathematical computation of shape indices (Russ, 1990;Tuset et al, 2006).…”

“…The otolith shape analysis' major advantages is the relatively low cost of analysis as compared to genetic research. However there are limited studies about morphometrics, length-weight relationships and otolith shape of bluefish (Tuset et al, 2008;Zengin et al, 2015;Bal et al, 2018a;Bat et al, 2018b). Bal et al (2018b) calculated FF, C, RD and AR for bluefish from Aegean Sea as 0.55±0.01, 22.21±0.42, 0.33±0.009 and 2.82±0.05.…”

“…Throughout these migrations' bluefish have been highly exploited, especially in area of western Black Sea and Marmara Sea (Ceyhan and Akyol 2006). Because of the commercial importance of bluefish, most of the studies were focused on age determination (Ceyhan et al, 2007), growth parameters (Cengiz et al, 2013), length-weight relationshisps (Özpiçak et al, 2017;Cumplido et al, 2018), diet (Buckel et al, 2004;Lucena et al, 2006), otolith size-length relationships (Cengiz et al, 2012;Zengin et al, 2017;Bal et al, 2018a), selectivity (Acarlı et al, 2013;İlkyaz, 2018) and morphometric variation (Turan et al, 2006). On the other hand, there are limited studies about stock structure of bluefish (Graves et al, 1992).…”