Spatial Distributions and Ecology of Pelagic Fish

Horwood, J. W.; Cushing, D. H.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-2195-6_14

Cited by 22 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The distribution of oceanic zooplankton is typically patchy, although the processes underlying this are often inadequately understood (Steele 1977, Cowen & Castro 1994. Moreover, many pelagic fish are now known to be non-randomly distributed, possibly reflecting their prey distribution (Horwood & Cushing 1977). Patchy local distribution may bias geographical estimates of abundance (Simmonds et al 1992).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A cost-effective way of investigating quantitative distribution is by visual survey, as is feasible for marine mammals which are large enough to be counted from the air or from a moving vessel as they surface (e.g. Holt 1987, Barlow 1988, for large tuna schools, which can be viewed aerially in some regions (see Horwood & Cushing 1977), and for pilchards whose bioluminescent intensity can be assessed from aerial photography and used to estimate fish density (Cram & Hampton 1976). The habit of flyingfish of taking to the air and gliding when vessels approach makes visual survey feasible.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Distribution and relative abundance of flyingfish (Exocoetidae) in the eastern Caribbean. I. Adults

Oxenford¹,

Mahon²,

Hunte³

1995

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT-We investigated the distribution and relative abundance of adult flyingfish by transect visual survey across a 67 500 square nautical mile (rum2) area of the eastern Caribbean from April 10 to May 6, 1988, using a 26 m research vessel and a rotating team of 23 observers. Flymgfish abundance (no. of fish per 0.5 nmi) was significantly correlated between data sets from port and starboard viewing stations, and we detected no evidence of observer bias. Flyingfish abundance varied significantly across the survey area, but was not correlated with any of the surface water characteristics measured (temperature, salinity, NOz-NO3-N, PO4-P, silicate). For the commercially harvested species Hirundichthys affinis, as well as for the smaller Parexocoetus brachypterus, abundance was high west (leeward) of the Lesser Antilles island chain and in an area between and to the east of Barbados and Tobago, and it was low between the Lesser Antilles chain and Barbados and Tobago. Cypselurus cyanopterus was less common than H affinis and P. brachypterus, and was largely restricted to the northeast of the survey area. Flyingfish distribution was patchy in all geographical zones of the survey area, mean patch width being 3.9 n m and mean inter-patch distance 2.0 nmi. Patch width and patch density (fish density m patch) were positively correlated with each other and with flyingfish abundance on a transect, and inter-patch distance was negatively correlated with fish abundance. Both within and outside of patches, flyingfish occurred in schools Flyingfish fleets from eastern Caribbean islands presently fish across areas of both high and low H. affinis abundance. Moreover, H. affinis abundance did not appear to decrease towards the east or west boundaries of the survey area, suggesting that catch rates may be similar to current rates if fishing fleets expanded their present geographical range. The high abundance indices obtained for P brachypterus indicate that the feasibility of developing a small-scale fishery for this species in the eastern Caribbean should be further explored

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distribution and relative abundance of flyingfish (Exocoetidae) in the eastern Caribbean. I. Adults

Oxenford¹,

Mahon²,

Hunte³

1995

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the face of high levels of predation, the importance of unsteady‐swimming activities is straightforward: increased acceleration and velocity during predator evasion should increase survival. In the absence of predators, steady‐swimming performance is predicted to be of critical ecological importance, as Gambusia populations are often found at high densities in these localities (suggesting higher levels of intraspecific competition), and make greater use of open‐water habitat (an area too dangerous to utilize in high frequency in high‐predation environments) where fish continuously swim in search of prey patches and mating opportunities (Horwood & Cushing, 1977; Winkelman & Aho, 1993; Langerhans, 2006; R.B. Langerhans, unpublished).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trade‐off between steady and unsteady swimming underlies predator‐driven divergence inGambusia affinis

Langerhans

2009

J of Evolutionary Biology

205

308

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Differences in predation intensity experienced by organisms can lead to divergent natural selection, driving evolutionary change. Western mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis) exhibit larger caudal regions and higher burst‐swimming capabilities when coexisting with higher densities of predatory fish. It is hypothesized that a trade‐off between steady (constant‐speed cruising; important for acquiring resources) and unsteady (rapid bursts and turns; important for escaping predators) locomotion, combined with divergent selection on locomotor performance (favouring steady swimming in high‐competition scenarios of low‐predation environments, but unsteady swimming in high‐predation localities) has caused such phenotypic divergence. Here, I found that morphological differences had a strong genetic basis, and low‐predation fish required less hydromechanical power during steady swimming, leading to increased endurance. I further found individual‐level support for cause‐and‐effect relationships between morphology, swimming kinematics and endurance. Results indicate that mosquitofish populations inhabiting low‐predation environments have evolved increased steady‐swimming abilities via stiffer bodies, larger anterior body/head regions, smaller caudal regions and greater three‐dimensional streamlining.

show abstract

“…On the other hand, in a school of fish, the random force is negligible and predominant nonrandom forces have a behavioral nature (Horwood and Cushing 1977). Neighbouring fish have a tendency to equalize their velocities and orientation (arrayal force), their distance (mutual interaction forces) and their forward thrust (Van Olst and Hunter 1970;Radakov 1973;Okubo et al 1977).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%