Back-Calculation of Total Lengths of Luciobarbus mystaceus (Pallas, 1814) from Scale and Otolith Measurements

Abstract

In this study, the total lengths of Luciobarbus mystaceus species at previous ages were estimated from scale and otolith lengths by using back-calculation methods. For this purpose, 20 fish samples with 4-7 years in age, 37.1-47.4 cm in total length and 426.1-874.1 g in weight were obtained from a commercial fisherman in Keban Dam Lake. By using the back-calculation methods, the mean total length values for each ages calculated from scale lengths and otolith lengths were calculated as L1=7.7, L2=14.9, L3=21.4, L4=28.1, L5=30.3, L6=33.5, L7=35.7 cm and L1=7.5, L2=14.5, L3=19.2, L4=26.3, L5=29.6, L6=33.3, L7=33.9 cm respectively. The total lengths of fish calculated from scale and otolith measurements for all age groups were always determined smaller than observed total lengths of fish. There was a significant differences between calculated and observed lengths, but did not differ between total fish lengths calculated from scale and otolith measurements. 

Keywords

• Luciobarbus mystaceus,Back-Calculation,Fish length,Scale,Otolith

References

1. 1. Lagler, K.F. (1956). Freshwater Fishery Biology, WM.C. Brown Co., Publ., Dubuque, Iowa, 421pp.
2. 2. Chugunova, N.I. (1963). Age and Growth Studies in Fish, Israel Prog. Sci. Transl. No: 610, Natl. Sci. Found Washington, D.C. 132pp.
3. 3. Tesch, F.W. (1968). Age and Growth: In methods for assessment of fish production in freshwater (Ed. W.E. Ricker), IBP Handbook No: 3, Blackwell, Oxford: 93-123pp.
4. 4. Summerfelt, R.C. and Hall, G.E. (1987). Age and Growth of Fish, Iowa State University Press, Ames, 544pp.
5. 5. Çelikkale, M.S. (1991). Balık Biyolojisi, Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Sürmene Deniz Bilimleri ve Teknolojisi Yüksekokulu Yayınları, No:101, Trabzon, 387s.
6. 6. Erkoyuncu, İ. (1995). Balıkçılık Biyolojisi ve Populasyon Dinamiği, Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi. Yayınları, No:95, Sinop, 265s.
7. 7. Geldiay, R. ve Balık, S. (2009). Türkiye Tatlısu Balıkları, Ege Üniversitesi Fen Fakültesi Kitaplar Serisi, No: 46, Bornova– İzmir, 644s.
8. 8. Avşar, D. (2005). Balıkçılık Biyolojisi ve Populasyon Dinamiği. Nobel Kitapevi, Adana, 332s.

9. 9. Francis, R.I.C.C. (1990). Back-calculation of fish length: a critical review. Journal of Fish Biology, 36, 883-902.
10. 10. Zivkov, M. (1996). Critique of proportional hypotheses and methods for back-calculation of fish growth, Environmental Biology of Fishes, 46, 309-320.
11. 11. Vigliola, L. and Meekan, M.G. (2009). The back-calculation of fish growth from otoliths. In tropical fish otoliths: information for assessment, management and ecology. Edited by B.S. Green, B.D. Mapstone, G. Carlos, and G.A. Begg. Springer, Heidelberg, Germany. pp. 174–211.
12. 12. Vigliola, L., Harmelin-Vivien, M., and Meekan, M.G. 2000. Comparison of techniques of back-calculation of growth and settlement marks from the otoliths of three species of Diplodus from the Mediterranean Sea. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 57(6), 1291-1299.
13. 13. Wilson, J.A., Vigliola, L. and Meekan, M.G. (2009). The back-calculation of size from otoliths: validation and comparison of models at an individual level. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 368, 9-21.
14. 14. Aydın, R., Çalta, M. and Şen, D. (2003). Age and growth of Capoeta trutta (Pisces: Cyprinidae) from Keban Dam Lake, Turkey. Archives of Polish Fisheries, 11(2), 237-243.
15. 15. Şen, D. and Yılayaz, Ö. (2001). Keban Baraj Gölü’nde yaşayan Barbus rajanorum mystaceus (Heckel, 1843)’ ün geri hesaplama yöntemiyle uzunluklarının belirlenmesi, G.Ü. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(1), 53-57.
16. 16. Şen, D. and Aydın, R. (2001) Keban Baraj Gölü’nde yaşayan Acanthobrama marmid Heckel, 1843’ün geri hesaplama metodu ile uzunluklarının belirlenmesi, G.Ü. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(1), 47-51.
17. 17. Şen, D., Aydın, R. and Çalta, M. (2002) Back-calculation of fork lengths of Capoeta capoeta umbla (Pisces: Cyprinidae) from otolith lengths. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 5(4), 506-508.
18. 18. Fraser, C.M. (1916). Growth of spring salmon. Transactions of the Pacific Fisheries Society, 29-39.
19. 19. Lee, R.M. (1920). A review of the methods of age and growth determination in fishes by means of scales. Fisheries Investigations, Series II, Marine Fisheries, Great Britain Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, 4(2), 1-35.
20. 20. Dahl, K. (1907). The scales of the herring as a means of determining age, growth and migration. Reports on Norwegian Fishery and Marine Investigations, 2(6), 1-39.
21. 21. Lea, E. (1910). On the methods used in the herring investigations. Publications de Circonstance, Conseil Permanent International pour I’Exploration de la Mer, 53, 7-25.