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

Year 2019, Volume: 14 Issue: 1, 33 - 36, 15.03.2019

Metin Çalta , Can Teksar

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. Lagler, K.F. (1956). Freshwater Fishery Biology, WM.C. Brown Co., Publ., Dubuque, Iowa, 421pp.
• 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. 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. Summerfelt, R.C. and Hall, G.E. (1987). Age and Growth of Fish, Iowa State University Press, Ames, 544pp.
• 5. Çelikkale, M.S. (1991). Balık Biyolojisi, Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Sürmene Deniz Bilimleri ve Teknolojisi Yüksekokulu Yayınları, No:101, Trabzon, 387s.
• 6. Erkoyuncu, İ. (1995). Balıkçılık Biyolojisi ve Populasyon Dinamiği, Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi. Yayınları, No:95, Sinop, 265s.
• 7. Geldiay, R. ve Balık, S. (2009). Türkiye Tatlısu Balıkları, Ege Üniversitesi Fen Fakültesi Kitaplar Serisi, No: 46, Bornova– İzmir, 644s.
• 8. Avşar, D. (2005). Balıkçılık Biyolojisi ve Populasyon Dinamiği. Nobel Kitapevi, Adana, 332s.
• 9. Francis, R.I.C.C. (1990). Back-calculation of fish length: a critical review. Journal of Fish Biology, 36, 883-902.
• 10. Zivkov, M. (1996). Critique of proportional hypotheses and methods for back-calculation of fish growth, Environmental Biology of Fishes, 46, 309-320.
• 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. Fraser, C.M. (1916). Growth of spring salmon. Transactions of the Pacific Fisheries Society, 29-39.
• 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. 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. 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.