Ege Denizi ve Akdeniz (Türkiye)’den örneklenen Boops boops (Linnaeus, 1758)’da Otolit Kütle Asimetrisinin Belirlenmesi

Öz

Bu çalışmada Türkiye’nin Ege Denizi ve Akdeniz kıyılarından yakalanmış ekonomik değeri yüksek bir tür olan Boops boops’ta otolit kütle asimetrisi (X) ve mutlak otolit kütle asimetrilerinin (IXI) belirlenerek, lokasyonlar arasında karşılaştırma yapılması amaçlanmıştır. Her iki lokasyonda da sağ-sol otolit çiftleri arasında istatistiksel açıdan herhangi bir fark çıkmamıştır (P˃0.05). Ortalama otolit kütle asimetrisi ve mutlak kütle asimetrisi değerleri sırasıyla Ege Denizi ve Akdeniz'e göre -0,00078±0,00405 ve 0,0021±0.00258 ile -0,00606±0,0049 ve 0,0015±0,00401 olarak bulunmuştur. Ayrıca, otolit kütle asimetrisi lokaliteler arasında anlamlı farklılık göstermezken (P˃0,05), mutlak otolit kütle asimetrisi lokaliteler arasında farklılık göstermiştir. Ayrıca hem X hem de IXI- balık boyu ilişkileri linear regresyon denklemi kullanılarak belirlenmiştir. Gerçekleştirilen analizler, balık boyu ile X arasında her iki lokasyonda da bir ilişki olmadığını ortaya çıkarmıştır (P˃0.05). ancak balık boyu- mutlak otolit kütle asimetrisi ilişkileri incelendiğinde Akdeniz lokasyonu için önemli bir ilişki belirlenmezken (P˃0.05), Ege Denizi’nde balık boyu- mutlak otolit kütle asimetrisi ilişkisi önemli bulunmuştur (P<0.05). Bu çalışmanın sonuçları, Türkiye'de Ege Denizi ve Akdeniz'den örneklenen B. boops için balıkçılık yönetimi önlemlerinin ve koruma stratejilerinin geliştirilmesine yardımcı olabilecek önemli bilgiler sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Otolit
• Kütle Asimetrisi
• Boops boops
• Türkiye

Determination of Otolith Mass Asymmetry in Boops boops (Linnaeus, 1758) sampled from Aegean Sea and Mediterranean Sea (Türkiye)

Abstract

This study aimed to determine otolith mass asymmetry (X) and absolute otolith mass asymmetry (IXI) in Boops boops, a species of high economic value sampled from the Aegean Sea and Mediterranean Sea in Türkiye, and to make comparisons between locations. No statistically significant difference was found between right-left otolith pairs in both locations (P˃0.05). The mean otolith mass asymmetry and absolute mass asymmetry values were found to be -0.00078±0.00405 and 0.0021±0.00258, and -0.00606±0.0049 and 0.0015±0.00401 for the Aegean Sea and the Mediterranean Sea, respectively. In addition, otolith mass asymmetry did not show significant differences among localities (P˃0.05), while absolute otolith mass asymmetry differed between localities. Also, the relationships between X-IXI and fish length were determined using a linear regression equation. The analyses revealed no relationship between fish length and X in either location (P˃0.05). However, when examining the relationships between fish length and absolute otolith mass asymmetry, no significant relationship was found for the Mediterranean location (P˃0.05), while the relationship between fish length and absolute otolith mass asymmetry was found to be significant in the Aegean Sea (P<0.05). The results of this study provide important information that can aid in the development of fisheries management measures and conservation strategies for B. boops sampled from the Aegean Sea and the Mediterranean Sea in Türkiye.

Keywords

• Otolit
• Mass Aymmetry
• Boops boops
• Türkiye

Kaynakça

1. Adjibayo Houeto MF, Mejri M, Bakkari W, Bouriga N, Chalh A, Shahin AAB, Quiganrd J-P, Trabelsi M, Ben Faleh A (2024). Discriminant inter and intrapopulation variation in sagittal otolith shape and morphometry in Chelon ramada (Actinopterygii, Mugilidae) from the Boughrara and El Bibane lagoons in Tunisian waters. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 104: 1–11.
2. Aksiray F (1987). Marine fishes of Turkey and a key to species (in Turkish), Istanbul University Publications. Begg GA, Campana SE, Fowler AJ, Suthers IM (2005). Otolith research and application: current directions in innovation and implementation. Marine and Freshwater Research, 56(5): 477-483.
3. Ben Labidi M, Mejri M, Shahin AAAB, Quignard J-P, Trabelsi M, Ben Faleh A (2020). Otolith fluctuating asymmetry in Boops boops (Actinopterygii, Sparidae) from two marine stations (Bizerte and Kelibia) in Tunisian waters. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 100, 1135–1146.
4. Bose APH, Zimmermann H, Winkler G, Kaufmann A, Strohmeier T, Koblmüller S, Sefc KM (2020). Congruent geographic variation in saccular otolith shape across multiple species of African cichlids. Scientific Reports, 10: 12820.
5. Bostancı D, Türker D, Yedier S, Kontaş S, Kurucu G (2018). Investigating the fluctuating asymmetry in the otolith characters of mediterranean horse mackerel, Trachurus mediterraneus (Steindachner 1868) Inhabiting Edremit Bay, North Aegean Sea. Ordu University Journal of Science and Tecnology, 8(1): 69-78
6. Bouriga N, Bahri WR, Bejaoui S, Adjibayo Houeto MF, Shahin AAB, Quignard J-P, Trabelsi M, Ben Faleh A (2023). Discrimination between six commercially relevant and ecologically diverse fish species across the Gulf of Tunis using fatty acid composition and otolith shape analyses. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 47: 231–252.
7. Campana SE (1999). Chemistry and composition of fish otoliths: pathways, mechanisms and applications, Marine Ecology Progress Series, 188.
8. Campana SE, Thorrold SR (2001). Otoliths, increments, and elements: keys to a comprehensive understanding of fish populations?, Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 58:1.

9. Charmpila EA, Teimori A, Reichenbacher B (2025). Otolith‐based species identification in the killifish Aphaniops (Teleostei; Cyprinodontiformes; Aphaniidae) using both morphometry and wavelet analysis. Acta Zoologica, 106(3): 291-308.
10. Chesalin MV (2021). Otolith shape analysis of the Mediterranean horse mackerel, Trachurus mediterraneus (Steindachner, 1868)(Perciformes: Carangidae) from the coastal waters of Sevastopol and Balaklava (the Black Sea). Russian Journal of Marine Biology, 47(3): 176-184.
11. Deida T, Gammoudi M, El Ayari T, Ben Faleh A, Djimera L, Shahin AAB, Bouriga N (2024). Do eco-geospatial differences induce otolith morphological variations? Assessment in Chelon auratus (Mugiliformes, Mugilidae)populations collected from Tunisian and Mauritanian waters. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1041–15.
12. Dkhili M, Bouriga N, Fatnassi M, Ben Mohamed S, Quignard JP and Trabelsi M (2018). Significant difference in otolith mass asymmetry between pelagic and benthic teleost species in the Tunis bay. Journal of New Sciences. Sustainable Livestock Management, 9: 178–183.
13. Echreshavi S, Esmaeili HR, Teimori A, Safaie M (2021). Otolith morphology: A hidden tool in the taxonomic study of goatfishes (Teleostei: Perciformes: Mullidae). Zoological Studies, 60: 36.
14. Gauldie RW, Nelson DGA (1990). Otolith growth in fishes. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Physiology, 97(2): 119-135.
15. Grønkjær P (2016). Otoliths as individual indicators: a reappraisal of the link between fish physiology and otolith characteristics. Marine and Freshwater Research, 67(7): 881-888.
16. İmamoğlu C, Polat N, Saygın S, Özpiçak M, Yılmaz S (2024). Investigation of otolith mass asymmetry of Squalius sp. populations sampled from different freshwater sources in Samsun Province (Türkiye). Balıkesir Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 26(2): 479-494.
17. Jawad L, Qasim A (2020). Otolith mass asymmetry in Otolithes ruber (Bloch & Schneider, 1801) (Actinopterygii: Perciformes) collected from the Iraq marine waters. Thalassia Salentina, 42: 117-124
18. Jawad LA (2013). Otolith mass asymmetry in Carangoides caerulepinnatus (Rüppell, 1830) (family: Carangidae) collected from the sea of Oman. Ribarstvo, 71(1): 37–41.
19. Jawad LA, Abdulsamad SM, Al-Nusear AN, Waryani B, Rutkayová J (2021). Otolith mass asymmetry in three sparid fish species collected from the Iraqi waters. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 173: 112968.
20. Jawad LA, Adams, NJ (2022). Otolith mass asymmetry in the Australian anchovy Engraulis australis (White, 1790) predated by Australasian gannets Morus serrator (Gray, 1843), Hauraki Gulf, New Zealand. Cahiers de Biologie Marine, 63(4): 371-376.
21. Jawad LA, Al-Mamry JM, Al-Mamari D, Al-Hasani L (2012). Study on the otolith mass asymmetry in Lutjanus bengalensis (Family: Lutjanidae) collected from Muscat City on the Sea of Oman. Journal of Fisheries Sciences, 6(1): 74-79
22. Jawad LA, Al-Mamry JM, Hager M, Al-Mamari M, Al-Yarubi M, Al-Busaidi HK and Al-Mamary DS (2011). Otolith mass asymmetry in Rhynchorhamphus georgi (Valenciennes, 1846) (Family: Hemiramphidae) collected from the Sea of Oman. Journal of Black Sea/Mediterranean Environment, 17: 47–55.
23. Jawad LA, Sadighzadeh Z (2013). Otolith mass asymmetry in the mugilid fish, Liza klunzingeri (Day, 1888) collected from Persian Gulf near Bandar Abbas. Anales de Biologia, 35: 105–107.
24. Jawad LA, Shamsan EF, Aguilar G, Hoedemakers K (2023). Scanning electron microscopy and morphological analysis reveal differences in the otolith morphology of three species of the family Lethrinidae (Teleostei: Perciformes) from Yemen. The Anatomical Record, 306(3): 651-664.
25. Koca HU, Koca SB, Cilbiz M, Jawad LA (2025). Investigating otolith mass asymmetry in four fish species from Antalya Bay, Mediterranean coast of Türkiye. Oceanological and Hydrobiological Studies, 54(1): 79-87.
26. Kontas S, Bostancı D, Polat N (2019). Aşağı Melet Irmağı (Ordu, Türkiye)’nda yaşayan Barbus tauricus Kessler, 1877 otolit kütle asimetrisinin belirlenmesi. Journal of Limnology and Freshwater Fisheries Research, 5(3): 197-203.
27. Ladich F, Schulz-Mirbach T (2016). Diversity in fish auditory systems: one of the riddles of sensory biology. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 4: 28.
28. Lychakov DV, Rebane YT (2005). Fish otolith mass asymmetry: morphometry and influence on acoustic functionality. Hearing Research, 201: 55-69
29. Lychakov DV, Rebane YT, Lombarte A, Demestre M, Fuiman LA (2008). Saccular otolith mass asymmetry in adult flatfishes, Journal of Fish Biology, 72: 10.
30. Lychakov DV, Rebane YT, Lombarte A, Fuiman LA, Takabayashi A (2006). Fish Otolith asymmetry: morphometry and modelling. Hearing Research, 219: 1-11.
31. Morales‐Nin B, Tores GJ, Lombarte A, Recasens L (1998). Otolith growth and age estimation in the European hake. Journal of Fish Biology, 53(6): 1155-1168.
32. Moussavou Mbadinga KC, Mejri M, Adjibayo Houeto MF, Bakkari W, Ben Faleh A, Quignard J-P, Trabelsi M, Shahin AAAB, Bouriga N (2025). Intra- and interspecific variation of otolith morphometric asymmetry in Ethmalosa fimbriata, Galeoides decadactylus, and Cynoglossus monodi living at different depth levels in the Komo Estuary, Gabon. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 105(e70): 1–12.
33. Neves JM, da Silva VE, Assis IO, Fabré NN (2025). Interspecific otolith shape and genetic variability as tools for identifying tropical sympatric and congeneric mullet species. Regional Studies in Marine Science, 81: 103969.
34. Nolf D (1985). Otolith piscium. Handbook of Paleoichthyology, Sttutgart: Gustav Fisher Verlag. Ozpicak M, Akkaya S (2025). Evaluating the Use of Otolith Shape Analysis to Identify the Spatial Stock Structure of Seabream, Diplodus annularis (Sparidae). Thalassas: An International Journal of Marine Sciences, 41(2): 103.
35. Ozpicak M, Saygin S (2023). Investigation of otolith mass asymmetry in three stocks of European sardine, Sardina pilchardus (Walbaum, 1792) from Turkiye. Ege Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 40(3): 195-200.
36. Ozpicak M, Saygin S, Yilmaz S, Polat N (2021). Otolith phenotypic analysis for the endemic Anatolian fish species, Caucasian bleak Alburnus escherichii Steindachner, 1897 (Teleostei, Leuciscidae), from Selevir Reservoir, Akarçay Basin, Turkey. Oceanological and Hydrobiological Studies, 50(4): 430-440.
37. Pavlov DA (2021). Otolith morphology and relationships of several fish species of the suborder Scorpaenoidei. Journal of Ichthyology, 61(1): 33-47.
38. Pavlov DA (2022). Otolith morphology in gibel carp Carassius gibelio and crucian carp C. carassius (Cyprinidae). Journal of Ichthyology, 62(6): 1067-1080.
39. Popper AN, Lu Z (2000). Structure-function relationships in fish otolith organs. Fisheries Research, 46(1-3): 15-25.
40. Quindazzi MJ, Gaffney LP, Polard E, Bohlender N, Duguid W, Juanes F (2023). Otolith mineralogy affects otolith shape asymmetry: a comparison of hatchery and natural origin Coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Journal of Fish Biology, 102(4): 870-882.
41. Saygin S (2024). Otolith shape analysis of Red Mullet, Mullus barbatus (Mullidae) in Turkish waters of the Aegean, Black, and Mediterranean seas. Journal of Ichthyology 64(2): 246–256.
42. Saygin S (2025). Differentiation of Mullus barbatus and Mullus surmuletus (Perciformes, Mullidae) from Turkish waters of the Mediterranean Sea using otolith shape analyses. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 49(1): 25-35.
43. Simsek E, Ciloglu A, Yildirim A, Pekmezci ZG (2018). Identification and molecular characterization of Hysterothylacium (Nematoda: Raphidascarididae) larvae in bogue (Boops boops L.) from the Aegean Sea, Turkey. Kafkas Universitesi Veteriner Fakultesi Dergisi, 24(4): 525–530.
44. TenBrink TT, Sullivan JY, Gburski CM (2025). Exploring the use of otolith shape analysis to identify the stock spatial structure of dusky rockfish (Sebastes variabilis). Fisheries Research, 281:107189.
45. Thomas OR, Swearer SE (2019). Otolith biochemistry—a review. Reviews in Fisheries Science and Aquaculture, 27(4): 458-489.
46. Tuset VM, Otero-Ferrer JL, Siliprandi C, Manjabacas A, Marti-Puig P, Lombarte A (2021). Paradox of otolith shape indices: routine but overestimated use. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science, 78(6): 681–692.
47. Vignon M (2012). Ontogenetic trajectories of otolith shape during shift in habitat use: Interaction between otolith growth and environment. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 420: 26-32.
48. Whitehead PJP, Bauchot ML, Hureau JC, Nielsen J, Tortonese E (1984). Fishes of the North-eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean. UNESCO.
49. Yedier S, Bostanci D, Türker D, Çayir, Z (2025). Otolith-based stock identification for garfish Belone belone from Turkish Seas using morphometry and wavelet analysis. Regional Studies in Marine Science, 104470.
50. Yedier S, Kontaş S, Bostancı D (2022). Assessing of fluctuating asymmetry in otolith of the Alburnus spp. from Anatolian lotic and lentic systems. Ege Journal of Fisheries and Aqutic Science, 39(1): 32-38.