Size-selective predation by three estuarine zooplanktivorous fish species
Hayden T. Schilling
A B * , James A. Smith A B , Jason D. Everett A B C , Daniel P. Harrison B D E and Iain M. Suthers A B
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Centre for Marine Science and Innovation, UNSW Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia.
B Sydney Institute of Marine Science, Mosman, NSW 2088, Australia.
C School of Mathematics and Physics, The University of Queensland, Saint Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia.
D Marine Studies Institute, School of Geosciences, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
E National Marine Science Centre, Southern Cross University, Coffs Harbour, NSW 2450, Australia.
Marine and Freshwater Research 73(6) 823-832 https://doi.org/10.1071/MF21344
Submitted: 3 December 2021 Accepted: 12 March 2022 Published: 4 May 2022
© 2022 The Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Published by CSIRO Publishing. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC)
Abstract
Context: Zooplanktivorous fish are a key link between abundant zooplankton and higher trophic levels but the foraging behaviour of zooplanktivorous fish is not fully understood. Selective feeding behaviours have been observed, with many species of planktivorous fish targeting certain species and sizes of zooplankton for prey. However, why certain size classes of zooplankton are preferred remains unclear.
Aim: This study investigated prey selection by three zooplanktivorous fish species through the lens of optimal foraging theory.
Methods: We assessed the size structure of zooplankton in the environment and compared this with the size distribution of zooplankton in gut contents from three zooplanktivorous fish.
Key results: The targeted prey size of Atypichthys strigatus and Scorpis lineolata aligns with the prey size classes in the environment that contain the highest overall biomass. Trachurus novaezelandiae showed little evidence of targeting these size classes.
Conclusions: These prey sizes therefore represent the most efficient prey to target because the return on foraging effort is greatest. By contrast, T. novaezelandiae showed only an underselection of large and small prey.
Implications: By incorporating this information on this key trophic link between zooplankton and fish, ecosystem models could better resolve the size dependant predation, particularly in size-based models.
Keywords: Atypichthys strigatus, diet, estuarine ecosystem, gut contents, laser optical plankton counter, optimal foraging theory, planktivory, prey choice, Scorpis lineolata, Trachurus novaezelandiae.
References
Andersen, KH, Berge, T, Gonçalves, RJ, Hartvig, M, Heuschele, J, Hylander, S, Jacobsen, NS, Lindemann, C, Martens, EA, Neuheimer, AB, Olsson, K, Palacz, A, Prowe, AEF, Sainmont, J, Traving, SJ, Visser, AW, Wadhwa, N, and Kiørboe, T (2016). Characteristic sizes of life in the oceans, from bacteria to whales. Annual Review of Marine Science 8, 217–241.| Characteristic sizes of life in the oceans, from bacteria to whales.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26163011PubMed |
Araoz, N (1991). Individual biomass, based on body measures, of copepod species considered as main forage items for fishes of the Argentine shelf. Oceanologica Acta 14, 575–580.
Avila, TR, Machado, AA S, and Bianchini, A (2012). Estimation of zooplankton secondary production in estuarine waters: comparison between the enzymatic (chitobiase) method and mathematical models using crustaceans. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 416–417, 144–152.
| Estimation of zooplankton secondary production in estuarine waters: comparison between the enzymatic (chitobiase) method and mathematical models using crustaceans.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Balogh, C, Serfőző, Z, and Kobak, J (2022). Factors determining selective predation of the common carp on quagga versus zebra mussels. Freshwater Biology 67, 619–629.
| Factors determining selective predation of the common carp on quagga versus zebra mussels.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Barnardo, T, Tambling, CJ, Davies, AB, Klein-Snakenborg, S, Asner, GP, le Roux, E, Cromsigt, JPGM, Druce, DJ, and Kerley, GIH (2020). Opportunistic feeding by lions: non-preferred prey comprise an important part of lion diets in a habitat where preferred prey are abundant. Mammal Research 65, 235–243.
| Opportunistic feeding by lions: non-preferred prey comprise an important part of lion diets in a habitat where preferred prey are abundant.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Blanchard, JL, Heneghan, RF, Everett, JD, Trebilco, R, and Richardson, AJ (2017). From bacteria to whales: using functional size spectra to model marine ecosystems. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 32, 174–186.
| From bacteria to whales: using functional size spectra to model marine ecosystems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Budy, P, Haddix, T, and Schneidervin, R (2005). Zooplankton size selection relative to gill raker spacing in rainbow trout. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 134, 1228–1235.
| Zooplankton size selection relative to gill raker spacing in rainbow trout.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bulman, C, Althaus, F, He, X, Bax, NJ, and Williams, A (2001). Diets and trophic guilds of demersal fishes of the south-eastern Australian shelf. Marine and Freshwater Research 52, 537–548.
| Diets and trophic guilds of demersal fishes of the south-eastern Australian shelf.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Champion, C, Suthers, IM, and Smith, JA (2015). Zooplanktivory is a key process for fish production on a coastal artificial reef. Marine Ecology Progress Series 541, 1–14.
| Zooplanktivory is a key process for fish production on a coastal artificial reef.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Chappell, BF, and Smith, KG (2016). Patterns of predation of native reef fish by invasive Indo-Pacific lionfish in the western Atlantic: evidence of selectivity by a generalist predator. Global Ecology and Conservation 8, 18–23.
| Patterns of predation of native reef fish by invasive Indo-Pacific lionfish in the western Atlantic: evidence of selectivity by a generalist predator.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Chesson, J (1978). Measuring preference in selective predation. Ecology 59, 211–215.
| Measuring preference in selective predation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Chisholm, LA, and Roff, JC (1990). Size–weight relationships and biomass of tropical neritic copepods off Kingston, Jamaica. Marine Biology 106, 71–77.
| Size–weight relationships and biomass of tropical neritic copepods off Kingston, Jamaica.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cumminns, KW, and Wuycheck, JC (1971). Caloric equivalents for investigations in ecological energetics. SIL Communications, 1953-1996 18, 1–158.
| Caloric equivalents for investigations in ecological energetics.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Das, P, Marchesiello, P, and Middleton, JH (2000). Numerical modelling of tide-induced residual circulation in Sydney Harbour. Marine and Freshwater Research 51, 97–112.
| Numerical modelling of tide-induced residual circulation in Sydney Harbour.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dawson, G, Suthers, IM, Brodie, S, and Smith, JA (2020). The bioenergetics of a coastal forage fish: importance of empirical values for ecosystem models. Deep-sea Research – II. Topical Studies in Oceanography 175, 104700.
| The bioenergetics of a coastal forage fish: importance of empirical values for ecosystem models.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Edgar, GJ, and Stuart-Smith, RD (2014). Systematic global assessment of reef fish communities by the Reef Life Survey program. Scientific Data 1, 140007.
| Systematic global assessment of reef fish communities by the Reef Life Survey program.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25977765PubMed |
Foo, D, Semmens, JM, Arnould, JPY, Dorville, N, Hoskins, AJ, Abernathy, K, Marshall, GJ, and Hindell, MA (2016). Testing optimal foraging theory models on benthic divers. Animal Behaviour 112, 127–138.
| Testing optimal foraging theory models on benthic divers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Garcia, V, Schilling, HT, Cruz, D, Hawes, SM, Everett, JD, Roughan, M, Miskiewicz, AG, Pakhomov, EA, Jeffs, A, and Suthers, IM (2022). Entrainment and development of larval fish assemblages in two contrasting cold core eddies of the East Australian Current system. Marine Ecology Progress Series 685, 1–18.
| Entrainment and development of larval fish assemblages in two contrasting cold core eddies of the East Australian Current system.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gardner, MB (1981). Mechanisms of size selectivity by planktivorous fish: a test of hypotheses. Ecology 62, 571–578.
| Mechanisms of size selectivity by planktivorous fish: a test of hypotheses.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gaston, TF, and Suthers, IM (2004). Spatial variation in δ13C and δ15N of liver, muscle and bone in a rocky reef planktivorous fish: the relative contribution of sewage. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 304, 17–33.
| Spatial variation in δ13C and δ15N of liver, muscle and bone in a rocky reef planktivorous fish: the relative contribution of sewage.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Glasby, TM, and Kingsford, MJ (1994). Atypichthys strigatus (Pisces: Scorpididae): an opportunistic planktivore that responds to benthic disturbances and cleans other fishes. Australian Journal of Ecology 19, 385–394.
| Atypichthys strigatus (Pisces: Scorpididae): an opportunistic planktivore that responds to benthic disturbances and cleans other fishes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Goddard, BK, Becker, A, Harasti, D, Smith, JA, Subramaniam, RC, and Suthers, IM (2022). The trophic basis of fish assemblages in temperate estuarine and coastal ecosystems. Marine Biology 169, 19.
| The trophic basis of fish assemblages in temperate estuarine and coastal ecosystems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Graeb, BDS, Dettmers, JM, Wahl, DH, and Cáceres, CE (2004). Fish size and prey availability affect growth, survival, prey selection, and foraging behavior of larval yellow perch. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 133, 504–514.
| Fish size and prey availability affect growth, survival, prey selection, and foraging behavior of larval yellow perch.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hansen, AG, Beauchamp, DA, and Schoen, ER (2013). Visual prey detection responses of piscivorous trout and salmon: effects of light, turbidity, and prey size. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 142, 854–867.
| Visual prey detection responses of piscivorous trout and salmon: effects of light, turbidity, and prey size.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hatton, IA, Heneghan, RF, Bar-On, YM, and Galbraith, ED (2021). The global ocean size spectrum from bacteria to whales. Science Advances 7, eabh3732.
| The global ocean size spectrum from bacteria to whales.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 34757796PubMed |
Heneghan, RF, Everett, JD, Blanchard, JL, and Richardson, AJ (2016). Zooplankton are not fish: improving zooplankton realism in size-spectrum models mediates energy transfer in food webs. Frontiers in Marine Science 3, 201.
| Zooplankton are not fish: improving zooplankton realism in size-spectrum models mediates energy transfer in food webs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Herman, AW, and Harvey, M (2006). Application of normalized biomass size spectra to laser optical plankton counter net intercomparisons of zooplankton distributions. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 111, C05S05.
| Application of normalized biomass size spectra to laser optical plankton counter net intercomparisons of zooplankton distributions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Herman, AW, Beanlands, B, and Phillips, EF (2004). The next generation of optical plankton counter: the laser-OPC. Journal of Plankton Research 26, 1135–1145.
| The next generation of optical plankton counter: the laser-OPC.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hernández-Pliego, J, Rodríguez, C, Dell’Omo, G, and Bustamante, J (2017). Combined use of tri-axial accelerometers and GPS reveals the flexible foraging strategy of a bird in relation to weather conditions. PLoS One 12, e0177892.
| Combined use of tri-axial accelerometers and GPS reveals the flexible foraging strategy of a bird in relation to weather conditions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28591181PubMed |
Jansen, T, Post, S, Olafsdottir, AH, Reynisson, P, Óskarsson, GJ, and Arendt, KE (2019). Diel vertical feeding behaviour of Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus) in the Irminger current. Fisheries Research 214, 25–34.
| Diel vertical feeding behaviour of Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus) in the Irminger current.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Johnston, EL, Mayer-Pinto, M, Hutchings, PA, Marzinelli, EM, Ahyong, ST, Birch, G, Booth, DJ, Creese, RG, Doblin, MA, Figueira, W, Gribben, PE, Pritchard, T, Roughan, M, Steinberg, PD, and Hedge, LH (2015). Sydney Harbour: what we do and do not know about a highly diverse estuary. Marine and Freshwater Research 66, 1073–1087.
| Sydney Harbour: what we do and do not know about a highly diverse estuary.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kingsford, MJ (1989). Distribution patters of planktivorous reef fish along the coast of northeastern New Zealand. Marine Ecology Progress Series 54, 13–24.
| Distribution patters of planktivorous reef fish along the coast of northeastern New Zealand.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Langeland, A, and Nøst, T (1995). Gill raker structure and selective predation on zooplankton by particulate feeding fish. Journal of Fish Biology 47, 719–732.
| Gill raker structure and selective predation on zooplankton by particulate feeding fish.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Moore, SK, and Suthers, IM (2006). Evaluation and correction of subresolved particles by the optical plankton counter in three Australian estuaries with pristine to highly modified catchments. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 111, 1–14.
| Evaluation and correction of subresolved particles by the optical plankton counter in three Australian estuaries with pristine to highly modified catchments.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pierce, GJ, and Ollason, JG (1987). Eight reasons why optimal foraging theory is a complete waste of time. Oikos 49, 111–118.
| Eight reasons why optimal foraging theory is a complete waste of time.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pikitch, EK, Rountos, KJ, Essington, TE, Santora, C, Pauly, D, Watson, R, Sumaila, UR, Boersma, PD, Boyd, IL, Conover, DO, Cury, P, Heppell, SS, Houde, ED, Mangel, M, Plagányi, É, Sainsbury, K, Steneck, RS, Geers, TM, Gownaris, N, and Munch, SB (2014). The global contribution of forage fish to marine fisheries and ecosystems. Fish and Fisheries 15, 43–64.
| The global contribution of forage fish to marine fisheries and ecosystems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pyke, GH, Pulliam, HR, and Charnov, EL (1977). Optimal foraging: a selective review of theory and tests. The Quarterly Review of Biology 52, 137–154.
| Optimal foraging: a selective review of theory and tests.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Schneider, CA, Rasband, WS, and Eliceiri, KW (2012). NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nature Methods 9, 671–675.
| NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22930834PubMed |
Sheldon, RW, Prakash, A, and Sutcliffe, WH (1972). The size distribution of particles in the ocean. Limnology and Oceanography 17, 327–340.
| The size distribution of particles in the ocean.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Simons, RD, Monismith, SG, Johnson, LE, Winkler, G, and Saucier, FJ (2006). Zooplankton retention in the estuarine transition zone of the St Lawrence Estuary. Limnology and Oceanography 51, 2621–2631.
| Zooplankton retention in the estuarine transition zone of the St Lawrence Estuary.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Skjoldal, HR, Wiebe, PH, Postel, L, Knutsen, T, Kaartvedt, S, and Sameoto, DD (2013). Intercomparison of zooplankton (net) sampling systems: results from the ICES/GLOBEC sea-going workshop. Progress in Oceanography 108, 1–42.
| Intercomparison of zooplankton (net) sampling systems: results from the ICES/GLOBEC sea-going workshop.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Suthers, IM, Taggart, CT, Rissik, D, and Baird, ME (2006). Day and night ichthyoplankton assemblages and zooplankton biomass size spectrum in a deep ocean island wake. Marine Ecology Progress Series 322, 225–238.
| Day and night ichthyoplankton assemblages and zooplankton biomass size spectrum in a deep ocean island wake.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tanaka, H, Aoki, I, and Ohshimo, S (2006). Feeding habits and gill raker morphology of three planktivorous pelagic fish species off the coast of northern and western Kyushu in summer. Journal of Fish Biology 68, 1041–1061.
| Feeding habits and gill raker morphology of three planktivorous pelagic fish species off the coast of northern and western Kyushu in summer.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Thygesen, UH, Sommer, L, Evans, K, and Patterson, TA (2016). Dynamic optimal foraging theory explains vertical migrations of Bigeye tuna. Ecology 97, 1852–1861.
| Dynamic optimal foraging theory explains vertical migrations of Bigeye tuna.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 27859170PubMed |
Truong, L, Suthers, IM, Cruz, DO, and Smith, JA (2017). Plankton supports the majority of fish biomass on temperate rocky reefs. Marine Biology 164, 73.
| Plankton supports the majority of fish biomass on temperate rocky reefs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tyson, RB, Friedlaender, AS, and Nowacek, DP (2016). Does optimal foraging theory predict the foraging performance of a large air-breathing marine predator? Animal Behaviour 116, 223–235.
| Does optimal foraging theory predict the foraging performance of a large air-breathing marine predator?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wanzenbock, J (1995). Changing handling times during feeding and consequences for prey size selection of O+ zooplanktivorous fish. Oecologia 104, 372–378.
| Changing handling times during feeding and consequences for prey size selection of O+ zooplanktivorous fish.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28307594PubMed |
