Feeding and trophic ecomorphology of Satanoperca pappaterra (Pisces, Cichlidae) in the Manso Reservoir, Mato Grosso State, Brazil

Abstract

The aim of this work was to evaluate the relationship between diet and features of the trophic ecomorphology of Satanoperca pappaterra (Heckel, 1840)

Allometric and ontogenetic patterns related to feeding of a neotropical fish, Satanoperca pappaterra (Perciformes, Cichlidae)

“…This finding is supported by the studies of Casatti et al (2003), who reported a predominance of benthic algae in the stomach of this species at the Rosana reservoir, upper Paraná river basin and Hahn & Cunha (2005), who found a mixture of plant detritus, benthic organisms and sand in individuals sampled at the Manso reservoir, Cuiaba river basin. This finding is supported by the studies of Casatti et al (2003), who reported a predominance of benthic algae in the stomach of this species at the Rosana reservoir, upper Paraná river basin and Hahn & Cunha (2005), who found a mixture of plant detritus, benthic organisms and sand in individuals sampled at the Manso reservoir, Cuiaba river basin.…”

“…The species is Satanoperca pappaterra (Heckel 1840), which grows up to 17.4 cm of standard length (Kullander 2003), belongs to the Cichlidae family, and is widely distributed in continental waters of Brazil, Bolivia and Paraguay (Kullander 2003). Hahn & Cunha (2005) studied its feeding aspects and described a detritivorous-invertivorous habit, highlighting that because the mouth has a narrow opening, arranged at a subinferior position with well-developed lips, fish ingest food mainly at the bottom. Hahn & Cunha (2005) studied its feeding aspects and described a detritivorous-invertivorous habit, highlighting that because the mouth has a narrow opening, arranged at a subinferior position with well-developed lips, fish ingest food mainly at the bottom.…”

Diet and ecomorphological relationships of four cichlid species from the Cuiabá River basin

“…Cichlasoma dimerus consumed mainly plants and aquatic and terrestrial insects whereas S. pappaterra consumed a combination of aquatic insects, plants and detritus. The high consumption of detritus by S. pappaterra indicates that this species is a bottom dwelling feeder, as reported by some authors (Hahn & Cunha, 2005;Pelicice & Agostinho, 2006), while C. dimerus appears to feed mainly in the pelagic zone. In addition, Chaetobranchopsis australis and Crenichla vittata showed more-divergent diets, consuming zooplankton and fish, respectively.…”

“…The position of the mouth can be associated with the location of preferred prey in the water column (i.e., Balassa et al, 2004;Hahn & Cunha, 2005;López-Fernández et al, 2014), being that fish with a terminal mouth are apparently not restricted in acquiring food, as in the case of C. dimerus and C. vittata. On the other hand, C. australis, with a superior mouth, consumed food from the planktonic regions, and S. pappaterra, with an inferior mouth, exploited the benthic region.…”

Gill rakers in six teleost species: influence of feeding habit and body size

“…The rakers of these species are short, fi liform, closely spaced and located opposite the gill fi laments (HAHN & CUNHA, 2005;LIMA et al, 2009). The species of Parapimelodus analyzed in the present study have long, fi liform and closely spaced gill rakers.…”