“…In the last 20 years, there has been a valuable contribution regarding otolith shape analysis and some types of morphometric descriptors have been reported with various purposes, such as studying morphometric relationships between right versus left otoliths Freire et al, 2017;Mille et al, 2015;Yedier & Bostanci, 2019); morphological identification and discrimination between close fish species or different fish populations (de Carvalho, Spach, et al, 2019;El habouz et al, 2016aEl habouz et al, , 2016bLadroit et al, 2017;Reig-Bolano et al, 2010;Skeljo & Ferri, 2012;Zorica et al, 2010); estimation of fish age based on morphometric analysis (See et al, 2016) or microstructures such as rings growth (Begg et al, 2001;Edwards et al, 2014;Nava et al, 2017;Yedier & Bostanci, 2020); an automatic taxonomic identification to identify biological species or structures (Parisi-Baradad et al, 2010;Salimi et al, 2016); studying how differences related to environmental and genetic aspects affect otoliths shape and growth (Jaramillo et al, 2014;Tuset et al, 2003;Vignon, 2012;Vignon & Morat, 2010); analyzing morphological features associated with the fish ecomorphologic type (Volpedo & Echeverrıá, 2003); as well as other events related to the life cycle of fish such as historical and biological characteristics, behaviour and activity (Montanini et al, 2017); further providing important information in decision-making about the exploitation vulnerability of species related to longevity and natural mortality ratio (Begg et al, 2005;Williams et al, 2015), and sustainable fishing activities (Iestyn-Map p, 2015). Some studies have been reported about left and right otoliths asymmetry, for example Lychakov et al (2006) show an asymmetry mesure obtained in rapport of otolith mass by mathematical models with asymmetry values among individual fish, and they reported that these asymmetry values are stable during a fish's lifetime.…”