Change in body size of juvenile marbled sole Pseudopleuronectes yokohamae after preservation in ethanol

Abstract

We evaluated the extent of shrinkage in body size of juvenile marbled sole Pseudopleuronectes yokohamae after preservation in 70% ethanol for 6, 12, 24, or 48 h, or 4 weeks. Standard length (SL, range of the analyzed specimens: 22.82-53.01 mm) decreased by 5.6% after 12 h and body weight (BW 0.174-2.964 g) decreased 27.8% after 24 h preservation in 70% ethanol. There was no further decrease in SL or BW after 12 or 24 h of preservation, respectively. The original body size could be estimated based on the size after preservation in 70% ethanol for 4 weeks using the following equations: SL original = 1.05 SL preserved ? 0.37 and BW original = 1.36 BW preserved ? 0.04. The condition factor calculated using the body size of preserved individuals was 16.0 and 15.8% lower than that calculated from the original body size and the body size back-calculated using the linear regression equations described above, respectively. Thus, our data suggest that the shrinkage of body size due to preservation in ethanol can cause errors in estimation of the condition factor. Our results can be used to improve the accuracy of estimating size-related biological parameters based on juvenile marbled sole that are preserved in ethanol.

The Influence of Preservation on Fish Morphology in Museum Collections Based on Two Species of the Genus <I>Lepomis</I> (Actinopterygii: Perciformes: Centrarchidae)

“…Historically, formalin was used as a fixative and preservative; however, more recently this method changed given the toxicity of formalin (Morgan 1997) to using formalin for fixation and ethyl alcohol for preservation (Kelsch andShields 1996, Al-Hassan et al 2000). Regardless of the technique, the effects of preservation can be species-and size specific (Ehrlich 1974, Hjörleifsson and Klein-MacPhee 1992, Al-Hassan et al 2000, Cunningham et al 2000, Jawad 2003, Santos et al 2009, Lee et al 2011 or vary with the type of preservation (Cunningham et al 2000, Jawad 2003, Santos et al 2009). …”

“…The most common effect of preservation is shrinkage, potentially altering morphometric configurations (Al-Hassan et al 2000, Cunningham et al 2000, Lee et al 2011. Shrinkage occurs when water is lost or replaced with preservative (Al-Hassan et al 2000), albeit not all preservatives alter size and shape similarly.…”

“…Regardless of the technique, the effects of preservation can be species-and size specific (Ehrlich 1974, Hjörleifsson and Klein-MacPhee 1992, Al-Hassan et al 2000, Cunningham et al 2000, Jawad 2003, Santos et al 2009, Lee et al 2011 or vary with the type of preservation (Cunningham et al 2000, Jawad 2003, Santos et al 2009). The most common effect of preservation is shrinkage, potentially altering morphometric configurations (Al-Hassan et al 2000, Cunningham et al 2000, Lee et al 2011. Shrinkage occurs when water is lost or replaced with preservative (Al-Hassan et al 2000), albeit not all preservatives alter size and shape similarly.…”

“…Regardless of the technique, the effects of preservation can be species-and size specific (Ehrlich 1974, Hjörleifsson and Klein-MacPhee 1992, Al-Hassan et al 2000, Cunningham et al 2000, Jawad 2003, Santos et al 2009, Lee et al 2011 or vary with the type of preservation (Cunningham et al 2000, Jawad 2003, Santos et al 2009). …”

Effect of preservation procedures on the body shape of the golden mojarra, Diapterus aureolus (Actinopterygii: Perciformes: Gerreidae), and its repercussions in a taxonomic study

“…Morphological variations associated with preservation of juvenile or adult fishes have rarely been reported. Changes have mainly been based on length or proportion measurements (Leslie and Moore 1986, Sagnes 1997, Smith and Walker 2003, Paradis et al 2007, Florin and Lingman 2008, Wessels et al 2010, Lee et al 2012, or length-weight relations (Al-Hassan et al 2000, Ogle 2009, Beamish et al 2011). To our knowledge, few studies explore the effect of preservation by taking advantage of the benefits of geometric morphometrics (BerbelFilho et al 2013, Gaston et al 2013.…”