Environmental drivers of the distribution of the order Pleuronectiformes in the Northern Spanish Shelf

Straying from the flatfish retinal plan: Cone photoreceptor patterning in the common sole (Solea solea) and the Senegalese sole (Solea senegalensis)

“…But even in rearing estuaries of less than 5 m in depth, there can be spatial segregation between younger and older juveniles (Gibson, Burrows, & Robb, ), as well as between species (Marchand, ; Vinagre et al, ; Vinagre, Maia, Reis‐Santos, Costa, & Cabral, ), depending on slight differences in ecotype and predation pressure (Gibson et al, ; Ryer et al, ; Vinagre et al, ). As flatfishes grow, they expand their ranges into deeper waters, with different species seemingly favoring different depths (Fernández‐Zapico et al, ; Rau, Lewin, Zettler, Gogina, & von Dorrien, ; Sobocinski, Ciannelli, Wakefield, Yergey, & Johnson‐Colegrove, ; Sohn, Ciannelli, & Duffy‐Anderson, ) likely as a result of multiple factors including substrate type (often correlated with prey type, Vinagre et al, ; Perry, Stocker, & Fargo, ; Fernández‐Zapico et al, ; Rau et al, ), complexity of habitat structure (e.g., presence of large rocks, sponges, bryozoan colonies; Ryer et al, ), oxygen availability (Sobocinski et al, ), temperature (Perry et al, ; Rau et al, ; van Hal, van Kooten, & Rijnsdorp, ; Vinagre et al, ), salinity (Rau et al, ; Vinagre et al, ), and risk of predation (Hurst, Ryer, Ramsey, & Haines, ; Reum & Essington, ; Yeung & Yang, ). Different flatfish species also vary in their displacement behavior (remaining primarily on the bottom or frequently swimming in the water column; Hurst et al, ; Vollen & Albert, ), camouflage capabilities (active mimicry by changing skin pattern or digging into the substrate; Ryer, Stoner, & Titgen, ; Ryer, Lemke, Boersma, & Levas, ), and prey spectrum (consuming more demersal species, like amphipods or polychaete worms, or pelagic species, such as mysids, euphausids and fish; Martell & McClelland, ).…”

“…But even in rearing estuaries of less than 5 m in depth, there can be spatial segregation F I G U R E 1 0 Spatial analysis of single cone distributions from the same mosaics shown in Figure 9. Presentation of data as in Figure 9 [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com] between younger and older juveniles (Gibson, Burrows, & Robb, 2011), as well as between species (Marchand, 1988;Vinagre et al, 2006; Vinagre, Maia, Reis-Santos, Costa, & Cabral, 2009), depending on slight differences in ecotype and predation pressure (Gibson et al, 2002;Ryer et al, 2012;Vinagre et al, 2009) Perry, Stocker, & Fargo, 1994;Fernández-Zapico et al, 2017;Rau et al, 2019), complexity of habitat structure (e.g., presence of large rocks, sponges, bryozoan colonies; Ryer et al, 2012), oxygen availability (Sobocinski et al, 2018), temperature (Perry et al, 1994;Rau et al, 2019; van Hal, van Kooten, & Rijnsdorp, 2016;Vinagre et al, 2009), salinity (Rau et al, 2019;Vinagre et al, 2009), and risk of predation (Hurst, Ryer, Ramsey, & Haines, 2007;Reum & Essington, 2011;Yeung & Yang, 2018). Different flatfish species also vary in their displacement behavior (remaining primarily on the bottom or frequently swimming in the water column; Hurst et al, 2007;Vollen & Albert, 2008), camouflage capabilities (active mimicry by changing skin pattern or digging into the substrate; Ryer, Stoner, & Titgen, 2004;Ryer, Lemke, Boersma, & Levas, 2008), and prey spectrum (consuming more demersal species, like amphipods or polychaete worms, or pelagic species, such as mysids, euphausids and fish; Martell & McClelland, 1994).…”

“…As evidence, the authors of this study provided a low magnification photograph of a section of unknown topographical origin and frequency plots of double cone orientations purportedly showing lack of a “common trend,” though no statistical analyses were provided (Engström & Ahlbert, ). Nonetheless, these early observations were intriguing as the common sole shares similar habitat with many other flatfish species (Fernández‐Zapico et al, ) and the ones that have been examined possess a square mosaic throughout the majority of the retina (Engström & Ahlbert, ). To assess whether the retinas of soles may indeed be exceptions to the general flatfish cone mosaic plan, we quantified the distribution of cone types and the patterning characteristics of the cone mosaic in the common sole and in a close relative, the Senegalese sole ( Solea senegalensis ).…”

Integrating spatial management measures into fisheries: The Lepidorhombus spp. case study

“…Previous studies show that the distribution of these species depends on environmental variables. L. boscii seem to be more abundant in deeper waters than L. whiffiagonis [13,14]. They seem to present a relation to the type of bottom, L. whiffiagonis preferred fine-medium sandy and L. boscii fine sandy sediments because of its different diets in adult stages [14].…”

“…L. boscii seem to be more abundant in deeper waters than L. whiffiagonis [13,14]. They seem to present a relation to the type of bottom, L. whiffiagonis preferred fine-medium sandy and L. boscii fine sandy sediments because of its different diets in adult stages [14]. Also, juveniles of both species can be present at deeper areas than other flatfish because they feed on detritivore crustaceans instead of zooplankton [13], being more accessible to the trawl fishery.…”