2021
DOI: 10.1590/1519-6984.226136
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Feeding aspects of Knodus heteresthes (Eigenmann, 1908) and Moenkhausia lepidura (Kner, 1858) (Characiformes, Characidae) in the Teles Pires and Juruena Rivers, southern Amazon

Abstract: The composition of the diet of two species of characids (Knodus heteresthes and Moenkhausia lepidura) was evaluated in the Teles Pires and Juruena Rivers, sampled in September and October 2016. We analyzed 226 stomachs of K. heteresthes and 425 of M. lepidura. The analysis of the stomach contents was based on volumetric and frequency of occurrence methods, applying the food importance index. For the similarity of the diets between the species we calculated the niche overlap with Pianka’s index. Both species in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The reasons that generate associations among fish species study are unknown, but may represent factors such as interspecific feeding associations, partial sharing of habitats (Pacheco and da Silva, 2009) and trophic relationships (Novakowski et al, 2007;Oliveira et al, 2020), however it is common fish species presenting similar feeding behavior and living in the same space, however, these usually have different foraging methods, suggesting that behavioral differences are essential to species coexistence (Mise et al, 2013). However, aggressive interactions are common among fish of the same guild and individuals of each species can obtain advantages in feed efficiency over other individuals from other species of the same trophic guild (Menegatti et al, 2003).…”
Section: Diet Compositionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reasons that generate associations among fish species study are unknown, but may represent factors such as interspecific feeding associations, partial sharing of habitats (Pacheco and da Silva, 2009) and trophic relationships (Novakowski et al, 2007;Oliveira et al, 2020), however it is common fish species presenting similar feeding behavior and living in the same space, however, these usually have different foraging methods, suggesting that behavioral differences are essential to species coexistence (Mise et al, 2013). However, aggressive interactions are common among fish of the same guild and individuals of each species can obtain advantages in feed efficiency over other individuals from other species of the same trophic guild (Menegatti et al, 2003).…”
Section: Diet Compositionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, when released into the water, high inputs of nutrients from human activities often have severe effects on the fish and invertebrate communities and can homogenize the type of resources available (Baeta et al 2017, Alonso et al 2019. This pollution alters the contribution of allochthonous and autochthonous resources available, which changes the feeding habits of fish (Ganassin et al 2020) and forces an adjustment in their diets when facing different habitat conditions (Alonso et al 2019, Oliveira et al 2021. Thus, species with trophic plasticity have the advantage of being able to shift their diet in response to environments with different shifts in resource availability (Welker & Scarnecchia 2006, Kokubun et al 2018, Oliveira et al 2021.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%