Partitioning of food and space resources by chaetodontid fishes on coral reefs

Bouchon‐Navaro, Yolande

doi:10.1016/0022-0981(86)90130-9

Cited by 74 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As most species of chaetodonts wander over larger areas than the area covered within the dimensions of transects used here (Reese 1975, Sutton 1985, Fowler 1988, it is likely that many species encountered each other on a regular basis, suggesting no obvious finer-scale, within-locality partitioning of space. Such broad overlap in the use of space appears typical for some assemblages of chaetodonts having been previously described for the Bahamas (Clarke 1977), French Polynesia (Bouchon-Navaro 1981, 1986) and the Red Sea (Bouchon-Navaro 1980, 1986, Bouchon-Navaro & Bouchon 1989). As such, the chaetodonts contrast with other families of reef fish in which confamilial species demonstrate more pronounced spatial segregation both amongst and within habitats.…”

Section: Spatial Patternssupporting

confidence: 57%

“…Because the diets of many chaetodonts rely on corals (HarmelinVivien & Bouchon-Navaro 1983) a n d their abundances have been related to this food source (Bell & Galzin 1984, Bouchon-Navaro 1986, Bouchon-Navaro & Bouchon 1989, it has been suggested that these fish are important indicator species for assessing the healthiness of coral reefs (Reese 1981, Hourigan et al 1988). Yet, this consideration may be preliminary as it assumes that populations of chaetodonts are resourcedetermined.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, this consideration may be preliminary as it assumes that populations of chaetodonts are resourcedetermined. To date, conclusions about the limitation of populations of chaetodonts have been inferred from static pictures of distribution and abundance (Clarke 1977, Anderson et al 1981, Bell et al 1985, Findley & Findley 1985, Bouchon-Navaro 1986 and their relationship with coral abundance (Bell & Galzin 1984, Bouchon-Navaro 1986). Yet such methodologies lack rigour in identifying processes (Connell 1978, Colwell 1983, Sale 1984, Wiens 1984, Sale et al 1985, Mapstone & Fowler 1988.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Spatial and temporal patterns of distribution and abundance of chaetodontid fishes at One Tree Reef, southern GBR

Fowler¹

1990

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Between November 1984 and April 1987, the butterflyfishes of One Tree Reef on the southern Great Barrier Reef were sampled on 8 occasions at 9 widely dispersed localities across the reef using a hierarchial sampling regime. Data were collected on 23 species which fell into 3 categories of abundance. Three 'abundant' species each contributed > 10 O/O of the total of all individuals. Five species were 'common', each contributing 2 to 10 "; o of the total, and 15 species were 'rare', each contributing < 1.0 % of the total. The 8 'abundant' and 'common' species were present at all localities, whilst 11 of the 'rare' species had restricted and discontinuous distributions. The former 8 demonstrated significant differences in abundance amongst localities, 5 of which also had significant differences amongst sites (within combinations of occasions and localities) Relationships between fish abundance and coral abundance were weak, and could not predict these spatial patterns. The size structures of the 3 abundant species inchcated consistent spatial differences, implying different population dynamics occurring on adjacent and local areas of reef. Five abundant and common species showed significant temporal variation, 2 species showed a seasonal pattern of variation, and 3 species showed increases in population density. Generally, however, spatial differences amongst localities were maintained through time.

show abstract

Section: Spatial Patternssupporting

confidence: 57%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spatial and temporal patterns of distribution and abundance of chaetodontid fishes at One Tree Reef, southern GBR

Fowler¹

1990

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar depth segregation has been reported for congeners of many other coral reef fishes, such as Chaetodon spp. (Bouchon-Navaro 1986, Fowler 1990, Cephalopholis spp. (Shpigel & Fishelson 1989), Acanthemblemaria (Clarke 1989), Stegastes spp.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A multi-scale study of the relationships between habitat use and the distribution and abundance patterns of three coral reef angelfishes (Pomacanthidae)

Eagle¹,

Jones²,

McCormick³

2001

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The degree to which species partition resources often depends on the spatial scale of the study. To investigate this, we examined the distribution and abundance patterns of 3 relatively rare pygmy angelfishes (family Pomacanthidae: Centropyge) among reef locations, depths and microhabitats at Lizard Island on the Great Barrier Reef. A strong association among species and between species and their habitat was found at some scales, but not others. On a broad scale, the abundances of the 3 species were highest at the same 4 sites (kilometres apart). These sites were all located at headlands, suggesting that the patterns of abundance may be in response to the topographic features of the island at this scale. Differences among species occurred at intermediate scales (10s to 100s of metres), where species were associated with different depth zones or reef locations. Centropyge vroliki occurred shallower than C. bicolor, while the depth distribution of C. bispinosa overlapped with both of these species. Laterally along the fringing reef, C. vroliki were more abundant in areas where both C. bicolor and C. bispinosa were also abundant, but these 2 latter species were not correlated with each other. The proportions of substratum types present in home patches differed among species, to some extent reflecting the benthic composition of the reef area where each occurred. However on a fine scale (metres), all 3 species appeared to use the same substratum type, which consisted of dead branching coral covered in algae, and occasionally formed multi-species groups. Species abundances were not correlated with this commonly used microhabitat, but rather the availability of the substrata characterizing the reef areas in which they were most abundant. Here, although Centropyge species use the same type of microhabitat, they may be an example of species that partition space on the basis of non-preferred resources. For example, all 3 species used home patches containing high proportions of overgrown corals; however where this habitat was not available, C. bicolor used sand and rubble habitat at the reef base, while C. vroliki used coral habitat on the reef crest. Most importantly, this study emphasizes that a multi-scale approach is necessary to determine appropriate scales for examining species associations and resource partitioning in reef fishes.

show abstract

“…On the other hand, Connell (1978) has demonstrated that species richness of hard coral assemblages decreases with increasing live hard coral cover and Aronson and Precht (1995) showed that at sites with low levels of disturbance only a few coral species dominate the community. Therefore corallivorous fishes might be limited in their food source, because some chaetodontid species prefer or even feed only on a few species of coral (Reese 1977;Bouchon-Navaro 1986).…”

Section: Correlation Of the Fish Community Parameters And Benthic Habmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community structure and biogeography of shore fishes in the Gulf of Aqaba, Red Sea

Khalaf¹,

Kochzius

2002

Helgol Mar Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shore fish community structure off the Jordanian Red Sea coast was determined on fringing coral reefs and in a seagrass-dominated bay at 6 m and 12 m depths. A total of 198 fish species belonging to 121 genera and 43 families was recorded. Labridae and Pomacentridae dominated the ichthyofauna in terms of species richness and Pomacentridae were most abundant. Neither diversity nor species richness was correlated to depth. The abundance of fishes was higher at the deep reef slope, due to schooling planktivorous fishes. At 12 m depth abundance of fishes at the seagrass-dominated site was higher than on the coral reefs. Multivariate analysis demonstrated a strong influence on the fish assemblages by depth and benthic habitat. Fish species richness was positively correlated with hard substrate cover and habitat diversity. Abundance of corallivores was positively linked with live hard coral cover. The assemblages of fishes were different on the shallow reef slope, deep reef slope and seagrass meadows. An analysis of the fish fauna showed that the Gulf of Aqaba harbours a higher species richness than previously reported. The comparison with fish communities on other reefs around the Arabian Peninsula and Indian Ocean supported the recognition of an Arabian subprovince within the Indian Ocean. The affinity of the Arabian Gulf ichthyofauna to the Red Sea is not clear.

show abstract

Partitioning of food and space resources by chaetodontid fishes on coral reefs

Cited by 74 publications

References 19 publications

Spatial and temporal patterns of distribution and abundance of chaetodontid fishes at One Tree Reef, southern GBR

Spatial and temporal patterns of distribution and abundance of chaetodontid fishes at One Tree Reef, southern GBR

A multi-scale study of the relationships between habitat use and the distribution and abundance patterns of three coral reef angelfishes (Pomacanthidae)

Community structure and biogeography of shore fishes in the Gulf of Aqaba, Red Sea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About