Resource partitioning among four butterflyfish species in the Red Sea

Zekeria, Z. A.; Dawit, Y.; Ghebremedhin, S.; Naser, M Niamul; Videler, John J.

doi:10.1071/mf01150

Cited by 34 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, coral mucous coats trap organic detrital material from the surrounding water column, with such enriched material likely representing a substantial food resource for many reef fishes (Wilson et al, 2003). Thus, coral likely represents an important component of the diet of many reef fishes, but its role has previously been underappreciated due to the difficulty of detecting coral in partially digested stomach contents using traditional techniques (Zekeria et al, 2002;Pratchett et al, 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Extremes Are Associated with Dietary Patterns in Arabian Gulf Reef Fishes

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change is affecting the trophic ecology of reef fishes through changes in reef-associated food availability and fish feeding behavior. The southern Arabian Gulf is a thermally extreme environment, providing an opportunity to study fish diets on reefs with summer temperatures representative of next-century conditions elsewhere. Using 18S metagenomic analyses of stomach contents, we provide the first description of the dietary composition of three abundant reef fishes (Pomacanthus maculosus, Pomacentrus aquilus, and Pomacentrus trichrourus) from the thermally extreme southern Arabian Gulf, with five sampling periods across 1 year used to assess seasonal variation in diet. In total, 146 stomach content samples were sequenced, resulting in 9.6 million filtered reads that aligned to 17 classes in 14 phyla. Corals (Cnidaria, Anthozoa) dominated stomach contents of all three fishes (overall mean: 74.6, 40.6, and 21.2% of stomach reads, respectively), suggesting coral consumption to be characteristic of reef fish diet in the region. Sanger sequencing validated the presence of corals in the stomach contents and identified two common genera in the region, Porites and Platygyra, as part of the diet. Other common phyla included sponges and annelid worms (P. maculosus: 14.9%, 4.1%; P. aquilus: 5.9%, 16.7%; P. trichrourus: 8.2%, 14.7%, respectively), with the remainder comprised of 11 other phyla. Algae were virtually absent in diets of all three species. The P. maculosus diet was consistently coral/sponge dominated across the year, but there was substantial seasonal variation in the damselfishes, with diets dominated by coral in the hottest month (August; P. aquilus: 89.4%, P. trichrourus: 51.5%) but broadest in spring (March, May) when corals became less common (<19.8% each) and bivalves, free living ascidians, and various arthropods increased; parasitic cestodes were also abundant in damselfish stomachs in spring (mean: >16.4%). These results suggest that these fishes have developed a feeding ecology responsive to the fluctuating and extreme environmental conditions of their region. These results broaden our understanding of the diets of these three species and document the nature, complexity and temporal dynamics of reef fish diets in the most thermally extreme coral reef environment on earth.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Extremes Are Associated with Dietary Patterns in Arabian Gulf Reef Fishes

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Information on mating system, female dispersal, territoriality, parental care mode, anti-predator strategy, and diet were taken directly from the individual species pages on FishBase; an online freely available aggregation of fish data (Supplementary Table S1.1; Froese, 1997;Strona, 2014;Thorson et al, 2014). Additional information from 41 further sources was also included (Fricke, 1980(Fricke, , 1986Lobel and Johannes, 1980;Thresher, 1980Thresher, , 1984Wallace and Selman, 1981;Hourigan and Kelley, 1985;Colin and Clavijo, 1988;Brichard, 1989;Colin, 1989;Tricas, 1989;Barlow, 1991;Colin and Bell, 1991;Fowler, 1991;Roberts and Ormond, 1992;Axelrod, 1993;Kuwamura, 1997;Nagoshi and Yanasigawa, 1997;DeMartini, 1998;Gibson, 1998;Righton et al, 1998;Coward and Bromage, 2000;Mylonas and Zohar, 2000;Avise et al, 2002;Zekeria et al, 2002;Murua and Saborido-Rey, 2003;Gibran et al, 2004;Heg et al, 2004;Whiteman and Côté, 2004;Ah-King et al, 2005;Genner and Turner, 2005;Gonzalez-Voyer et al, 2008;Fitzpatrick et al, 2009;Collette, 2010;Takem...…”

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evolution of monogamy in cichlids and marine reef fishes

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although several hypotheses have been proposed to explain the emergence of social monogamy, its origin is still intensely debated. Monogamy has many potential drivers, but evolutionary causality among them remains unclear. Using phylogenetic comparative methods within a Bayesian framework we explored the evolution of monogamy in cichlids and in marine reef fishes because, while both groups are characterised by unusually high incidence of social monogamy, they face very different ecological challenges. For each group, we examined four classic hypotheses that explain the evolution of monogamy: female dispersal, male mate guarding, female–female intolerance, and the biparental care hypotheses. We also explored whether the ecological traits of diet and shelter use are evolutionarily coupled with these hypotheses or with monogamy. First, we found that the evolution of monogamy was predicted by male territoriality in cichlids and simultaneous male and female territoriality in marine reef fishes. We suggest that these results provide support for the male mate guarding hypothesis in cichlids and female–female intolerance hypothesis in marine reef fishes. Second, we demonstrate clear evidence against the biparental care hypothesis, as biparental care was a consequence, not a cause, of monogamy in our analyses. Third, as female dispersal drove the loss of monogamy in both cichlids and marine reef fishes, this suggests the female dispersal hypothesis is not driving the evolution of monogamy in either group. These findings in two highly-monogamous fish taxa largely support prior findings from primate and bird comparative studies and provide novel large-scale evidence for a link between mate guarding and the evolution of monogamy.

show abstract

Community structure of butterflyfishes in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden

Khalaf

Abdallah²

2005

Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1.A spatially comprehensive description of the butterflyfish assemblage structure in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden is presented. Fish were censused on 118 transects at 29 coral reef sites.2. A total of 5062 butterflyfishes were counted along the Jordanian, Egyptian, Saudi Arabian, Yemeni and Djiboutian coasts, representing 14 species and two genera.3. A spatially comprehensive description of the butterflyfish community structure in shallow water demonstrates that the most common species of butterflyfish along the Jordanian, Egyptian, and Saudi Arabian coasts were Chaetodon paucifasciatus, Chaetodon auriga, Chaetodon austriacus respectively, and Chaetodon larvatus off Yemen and Djibouti.4. The comparison of butterflyfish community on reefs around the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden suggests two main groups, a northern Red Sea and central Red Sea group, and a southern Red Sea and Gulf of Aden group.

show abstract

Resource partitioning among four butterflyfish species in the Red Sea

Cited by 34 publications

References 0 publications

Environmental Extremes Are Associated with Dietary Patterns in Arabian Gulf Reef Fishes

Environmental Extremes Are Associated with Dietary Patterns in Arabian Gulf Reef Fishes

The evolution of monogamy in cichlids and marine reef fishes

Community structure of butterflyfishes in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About