2010
DOI: 10.1080/10236244.2010.501135
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effects of swimming pattern on the energy use of gilthead seabream (Sparus aurataL.)

Abstract: Oxygen consumption (M O2 ) was measured for gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata) during spontaneous and forced activities. During spontaneous activity, the swimming pattern was analysed for the effect on M O2 on the average speed (U), turning rate () and change in speed (DU). All swimming characteristics contributed significantly to the source of spontaneous swimming costs, and the models explained up to 58% of the variation in M O2 : Prediction of M O2 of fish in field studies can thereby be improved if changes … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
32
4

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
32
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Down sampling our position data to 1 Hz gave angular velocity estimates of <3/°s in yaw and 2/°s in pitch. This may be a consequence of intrinsic interspecific differences in swimming behavior as the comparable volitional energetic data were obtained for gilthead seabream ( Sparus aurata , Steinhausen et al., ) and brook trout ( Salvelinus fontinalis , Tang & Boisclair, ; Krohn & Boisclair, ; Tang et al., ), but small turning radii imposed by the enclosures used are likely an important factor. The available energetic data are therefore snapshots from opposite ends of a spectrum of mechanical unsteadiness and linearity, neither of which may directly inform estimates of FMR.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…Down sampling our position data to 1 Hz gave angular velocity estimates of <3/°s in yaw and 2/°s in pitch. This may be a consequence of intrinsic interspecific differences in swimming behavior as the comparable volitional energetic data were obtained for gilthead seabream ( Sparus aurata , Steinhausen et al., ) and brook trout ( Salvelinus fontinalis , Tang & Boisclair, ; Krohn & Boisclair, ; Tang et al., ), but small turning radii imposed by the enclosures used are likely an important factor. The available energetic data are therefore snapshots from opposite ends of a spectrum of mechanical unsteadiness and linearity, neither of which may directly inform estimates of FMR.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…Swim tunnel studies have frequently been used to shed light on relationships between swimming speed (or performance) and metabolism in fish (Claireaux & Lagarde 1999, Steinhausen et al 2010, Gleiss et al 2010. However, many authors question the validity of the capacity of swim tunnel work to replicate natural swimming conditions (Nelson et al 2002).…”
Section: The Problem With Swim Tunnelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Brett, 1964) or, more rarely, by allowing fish to swim volitionally within a restricted volume (Tang and Boisclair, 1995;Tang et al, 2000;Steinhausen et al, 2010). These approaches produce mechanically quite different behaviors between quasi-steady-state swimming in flumes versus unsteady maneuvering within the physical constraints of a small, static volume (Steinhausen et al, 2010). Volitional swimming behavior may be intrinsically unsteady (Webb, 1991), and unsteady locomotion is typically costlier than steady-state motion because of the additional energy expended in altering the organism's trajectory (Daniel, 1984).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is achieved by forcing fish to swim against a current within sealed, recirculating flumes (e.g. Brett, 1964) or, more rarely, by allowing fish to swim volitionally within a restricted volume (Tang and Boisclair, 1995;Tang et al, 2000;Steinhausen et al, 2010). These approaches produce mechanically quite different behaviors between quasi-steady-state swimming in flumes versus unsteady maneuvering within the physical constraints of a small, static volume (Steinhausen et al, 2010).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%