Environmental Biology of Fishes

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 183–193

Diet, intestinal morphology, and nitrogen assimilation efficiency in the damselfish, Stegastes lividus, in Guam

  • Dennis R. Lassuy
Full paper

Synopsis

Analysis of stomach contents of Stegastes lividus revealed a shift from omnivory in juveniles to herbivory in adults. Red algae, primarily Polysiphonia spp., Gelidiopsis intricata and Ceramium spp., formed the bulk of the diet in all size classes. Foraminifera and small crustaceans were of particular importance in the diet of juveniles. Net nitrogen assimilation efficiency of field-fed S. lividus was approximately 61%, and did not vary with fish size. The net assimilation efficiencies of fish fed on Enteromorpha in the laboratory ranged from size-class means of 36–79% for nitrogen and from 29–72% for total organic material, and increased from juveniles to adults. Apparently, juveniles compensate for a lower efficiency in assimilating plant food by including a higher percentage of animal material in their natural diets. The ratios of intestine length to standard length (IL/SL) and to intestine diameter (IL/ID) increased rapidly in juveniles and leveled off in adults. The retention time for ingested food items may only be about one-half as long in juveniles as in adults. The combination of observed IL/ID ratios and estimated retention times proved most valuable in the interpretation of ontogenetic changes in feeding habits and assimilation efficiency.

Keywords

Pomacentridae Eupomacentrus Herbivorous Feeding habits Gut morphology Ontogenetic changes 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References cited

  1. Alevizon, W.S. 1975. Comparative feeding ecology of a kelp-bed embiotocid (Embiotoca lateralis). Copeia 1975: 608–615.Google Scholar
  2. Al-Hussaini, A.H. 1947. The feeding habits and the morphology of the alimentary tract of some teleosts. Publ. Mar. Biol. Stn. Ghardaqa 5. 1–61.Google Scholar
  3. Al-Hussaini, A.H. 1949. On the functional morphology of the alimentary tract of some fish in relation to differences in their feeding habits: anatomy and histology. Quart. J. Microscop. Sci. 90: 109–139.Google Scholar
  4. Bakus, G. 1964. The effects of fish grazing on invertebrate evolution in shallow tropical waters. Allan Hancock Found. Occ. Pap. 27: 1–29.Google Scholar
  5. Barrington, E.J.W. 1957. The alimentary canal and digestion. pp. 109–161. In: M.E. Brown (ed.) The Physiology of Fishes, Vol. 1, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Belk, M.S. 1975. Habitat partitioning in two tropical reef fishes, Pomacentrus lividus and P. albofasciatus. Copeia 1975: 603–607.Google Scholar
  7. Bondi, A., A. Spandorf & R. Chalmi. 1957. The nutritive value of various feeds for carp. Bamidgeh 9: 13–18.Google Scholar
  8. Boyd, C.E. & C.P. Goodyear. 1971. Nutritive quality of food in ecological systems. Arch. Hydrobiol. 69: 256–270.Google Scholar
  9. Brawley, S.H. & W.H. Adey. 1977. Territorial behavior of threespot damselfish (Eupomacentrus planifrons) increases reef algal biomass and productivity. Env. Biol. Fish. 2: 45–51.Google Scholar
  10. Bryan, P.G. 1975. Food habits, functional digestive morphology and assimilation efficiency of the rabbitfish, Siganus spinus (Pisces: Siganidae) on Guam. Pac. Sci. 29: 269–277.Google Scholar
  11. Buddington, R.K. 1979. Digestion of an aquatic macrophyte by Tilapia zillii (Gervais). J. Fish Biol. 15: 449–455.Google Scholar
  12. Chiang, L'Kuei, et al. 1966. Collected articles on the 7th Conference of the Committee of Fishery Research of the West Pacific, Hydrobiology Institute, pp. 84–94. Chinese Academy of Science, Peking.Google Scholar
  13. Christensen, M.S. 1978. Trophic relationships of three species of sparid fishes in the South African marine littoral. U.S. Fish. Bull. 76: 389–401.Google Scholar
  14. Ciardelli, A. 1967. The anatomy of the feeding mechanism and the food habits of Microspathodon chrysurus (Pisces: Pomacentridae). Bull. Mar. Sci. 17: 845–883.Google Scholar
  15. Clark, D.B. & J.W. Gibbons. 1969. Dietary shift in the turtle Pseudomys scripta (Schoepft) from youth to maturity. Copeia 1969: 704–706.Google Scholar
  16. Clarke, T.A. 1971. Territory boundaries, courtship, and social behavior in the garibaldi, Hypsypops rubicunda (Pomacentridae). Copeia 1971: 295–299.Google Scholar
  17. Condrey, P.E., J.G. Gosselink & H.J. Bennett. 1972. Comparison of the assimilation of different diets by Penaeus setiferus and P. aztecus. U.S. Fish. Bull. 70: 1281–1299.Google Scholar
  18. Conover, R.J. 1966. Assimilation of organic matter by zooplankton. Limnol. Oceanogr. 11: 338–345.Google Scholar
  19. Ebersole, J.P. 1977. The adaptive significance of interspecific territoriality in the reef fish Eupomacentrus leucostictus. Ecology 58: 914–920.Google Scholar
  20. Edwards, T.W. & M.H. Horn. 1982. Assimilation efficiency of a temperate-zone intertidal fish (Cebidichthys violaceus) fed diets of macroalgae. Mar. Biol. 67: 247–253.Google Scholar
  21. Emery, A.R. 1973. Comparative ecology and functional osteology of fourteen species of damselfish (Pisces: Pomacentridae) at Alligator Reef, Florida Keys. Bull. Mar. Sci. 23: 649–770.Google Scholar
  22. Fitzgerald, W.J., Jr. 1978. Environmental parameters influencing the growth of Enteromorpha clathrata in the intertidal zone on Guam. Bot. Mar. 21: 207–220.Google Scholar
  23. Gohar, H.A.F. & A.F.A. Latif. 1959. Morphological studies on the gut of some scarid and labrid fishes. Publ. Mar. Biol. Stn. Ghardaqa (Red Sea) 10: 145–189.Google Scholar
  24. Hiatt, R.W. & D.S. Strasburg. 1960. Ecological relationships of the fish fauna on coral reefs of the Marshall Islands. Ecol. Monogr. 30: 65–127.Google Scholar
  25. Hickling, C.F. 1966. On the feeding process in the white amur (Ctenopharyngodon idella). J. Zool. 148: 408–419.Google Scholar
  26. Hickling, C.F. 1971. Fish culture. Faber and Faber, London. 295 pp.Google Scholar
  27. Hobson, E.S. 1974. Feeding relationships of teleostean fishes on coral reefs in Kona, Hawaii. U.S. Fish. Bull. 72: 915–1031.Google Scholar
  28. Hynes, H.B.N. 1950. The food of fresh-water sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus and Pygosteus pungitius) with a review of methods used in studies of food of fishes. J. Anim. Ecol. 19: 36–58.Google Scholar
  29. Hyslop, E.J. 1980. Stomach content analysis — a review of methods and their application. J. Fish. Biol. 17: 411–429.Google Scholar
  30. Jones, R.S. 1968. Ecological relationships in Hawaiian and Johnston Island Acanthuridae (Surgeonfishes). Micronesica 4: 309–361.Google Scholar
  31. Klust, G. 1939. Über Entwicklung, Bau und Funktion des Darmes bei Karpfen (Cyprinus carpio L.). Intern. Rev. ges. Hydrobiol. Hydrog. 39: 498–176, 40: 88.Google Scholar
  32. Lassuy, D.R. 1980. Effects of ‘farming’ behavior in Eupomacentrus lividus and Hemiglyphidodon plagiometopon on algal community structure. Bull. Mar. Sci. 30: 304–312.Google Scholar
  33. Lobel, P.S. 1981. Trophic biology of herbivorous reef fishes: alimentary pH and digestive capabilities. J. Fish. Biol. 19: 365–397.Google Scholar
  34. Low, R.M. 1971. Interspecific territoriality in a pomacentrid reef fish, Pomacentrus flavicauda Whitley. Ecology 52: 648–654.Google Scholar
  35. Mann, H. 1966. The utilization of food by Tilapia melanopleura, Dum. Proc. World Symp. Warm-water Pond Cult. FAO Repts. 44: 408–410.Google Scholar
  36. Mathavan, S., E. Vivekanandan & T.J. Pandian. 1976. Food utilization in the fish Tilapia mossambica fed on plant and animal foods. Helgolander wiss. Meeresunters. 28: 71–89.Google Scholar
  37. Menzel, D.W. 1959. Utilization of algae for growth by the angelfish, Holocanthus bermudensis. J. Cons. perm. int. Explor. Mer. 24: 308–313.Google Scholar
  38. Menzel, D.W. 1960. Utilization of food by a Bermuda reef fish, Epinephelus guttatus. J. Cons. perm. int. Explor. Mer. 25: 216–222.Google Scholar
  39. Mitchell, D.F. 1953. An analysis of stomach contents of California tide pool fishes. Amer. Midl. Nat. 49: 862–871.Google Scholar
  40. Montgomery, W.L. 1977. Diet and gut morphology in fishes, with special reference to the monkeyface prickleback, Cebidichthys violaceus (Stichaeidae: Blenniodidei). Copeia 1977: 178–182.Google Scholar
  41. Montgomery, W.L. 1980. Comparative feeding ecology of two herbivorous damselfishes (Pomacentridae: Teleostei) from the Gulf of California, Mexico. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 47: 9–24.Google Scholar
  42. Montgomery, W.L. & R.E. Gerking. 1980. Marine macroalgae as foods for fishes: an evaluation of potential food quality. Env. Biol. Fish. 5: 143–153.Google Scholar
  43. Myrberg, A.A., Jr. & R.E. Thresher. 1974. Interspecific aggression and its relevance to the concept of territoriality in reef fishes. Amer. Zool. 41: 81–96.Google Scholar
  44. Ogden, J.C. & P.S. Lobel. 1978. The role of herbivorous fishes and urchins in coral reef communities. Env. Biol. Fish. 3: 49–63.Google Scholar
  45. Pandian, T.J. 1967. Intake, digestion, absorption and conversion of food in the fishes Megalops cyprinoides and Ophiocephalus striatus. Mar. Biol. 1: 16–32.Google Scholar
  46. Payne, A.I. 1978. Gut pH and digestive strategies in estuarine grey mullet (Mugilidae) and tilapia (Cichlidae). J. Fish Biol. 13: 627–629.Google Scholar
  47. Pfeffer, R. 1963. The digestion of algae by Acanthurus sandvicensis. Master's Thesis, University of Hawaii, Honolulu. 47 pp.Google Scholar
  48. Pough, F.H. 1973. Lizard energetics and diet. Ecology 54: 837–844.Google Scholar
  49. Randall, J.E. 1961. A contribution to the biology of the convict surgeonfish of the Hawaiian Islands, Acanthurrus triostegus sandvicensis. Pac. Sci. 51: 215–272.Google Scholar
  50. Royce, W.F. 1972. Introduction to the fishery sciences. Academic Press, New York. 351 pp.Google Scholar
  51. Suyehiro, Y. 1941. A study of the digestive system and feeding habits of fish. Jap. J. Zool. 10: 1–303.Google Scholar
  52. Targett, T.E. 1979. The effect of temperature and body size on digestive efficiency in Fundulus heteroclitus (L.). J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 79: 179–186.Google Scholar
  53. Thresher, R.E. 1976. Field analysis of the territoriality of the threespot damselfish, Eupomacentrus planifrons (Pomacentridae). Copeia 1976: 266–276.Google Scholar
  54. Tsuda, R.T. & P.G. Bryan. 1973. Food preferences of juvenile Siganus rostrams and S. spinus on Guam. Copeia 1973: 604–606.Google Scholar
  55. Tsuda, R.T. & H.T. Kami. 1973. Algal succession on artificial reefs in a marine lagoon environment on Guam. J. Phycol. 9: 260–264.Google Scholar
  56. Van Dyke, J.M. & D.L. Sutton. 1977. Digestion of duckweed (Lemna spp.) by the grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella). J. Fish Biol. 11: 273–278.Google Scholar
  57. Windell, J.T. 1967. Rates digestion in fishes. pp. 151–174. In: S.D. Gerking (ed.) Biological Basis of Freshwater Fish Production, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Dr W. Junk Publishers 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dennis R. Lassuy
    • 1
  1. 1.Oregon Cooperative Fishery Research UnitOregon State UniversityCorvallisU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations