Marine Biology

, Volume 99, Issue 1, pp 137–143 | Cite as

Stock discrimination of orange roughy,Hoplostethus atlanticus, by parasite analysis

  • R. J. G. Lester
  • K. B. Sewell
  • A. Barnes
  • K. Evans
Article

Abstract

The parasite fauna of the viscera of 1251 orange roughy,Hoplostethus atlanticus, collected in 1983 to 1986 from eight areas off southern Australia and three areas off New Zealand, was examined for evidence of discrete host populations. Fish from each area were divided into three length groups which averaged close to 28, 37, and 42 cm. Canonical multivariate analysis of data on larval nematodes (Anisakis spp.,Terranova sp., and a spirurid) and larval cestodes (Hepatoxylon trichiuri andCallitetrarhynchus sp.) discriminated five Australian and three New Zealand stocks. These were for Australia: (1) Great Australian Bight (2) South Australia/west Victoria/west and south Tasmania, (3) Cascade Plateau/Tasman Rise, (4) north-east Tasmania, (5) New South Wales; and for New Zealand: (1) north-east New Zealand, (2) south-east New Zealand, (3) west New Zealand. No significant differences in parasite fauna were detected between samples of fish taken within the spawning season and those taken outside the spawning season in the same area. In one southern Australian stock there was a north-south cline in the numbers ofAnisakis spp. This was apparent in both small (immature) and medium-sized (mature) fish. We conclude thatHoplostethus atlanticus is a sedentary species with little movement between fishmanagement zones.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature cited

  1. Dogiel, V. A. (1961). Parasitology of fishes. Oliver & Boyd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Evans, K., Wilson, M. A. (1987). A survey of orange, roughy biological information: 1981 to 1985. Unpublished Report of the Demersal and Pelagic Fish Research Group Meeting No. 24, Department of Sea Fisheries, HobartGoogle Scholar
  3. Grant, W. S. (1984). Biochemical population genetics of Atlantic herringClupea harengus. Copeia 1984: 357–364Google Scholar
  4. Hislop, J. R. G., MacKenzie, K. (1976). Population studies of the whitingMerlangius merlangus (L.) of the northern North Sea. J. Cons. int. Explor. Mer 37: 98–111Google Scholar
  5. Kleiber, P., Kearney, R. E. (1983). An assessment of the skipjack and batifish resource of Kiribati. Skipjack Survey and Assessment Program Final Country Report No. 5. South Pacific Commission, Nouméa, New CaledoniaGoogle Scholar
  6. Lester, R. J. G., Barnes, A., Habib, G. (1985) Parasites of skipjack tunaKatsuwonus pelamis: fishery implications. Fish. Bull. U.S. 83: 343–356Google Scholar
  7. MacKenzie, K. (1983). Parasites as biological tags in fish population studies. Adv. appl. Biol. 7: 251–331Google Scholar
  8. MacKenzie, K. (1985). The use of parasites as biological tags in population studies of herring (Clupea harengus L.) in the North Sea and to the north and west of Scotland. J. Cons. int. Explor. Mer 42: 33–64Google Scholar
  9. MacKenzie, K. (1987). Parasites as indicators of host populations. Int. J. Parasit. 17: 345–352Google Scholar
  10. Mardia, K. V., Kent, J. T., Bibby, J. M. (1979). Multivariate analysis. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Margolis, L. (1965). Parasites as an auxiliary source of information about the biology of Pacific salmons (genusOncorhynchus). J. Fish. Res. Bd Can. 22: 1387–1395Google Scholar
  12. Pankhurst, N. W., McMillan, P. J., Tracey, D. M. (1987). Seasonal reproductive cycles in three commercially exploited fishes from the slope waters off New Zealand. J. Fish Biol. 30: 193–211Google Scholar
  13. Richardson, B. J. (1983). Distribution of protein variation in skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis) from the central and southwestern Pacific. Aust. J. mar. Freshwat. Res 34: 231–251Google Scholar
  14. Robertson, D. A., Grimes, P. J., McMillan, P. J. (1984). Orange roughy on Chatham Rise; results of a trawl survey, August-September 1982. Occ. Publs Fish. Res. Div. N.Z. Minist. Agric. Fish. 46: 1–27Google Scholar
  15. Sewell, K. B., Lester, R. J. G. (1988). The numbers of selected parasites in Australian and New Zealand samples of orange roughyHoplostethus atlanticus, 1983 to 86. Tech. Rep. Dep. Sea Fish., Tasm. 26: 1–38Google Scholar
  16. Sindermann, C. J. (1983). Parasites as natural tags for marine fish: a review. N. Atlant. Fish. Orgn (NAFO) scient. Coun. Stud. 6: 63–71Google Scholar
  17. Smith, P. J. (1986). Genetic similarity between samples of the orange roughyHoplostethus atlanticus from the Tasman Sea, South-west Pacific Ocean and North-east Atlantic Ocean. Mar. Biol. 91: 173–180Google Scholar
  18. Wilson, M. (1982).Challenger reveals potentially important roughy resource off Tasmania. Aust. Fish. 41(5): 2–3Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. J. G. Lester
    • 1
  • K. B. Sewell
    • 1
  • A. Barnes
    • 2
  • K. Evans
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of ParasitologyUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of ScienceUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia
  3. 3.Department of Sea FisheriesHobartAustralia

Personalised recommendations