Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T21:34:31.290Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Biology of the Whiting, Gadus Merlangus, in Manx Waters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

A. K. Nagabhushanam
A. K. Nagabhushanam*
Affiliation:
Marine Biological Station, University of Liverpool, Port Erin, Isle of Man, U.K.
*
*Present address: Central Marine Fisheries Research Unit, Bolar, Mangalore, India.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The biology of whiting in Manx waters has been investigated at different stages of the life-cycle, with special reference to their diet. Planktonic postlarvae occurred chiefly in May, these measured between 4.5 and 16.5 mm, and had fed chiefly on Pseudocalanus. Larger whiting (between 21 and 52 mm) were taken in association with Rhizostoma. They were approximately 2–4 months old, and had fed on copepods supplemented with Hyperia and euphausiid furcilia. Immature whiting 77 mm long appeared in July in a shallow sandy bay—a nursery area. The fish were about 4–5 months old, and fed on swarming amphipods, isopods and mysids after dark, when these organisms were free-swimming. This diet was supplemented to an appreciable extent during the following April-June quarter by the inclusion of juvenile Ammodytes. After staying for nearly 1 year in the nursery area, the bulk of the fish appear to migrate to the open sea.

In the open-sea habitat, the immature fish fed chiefly on euphausiids, decapods and sprats—nektonic forms particularly. These whiting are themselves eaten by larger whiting in the same habitat. Adult whiting (over 220 mm) were taken only offshore, and fed chiefly on euphausiids, Crangon, Pandalus, Pasiphaea, Clupea and gadoids. A few samples taken off the east coast of I.o.M. indicated that the whiting are capable of feeding on infauna and plankton in an environment deficient in active epifauna and nekton. The whiting is an active feeder throughout the year.

Two length-weight relationships have been calculated for Manx whiting: nursery-area, and open-sea fish—the latter gain weight more rapidly than the former would be expected to do.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 44 , Issue 1 , February 1964 , pp. 177 - 202
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1964

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bainbridge, R., 1952. Underwater observations on the swimming of marine zooplankton. J. mar. Biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 31, pp. 107–12.Google Scholar
Bal, D. V., 1941. Observations on spawning periods and key to pelagic eggs of fishes in Manx waters. Proc. Lpool biol. Soc, Vol. 54, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
Blegvad, H., 1916. On the food of fish in Danish waters within the Skaw. Rep. Danish biol. Sta., Vol. 24, pp. 19–72.Google Scholar
Blegvad, H., 1925. Continued studies on the quantity of fish-food in the sea-bottom. Rep. Danish biol. Sta., Vol. 34, pp. 27–56.Google Scholar
Bowers, A. B., 1954. Breeding and growth of whiting (Gadus merlangus L.) in Isle of Man waters. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 33, pp. 97–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carr, A. M., 1909. The food and condition of fish obtained from the North East coast. Rep. Northumb. Sea Fish. Comm., pp. 41–50.Google Scholar
Colman, J. S. & Segrove, F., 1955 a. The fauna living in Stoupe Beck sands, Robin Hood's Bay (Yorkshire, North Riding). J. Anim. Ecol., Vol. 24, pp. 426–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colman, J. S., 1955b. The tidal plankton over Stoupe Beck sands, Robin Hood's Bay (Yorkshire, North Riding). J. Anim. Ecol., Vol. 24, pp. 445–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Couch, J., 1864. A History of the Fishes of the British Islands. III. London: Groomsbridge.Google Scholar
Cunningham, J. T., 1896. The Natural History of the Marketable Marine Fishes of the British Isles. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dahl, E., 1959. The hyperiid amphipod, Hyperiagalba, a true ecto-parasite on jelly-fish. Univ. Berg. Årb., 1959, naturv. R., Nr 9, 8 pp.Google Scholar
Damas, D., 1909. Contribution à la biologie des Gadides. Rapp. Cons. Explor. Mer, Vol. 10, B. 3, pp. 1–227.Google Scholar
Desbrosses, P., 1945. Le Merlan (Gadus merlangus L.) de la côte française de l'Atlantique. Rev. Trav. Off. Pêches marit., T. 13, pp. 177–95.Google Scholar
Desbrosses, P., 1948. Le Merlan (Gadus merlangus L.) de la côte francaise de l'Atlantique (Deuxième partie). Rev. Trav. Off. Pêches marit., T. 14, pp. 71–104.Google Scholar
Ehrenbaum, E., 1936. Naturgeschichte und wirtschaftliche Bedeutung der Seefische Nord-Europas. Handb. Seefisch. Nordeurop., Bd. 2.Google Scholar
Elkin, H. W., 1954. Notes on food of whiting (Gadus merlangus L.). Irish Nat. J., Vol. 11, No. 7, pp. 183–7.Google Scholar
Elkin, H. W., 1955. Whiting (Gadus merlangus L.) in Irish waters. Set. Proc. R. Dublin Soc, Vol. 27, pp. 17–30.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. W., 1950. Whiting. Ann. biol., Copenhague, Vol. 6 (1949), pp. 106–8.Google Scholar
Evans, H. Muir, 1940. Brain and Body of Fish—A Study of Brain Pattern in Relation to Hunting and Feeding in Fish. London: Tech. Press.Google Scholar
Frost, W. E., 1932. Observations on the reproduction of Nyctiphanes couchii (Bell) and Meganyctiphanes norvegica (Sars) off the south coast of Ireland. Proc. R. Irish Acad., Vol. 40 (B), No. 14.Google Scholar
Fulton, T. W., 1892. Observations on the reproduction, maturity and sexual relations of the food-fishes. Rep. Fish. Bd Scot., Vol. 10, pp. 232–3.Google Scholar
Gokhale, S. V., 1957. Seasonal histological changes in the gonads of the Whiting (Gadus merlangus L.) and the Norway Pout (G. esmarkii Nilsson). Ind. J. Fish., Vol. 4, pp. 92–112.Google Scholar
Graham, M., 1924. The annual cycle in the life of the cod in the North Sea. Fish. Invest., Lond., Ser. 2, Vol. 6, No. 6, 77 pp.Google Scholar
Graham, M., 1956. Sea-Fisheries. Their Investigation in the United Kingdom. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Hardy, A. C., 1924. The herring in relation to its animate environment. Part I. The food and feeding habits of the herring with special reference to the west coast of England. Fish. Invest., Lond., Ser. 2, Vol. 7.Google Scholar
Hardy, A. C., 1956. The Open Sea—its Natural History: the World of Plankton. London: Collins.Google Scholar
Hardy, A. C., 1959. The Open Sea—its Natural History: Fish and Fisheries. London: Collins.Google Scholar
Herdman, W. A.et al. 1893. Food of fishes. Rep. Lanes. Sea-Fish. Labs., Mem. 2.Google Scholar
Hartley, P. H. T., 1940. The Saltash tucknet fishery and the ecology of some estuarine fishes. J. mar. Biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 24, pp. 1–68.Google Scholar
Hertling, H., 1938. Untersuchungen über die Ernährung von Meeresfischen. II. Quantitativ Nahrungesuntersuchen an Schellfischen (Gadus aeglefinus), Wittlinger (G. melangus) und Dorschen (G.morrhua) aus der Nordsee unter besonderer Berúcksichtigung des Wármswertes der Nahrung. Ber. dtsch. Komm. Meeresforsch., N.F., Bd. 9, pp. 274–317.Google Scholar
Hynes, H. B. N., 1950. The food of freshwater sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus and Pygosteus pungitius) with a review of methods used in studies of food of fishes. J. Anim. Ecol., Vol. 19, pp. 36–58.Google Scholar
Johnstone, J., 1910. The fishes of Cheshire and Liverpool Bay. In The Vertebrate Fauna of Cheshire; ed. Coward, T. A.. London: Witherby.Google Scholar
Jones, N. S., 1951. The bottom-fauna off the South of the Isle of Man. J. Anim. Ecol., Vol. 20, pp. 132–44.Google Scholar
Jones, R., 1956. The fauna and biomass of a muddy sand deposit off Port Erin, I.o.M. J. Anim. Ecol., Vol. 25, pp. 217–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, R., 1954. The food of the whiting, and a comparison with that of the haddock. Scot. mar. Res., 1954, No. 2, 34 pp.Google Scholar
Kabata, Z., 1957. Lernaeocera obtusa n.sp., a hitherto undescribed parasite of the haddock (Gadus aeglefinus L.). J. mar. Biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 36, pp. 569–92.Google Scholar
Kennedy, M., 1954. The Sea-Angler's Fishes. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Knudsen, J., 1950. Contributions to the biology of the whiting (Gadus merlangus L.) in Danish waters. Rep. Danish biol. Sta., No. 52, pp. 27–40.Google Scholar
Lebour, M. V., 1918. The food of post-larval fish. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 11, PP. 433–69.Google Scholar
Lebour, M. V., 1919a. Feeding habits of some young fish. J. mar biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 12, pp. 9–21.Google Scholar
Lebour, M. V., 1919b. The food of postlarval fish. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 12, pp. 22–47.Google Scholar
Lebour, M. V., 1922. The food of plankton organisms. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 12, pp. 644–77.Google Scholar
Le Cren, E. D., 1951. The length-weight relationships and the seasonal cycle in gonad-weight and condition in the perch (Perca fluviatilis). J. Anim. Ecol., Vol. 20, pp. 201–19.Google Scholar
Matthews, D., 1887. Food of the whiting. Rep. Fish. Bd Scot., Vol. 5 (1886), p. 317.Google Scholar
Messtorff, J., 1959. Untersuchungen über die Biologie des Wittlings, Merlangius merlangus (L.) in der Nordsee. Ber. dtsch. Komm. Meeresforsch., Bd. 15, pp. 277–334.Google Scholar
Nagabhushanam, A. K., 1959. Notes on Argentina sphyraena L. (Teleostei-Salmonoidea) in Manx waters. Rep. mar. biol. Sta. Pt Erin, Vol. 71, pp. 53–8.Google Scholar
Orton, J. H., 1922. The mode of feeding of the jellyfish Amelia aurita on the smaller organisms in the plankton. Nature, Lond., Vol. 110, p. 178.Google Scholar
Russell, F. S., 1928. The vertical distribution of marine macroplankton. VIII. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 15, p. 829.Google Scholar
Saemundsson, B., 1949. Marine pisces. Zool. Iceland, Vol. 4, No. 72, 150 pp.Google Scholar
Schmidt, J., 1909. The distribution of the pelagic fry and the spawning regions of the gadoids in the North Atlantic from Iceland to Spain (based chiefly on Danish investigations). Rapp. Cons. Explor. Mer, Vol. 10, 229 pp.Google Scholar
Smitt, F. A., 1892. A History of Scandinavian Fishes, 2nd ed. Stockholm: Norsted and Soner.Google Scholar
Sproston, N. G. & Hartley, P. H. T., 1941. The ecology of some parasitic copepods of gadoids and other fishes. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 25, pp. 361–92.Google Scholar
Steven, G. A., 1930. Bottom-fauna and the food of fishes. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 26, pp. 677–705.Google Scholar
Steven, G. A., 1949. Contributions to the biology of the Mackerel (Scomber scombrus L.). A study of the fishery in the south-west of England, with special reference to the spawning, feeding, and ‘fishermen's signs’. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 28, pp. 555–81.Google Scholar
Todd, R. A., 1905. Report on the food of fishes collected during 1903. Rep. N. Sea Fish. Invest. Comm., Vol. 1 (South Area), pp. 229–62.Google Scholar
Todd, R. A., 1907. Second report on the food of fishes (North Sea, 1904–5). Rep. N. Sea Fish. Invest. Comm., Vol. 2 (South Area), Pt. 1, pp. 53–160.Google Scholar
Williamson, D. I., 1952. Distribution of the plankton in the Irish Sea, 1949–50. Proc. Lpool biol. Soc., Vol. 58, pp. 1–46.Google Scholar
Williamson, D. I., 1956. The plankton in the Irish Sea, 1951–52. Bull. mar. Ecol., Vol. 4, No. 31, pp. 87–114.Google Scholar