Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T07:39:50.430Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A new distribution record and the reproductive strategy of Pomatoschistus pictus adriaticus (Pisces: Gobiidae) in the Mediterranean Sea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2003

Jean-Luc Bouchereau ,
Virginie Houder ,
Adam Marques  and
José E. Rebelo
Jean-Luc Bouchereau*
Affiliation:
University Antilles-Guyane, BP 592, F-97159 Pointe-à-Pitre, France University Montpellier II, F-34095 Montpellier 05, France
Virginie Houder
Affiliation:
University Montpellier II, F-34095 Montpellier 05, France
Adam Marques
Affiliation:
University Montpellier II, F-34095 Montpellier 05, France
José E. Rebelo
Affiliation:
University de Aveiro, P-3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal
*
∫Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Specimens and nests of Pomatoschistus pictus adriaticus have been caught for the first time along the French Mediterranean shore (Gulf of Lions). Six types of nests are found on sandy-gravelly bottom at 10 m depth and 25.3 to 27.5 g 1−1 salinity, using in 84.7% of cases, a valve of Cardium edule (3.3≤weight g≤40.6; 507≤surface mm2≤2490). Nest size, egg patch, surface area and nesting fecundity are positively correlated. Nesting fecundity varies between 669 and 4690 eggs. For a similar egg diameter, the egg height is less than that of P. minutus which spawns on the same bottom and localities. Larval length at hatching varies from 1.70 to 2.67 mm.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 83 , Issue 5 , October 2003 , pp. 1157 - 1161
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2003

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

Arruda, L.M., Andrade, J.P. & Cunham, M., 1988. Abundance, diversity and community structure of the fish population in the Ria de Aveiro, Portugal. Oceanologica Acta, 11, 234–240.Google Scholar
Bouchereau, J.-L., 1994. Bio-ecologie et tactiques adaptatives d'occupa-tion d'une lagune medüerraneenne (Mauguio, Languedoc, France) par trois poissons te'leosteens gobndes: Pomatoschistus minutus (Pallas, 1770), P. microps (Krojer, 1838), Gobius niger Linnaeus, 1758. The'se de Doctorat d'Etat, ‘Sciences’, Universite de Montpellier II, France.Google Scholar
Bouchereau, J.-L., Tomasini, J.A., Quignard, J.P. & Joyeux, J.C., 1991. Strategies et tactiques de reproduction de Pomatoschistus microps (Kroyer, 1838) et de Pomatoschistus minutus (Pallas, 1770) (Pisces, Gobiidae) dans le Golfe du Lion. Nids, determinismes de la sedentarite et de la migration. Cybium, 15, 315–346.Google Scholar
Lebour, M.V., 1920. The eggs of Gobius minutus, pictus and microps. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 12, 253–260.Google Scholar
Magnhagen, C. & Kvarnemo, L., 1989. Big is better: the importance of size for reproductive success in male Pomatoschistus minutus (Pallas) (Pisces, Gobiidae). Journal of Fish Biology, 35, 755–763.Google Scholar
Miller, P.J., 1973. The identity of Gobius affinis Kolombatovic, with notes on the systematics and biology of Pomatoschistus pictus (Malm.) (Pisces: Gobiidae). Annali Museo Civile di Storia Naturale Giacomo Doria, 79, 53–88.Google Scholar
Miller, P.J., 1986. Gobioidei. In Fishes of the north-eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean, vol. III (ed. P.J.P. Whitehead et al.), pp. 1019–1085. Paris: Unesco.Google Scholar
Pampoulie, C., Sasal, P., Auby, I., Rosecchi, E., Bouchereau, J.-L., Lindstro«m, K. & Crivelli, A.J., 2001. Nest use by the common goby Pomatoschitus microps in Camargue (France). Ethology, Ecology and Evolution, 13, 181–192.Google Scholar
Petersen, C.G.J., 1919. Our gobies (Gobiidae) from the egg to the adult stages. Report of the Danish Biological Station, 26, 47–66.Google Scholar