Biology and fishery of barred spiny eel, Macrognathus pancalus Hamilton

• Autorzy: Suresh V.R. , Biswas B.K. , Vinci G.K. , Mitra K. , Mukherjee A.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Background. The barred spiny eel, Macrognathus pancalus Hamilton 1822 (known also as the striped spiny eel) has high food- as well as ornamental value in India and its neighbouring countries. The natural resources of this species are declining due to over exploitation and habitat changes. The aim of this study was to provide necessary inputs on food habits, reproductive biology, and fishery of the species for artificial propagation programs and fisheries guidelines for conservation of its natural populations. Materials and Methods. Fish samples were collected monthly, for a period of 12 months, from an oxbow lake, situated in the Ganga River basin, India, during June 2004-May 2005. Food habits, reproductive biology, length-weight relation, fishery resource status, asymptotic length (L∞), length at maturity (Lm) and length at maximum possible yield (Lopt) for the species were studied. Results. The fish subsisted mainly on insect larvae. Fecundity range was 227 (fish: 10.7 cm and 5.03 g) to 8310 (fish: 17 cm and 30.31 g). Length at first maturity calculated through maturity curve was 10-11 cm (males) and 11-12 cm (females) in total length. The breeding period was within March-September. The regression model fitted for length and weight of the fish was Log W = 3.3224 Log L - 6.0793, R2 = 0.9094 for male; Log W = 3.3378 Log L - 6.0716, R2 = 0.9183 for female. The exponent ‘b’ for male and female varied significantly from ‘3’ indicating allometric growth pattern. The relation of fecundity with total length and weight of the fish was Log F = 2.9574 Log L - 3.2055, R2 = 0.3728 and Log F = 0.9684 Log W + 2.0934, R2 = 0.4716. Immature specimens dominated in the catch. The estimates obtained for L∞ = 18.8 cm (s.e. range 15.9-22.3 cm), Lm male = 10.8 cm (s.e. range 7.7-15.1 cm), Lm female = 12.3 cm (s.e. range 9.3-16.3 cm) and Lopt = 11.3 cm (s.e. range 9.6-13.4 cm). Biomass of the species in experimental fishing was high during October-January, which was also the period when immature specimens were lowest. Conclusion. Closed or less intense fishing for the species during March-September and capture of only specimens above 14 cm length would help conservation of the natural stock of the fish in the wetland.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

fishery; Macrognathus pancalus; barred spiny eel; striped spiny eel zob.barred spiny eel; Asia; Mastacembelidae; animal species; fish; food habit; length-weight relation; conservation; natural resource; habitat change

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Ichthyologica et Piscatoria
• Rocznik: 2006
• Tom: 36
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: p.31-37,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Suresh V.R.

• Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore, Kolkata - 700 120, West Bengal, India

autor

Biswas B.K.

autor

Vinci G.K.

autor

Mitra K.

autor

Mukherjee A.

Bibliografia

• Anonymous 1998. Report of the workshop on “Conservation Assessment and Management Plan (CAMP) for Freshwater Fishes of India”. National Bureau of Fish Genetic Resources, Zoo Outreach Organization/CBSG, India.
• Anonymous 2006. 2006 IUCN red list of threatened species. http://www.redlist.org
• Chonder S.L. 1972. Length-weight relationship of mature female Labeo gonius (Hamilton) from the Keetham Reservoir. Journal of the Inland Fisheries Society of India 4: 216-217.
• Dutta S.P.S. 1989/1990. Food and feeding ecology of Mastacembelus armatus (Lecep.) from Gadigarh stream, Jammu. Matsya 15, 16: 66-69.
• Fisher R.A. 1970. Statistical methods for research workers. 14th edn. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.
• Froese R., Binohlan C. 2000. Empirical relationships to estimate asymptotic length, length at first maturity and length at maximum yield per recruit in fishes, with a simple method to evaluate length frequency data. Journal of Fish Biology 56: 758-773.
• Froese R., Pauly D. (eds) 2006. FishBase, World-wide Web Electronic Publication. http://www.fishbase.org
• Grimes C.B., Huntsman G.R. 1980. Reproductive biology of the vermilion snapper, Rhomboplites aurorubens from North Carolina and South Carolina. Fishery Bulletin 78: 137-146.
• Hart T.J. 1946. Report on the trawling surveys on the Patagonian continental shelf. “Discovery” Reports 23: 223-408.
• Hickling C.F., Rutenberg E. 1936. The ovary as an indicator of spawning period in fishes. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 21: 311-317.
• June F.C. 1953. Spawning of yellowfin tuna in Hawaiian waters. Fishery Bulletin 54: 47-64.
• Kagwade V.N. 1968. Maturation and spawning of the horse mackerel Caranx kalla (Cuv. and Val.). Indian Journal of Fisheries 15: 207-220.
• Karim M.A., Hossain A. 1972. Studies on the biology of Mastacembelus pancalus (Ham.) in artificial ponds. Part II. Sexual maturity and fecundity. Bangladesh Journal of Biology and Agricultural Sciences 1: 15-18.
• Lagler K.F. 1956. Freshwater fishery biology. 2nd edn. W.C. Brown Co., Dubuque, IA, USA.
• Le Cren E.D. 1951. The length.weight relationship and seasonal cycle in gonad weight and condition in the perch (Perca fluviatilis). Journal of Animal Ecology 21: 210-219.
• Menon M.D. 1950. The bionomics of the poor cod (Gadus minutus L.) in the Plymouth area. Journal of the Marine Biological Association f the United Kingdom 29: 195-239.
• Qayyum A., Qasim S.Z. 1964. Studies on the biology of some fresh water fishes. Part II. Barbus stigma (Cuv. and Val.). Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 61: 330-347.
• Serajuddin M. 2004. Intraspecific diversity of riverine populations of spiny eel, Mastacembelus armatus. Applied Fisheries and Aquaculture 4: 25-29.
• Serajuddin M., Mustafa S. 1994. Feeding specialization in adult spiny eel, Mastacembelus armatus. Asian Fisheries Science 7: 63-65.
• Serajuddin M., Khan A.A., Mustafa S. 1998. Food and feeding habits of the spiny eel, Mastacembelus armatus. Asian Fisheries Science 11: 271-278.
• Serajuddin M., Ali R. 2005. Food and feeding habits of striped spiny eel, Macrognathus pancalus (Hamilton). Indian Journal of Fisheries 52 (1): 81-86.
• Sugunan V.V., Mitra K., Vinci G.K. 2002. Ornamental fishes of West Bengal. Classic Printers, Kolkata, India.
• Swarup K., Srivastava S., Das V.K. 1972. Sexual dimorphism in the spiny eel, Mastacembelus pancalus. Current Science 41 (2): 68-69.
• Talwar P.K. 1962. Acontribution to the biology of the halfbeak, Hyporhamphus georgii (Cuv. & Val.) (Hemirhamphidae). Indian Journal of Fisheries 9: 168-196.
• Talwar P.K., Jhingran A.G. 1991. Inland fishes of India and adjacent countries. Vol. 2. Oxford and IBH Publishing, New Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta.
• Tripathi S.D. 2004. Ornamental fishes: Breeding, culture and trade. Pp.17-42. In: Das R.C., Sinha A., Datta S., Ghosh S. (eds). Proceedings of the National Seminar on Prospects of Ornamental Fish Breeding and Culture in Eastern and Northeastern India. Central Institute of Fisheries Education, (Indian Council of Agricultural Research), Kolkata, India.
• Varghese T.J. 1961. Observations on the biology of Raconda russelliana (Gray). Indian Journal of Fisheries 8: 96-106.