Does diet in Celtic Sea fishes reflect prey availability

By J. Pinnegar, Verena M. Trenkel, A. Tidd, W. A. Dawson, M. D. Buit. 2003

122 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Feeding preferences of Celtic Sea fishes were investigated using a database of stomach content records, collected between 1977 and 1994. The diet of cod Gadus morhua, hake Merluccius merluccius, megrim Lepidorhombus whiffiagonis, whiting Merlangius merlangus and saithe Pollachius virens changed markedly as the animals grew larger, and although large predators generally chose larger bodied prey, the variability of prey sizes consumed also increased. Large predators continued to select small, low value, benthic prey (e.g. Callionymus spp. and Trisopterus spp.) which were easier to catch, rather than larger, more energy lucrative pelagic prey (e.g. mackerel Scomber scombrus), even though these pelagic prey-fishes were nearly always available and were often very abundant. Stock estimates of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea and U.K. groundfish survey catches were used as indices of prey abundance. Blue-whiting Micromesistius poutassou and other small pelagic fishes (Argentina spp. and clupeoids) were identified as being particularly important, and were consumed by some predators more often than would be expected given the abundance of these prey in the environment. There was no evidence for density-dependent feeding by predators on mackerel and only hake exhibited density-dependent feeding on horse-mackerel. Hake, cod and megrim consumed more blue-whiting when this prey was at higher abundance in the environment. In choosing what prey to consume, predators must balance costs and benefits, considering the quality of prey and the energy expended during search, capture and handling.

Subfields: Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/63c62e789223bb3d1cd175857c8b96ef9b9434a9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Global and Planetary Change

1. S. Jennings
2. N. Dulvy
3. I. Senina
4. C. Simpfendorfer
5. J. Pinnegar
6. M. Heupel
7. D. Knip
8. P. Lehodey

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. G. Woodward
2. U. Brose
3. N. Dulvy
4. C. Simpfendorfer
5. S. Jennings
6. M. Heupel
7. D. Knip
8. Neo D. Martinez

Citations in the corpus

• Sizing up the ecological role of sharks as predators (2014, background): “Many species’ traits change with body size, such that larger-bodied animals use larger home ranges (Jetz et al. 2004), eat larger prey (Pinnegar et al. 2003) and typically have increased dietary specialisation (Scharf et al. 2000).”
• BODY SIZES OF CONSUMERS AND THEIR RESOURCES (2005, background): “…1994) , predatory nematodes (Ruess, unpublished data ; Andrassy 1956) , parasitoids (Ulrich 1999, 2001) , marine fish predators (Scharf et al. 2000, Pinnegar et al. 2003) , freshwater invertebrates (Warren, unpublished data ), Australian consumers (Dell, unpublished data ; Rayner, unpublished data…”
• Comparative ecology of widely distributed pelagic fish species in the North Atlantic: Implications for modelling climate and fisheries impacts (2014, background): “In the Celtic Sea hake diet was found to reflect horse mackerel availability (Pinnegar et al., 2003), similarly in the Cantabrian Sea (Preciado et al.”
• The signature of phylogenetic constraints on food-web structure (2008, unknown): “…unpublished data), supplemented by data for some specific groups (Andrassy, 1956; Hansen et al., 1994; Ulrich, 1999, 2001; Scharf et al., 2000; Pinnegar et al., 2003; Cohen et al., 2005; Dell, unpublished data; Rayner, unpublished data; Ruess, unpublished data; Warren, unpublished data).”
• Seeing Double:: Size-Based and Taxonomic Views of Food Web Structure (2011, methodology): “The original stomach contents data were collected from dissections carried out on board research vessels during the annual surveys carried out by the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas) (Pinnegar et al., 2003).”
• Coupled energy pathways and the resilience of size-structured food webs (2011, background): “It is difficult, however, to envisage an entire pelagic fish community feeding exclusively on non-pelagic prey, and even fish species that spend a great deal of the lives feeding in the benthic zone do not feed entirely on benthic detritivores (Pinnegar et al. 2003; Greenstreet et al. 1997).”
• Ontogenetic and spatial variation in the diet of hake (Merluccius merluccius) in the Bay of Biscay and the Celtic Sea (2007, background): “These include the effort required to find, pursue, and handle prey, the morphology or visual acuity of the predator, and the behaviour and habitat use of the prey (which in turn affect the encounter rate) (Pinnegar et al., 2003).”