Ontogenetic shift or not? Different foraging trade‐offs within the meso‐ to bathypelagic fish community

Abstract During ontogeny, the increase in body size forces species to make trade‐offs between their food requirements, the conditions necessary for growth and reproduction as well as the avoidance of predators. Ontogenetic changes are leading species to seek out habitats and food resources that meet...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Ecology and Evolution
Main Authors: Loutrage, Liz, Brind'Amour, Anik, Chouvelon, Tiphaine, Spitz, Jérôme
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2024
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.11129
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ece3.11129
id crwiley:10.1002/ece3.11129
record_format openpolar
spelling crwiley:10.1002/ece3.11129 2024-06-23T07:55:28+00:00 Ontogenetic shift or not? Different foraging trade‐offs within the meso‐ to bathypelagic fish community Loutrage, Liz Brind'Amour, Anik Chouvelon, Tiphaine Spitz, Jérôme 2024 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.11129 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ece3.11129 en eng Wiley http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Ecology and Evolution volume 14, issue 3 ISSN 2045-7758 2045-7758 journal-article 2024 crwiley https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.11129 2024-06-04T06:40:08Z Abstract During ontogeny, the increase in body size forces species to make trade‐offs between their food requirements, the conditions necessary for growth and reproduction as well as the avoidance of predators. Ontogenetic changes are leading species to seek out habitats and food resources that meet their needs. To this end, ontogenetic changes in nocturnal habitat (vertical use of the water column) and in the type of food resources (based on stable isotopes of nitrogen) were investigated in 12 species of deep pelagic fish from the Bay of Biscay in the Northeast Atlantic. Our results revealed the existence of major differences in the ontogenetic strategies employed by deep pelagic fishes. Some species showed ontogenetic changes in both vertical habitat use and food resources (e.g. Jewel lanternfish ( Lampanyctus crocodilus ) and Atlantic soft pout ( Melanostigma atlanticum )). In contrast, other species showed no ontogenetic change (e.g. Koefoed's searsid ( Searsia koefoedi ) and Lancet fish ( Notoscopelus kroyeri )). Some species only changed food resources (e.g. Spotted lanternfish ( Myctophum punctatum ), Spotted barracudina ( Arctozenus risso ) and Stout sawpalate ( Serrivomer beanii )), while others seemed to be influenced more by depth than by trophic features (e.g. Bluntsnout smooth‐head ( Xenodermichthys copei ) and Olfer's Hatchetfish ( Argyropelecus olfersii )). These results suggest that to meet their increasing energy requirements during ontogeny, some species have adopted a strategy of shifting their food resources (larger prey or prey with a higher trophic level), while others seemed to maintain their food resources but are most likely increasing the quantity of prey ingested. As fish species can have different functional roles during their development within ecosystems, characterising ontogenetic changes in mesopelagic fish species is a crucial step to be considered in future research aimed at understanding and modelling the complexity of deep‐pelagic food webs. Article in Journal/Newspaper Northeast Atlantic Wiley Online Library Ecology and Evolution 14 3
institution Open Polar
collection Wiley Online Library
op_collection_id crwiley
language English
description Abstract During ontogeny, the increase in body size forces species to make trade‐offs between their food requirements, the conditions necessary for growth and reproduction as well as the avoidance of predators. Ontogenetic changes are leading species to seek out habitats and food resources that meet their needs. To this end, ontogenetic changes in nocturnal habitat (vertical use of the water column) and in the type of food resources (based on stable isotopes of nitrogen) were investigated in 12 species of deep pelagic fish from the Bay of Biscay in the Northeast Atlantic. Our results revealed the existence of major differences in the ontogenetic strategies employed by deep pelagic fishes. Some species showed ontogenetic changes in both vertical habitat use and food resources (e.g. Jewel lanternfish ( Lampanyctus crocodilus ) and Atlantic soft pout ( Melanostigma atlanticum )). In contrast, other species showed no ontogenetic change (e.g. Koefoed's searsid ( Searsia koefoedi ) and Lancet fish ( Notoscopelus kroyeri )). Some species only changed food resources (e.g. Spotted lanternfish ( Myctophum punctatum ), Spotted barracudina ( Arctozenus risso ) and Stout sawpalate ( Serrivomer beanii )), while others seemed to be influenced more by depth than by trophic features (e.g. Bluntsnout smooth‐head ( Xenodermichthys copei ) and Olfer's Hatchetfish ( Argyropelecus olfersii )). These results suggest that to meet their increasing energy requirements during ontogeny, some species have adopted a strategy of shifting their food resources (larger prey or prey with a higher trophic level), while others seemed to maintain their food resources but are most likely increasing the quantity of prey ingested. As fish species can have different functional roles during their development within ecosystems, characterising ontogenetic changes in mesopelagic fish species is a crucial step to be considered in future research aimed at understanding and modelling the complexity of deep‐pelagic food webs.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Loutrage, Liz
Brind'Amour, Anik
Chouvelon, Tiphaine
Spitz, Jérôme
spellingShingle Loutrage, Liz
Brind'Amour, Anik
Chouvelon, Tiphaine
Spitz, Jérôme
Ontogenetic shift or not? Different foraging trade‐offs within the meso‐ to bathypelagic fish community
author_facet Loutrage, Liz
Brind'Amour, Anik
Chouvelon, Tiphaine
Spitz, Jérôme
author_sort Loutrage, Liz
title Ontogenetic shift or not? Different foraging trade‐offs within the meso‐ to bathypelagic fish community
title_short Ontogenetic shift or not? Different foraging trade‐offs within the meso‐ to bathypelagic fish community
title_full Ontogenetic shift or not? Different foraging trade‐offs within the meso‐ to bathypelagic fish community
title_fullStr Ontogenetic shift or not? Different foraging trade‐offs within the meso‐ to bathypelagic fish community
title_full_unstemmed Ontogenetic shift or not? Different foraging trade‐offs within the meso‐ to bathypelagic fish community
title_sort ontogenetic shift or not? different foraging trade‐offs within the meso‐ to bathypelagic fish community
publisher Wiley
publishDate 2024
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.11129
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ece3.11129
genre Northeast Atlantic
genre_facet Northeast Atlantic
op_source Ecology and Evolution
volume 14, issue 3
ISSN 2045-7758 2045-7758
op_rights http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.11129
container_title Ecology and Evolution
container_volume 14
container_issue 3
_version_ 1802648095733841920