4.4 Article

Temporal and ontogenetic shifts in habitat use of juvenile Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus)

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jembe.2009.06.010

Keywords

Baited camera; Diel behavior; Gulf of Alaska; Habitat selection; Nursery habitat

Funding

  1. Alaska Regional Office of NOAA Fisheries
  2. North Pacific Research Board (NPRB) [605]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Habitat use of age-0 and age-1 juvenile Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus) was examined in coastal regions in Kodiak Alaska over daily, seasonal and annual scales. Catch data indicated highly variable recruitment to nursery areas, but a strong separation of distribution by depth among age groups. Age-0 cod were most abundant in the shallows (<3 m) whereas age-1 cod were typically found in depths (9.0-13.5 m). In comparison, age-1 saffron cod (Eleginus gracilis), another highly abundant gadid in the region, were found in shallower depths where age-0 cod often resided. Age-1 cod Pacific cod made diel lateral movements, moving into shallow regions at night where they co-occurred with age-0 cod to a greater extent. Laboratory light-gradient experiments indicated that age-0 cod tolerated intense lighting (similar to 20-80 mu E m(-2) s(-1)) typical of shallow water regions whereas larger age-1 Pacific cod strongly avoid bright light given the choice. However, while diet data indicate age-1 cod of both species are moderately piscivorous (3% saffron cod: 16% Pacific cod), we found no direct evidence of predation on smaller conspecific cod, possibly due to the low densities of age-0 cod in the year of the diet study. Together, these data suggest that coastal regions continue to serve a nursery function beyond the 1st year of development for juvenile Pacific gadids, and that small-scale temporal and depth partitioning in these regions is a mechanism by which varying cod species and age classes co-occur. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available