Cited by 29Marine and fisheries researchFish Biology and Ecology StudiesIchthyology and Marine Biology

Contrasting patterns of resource utilization between juvenile estuarine predators: the influence of relative prey size and foraging ability on the ontogeny of piscivory

Scharf, Frederick S., Buckel, Jeffrey A., Juanes, Francis·2009·Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences

Abstract

In aquatic systems, ontogenetic patterns of resource utilization strongly influence growth and survival, particularly during early life stages. We compared prey resource use and evaluated potential factors affecting the timing of the shift to piscivorous feeding in two juvenile estuarine fish predators: striped bass ( Morone saxatilis ) and bluefish ( Pomatomus saltatrix ). In New York Bight estuaries, bluefish shift to piscivory earlier in ontogeny and consume larger relative prey fish sizes compared with striped bass. Predator gape allometries are similar and did not determine maximum prey sizes eaten. Experimental results revealed marked differences in foraging abilities between predators, with bluefish realizing much greater foraging efficiency compared with striped bass feeding on identical fish prey. Both predators demonstrated lower feeding efficiency and grew relatively poorly when feeding on invertebrates compared with fish prey. When held together under limited prey conditions, bluefish exploited a greater proportion of available prey at the expense of striped bass. Our findings highlight the importance of the availability of appropriately sized forage fishes to the ontogeny of piscivory and provide evidence that predator–prey size relationships and disparate foraging abilities can generate inter- and intra-specific variation in patterns of resource utilization and predator growth.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1139/f09-030

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 57 · Cited by 29

Authors
Scharf, F. S., Buckel, J. A., & Juanes, F.
Affiliations
North Carolina State University (US)
Venue
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
Published
2009-05
Volume
66
Issue
5
Pages
790-801
ISSN
  • 0706-652X (ISSN-L)
  • 1205-7533
OpenAlex
W2104633616
Cited by
29
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
2.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
  • Hudson River Foundation
  • Northeast Fisheries Science Center
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Marine and fisheries research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Aquatic Science › Fish Biology and Ecology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ichthyology and Marine Biology
Keywords
Morone saxatilis, bluefish, Pomatomus saltatrix, foraging efficiency, predator-prey size relationship, resource utilization (natural resources), feed efficiency, interspecific competition

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review