Cited by 99Marine and fisheries researchMarine and coastal ecosystemsAquaculture Nutrition and Growth

Distinctions in the diets and distributions of larval tunas and the important role of appendicularians

Llopiz, Joel K., Richardson, David E., Shiroza, Akihiro, Smith, Sharon L., Cowen, Robert K.·2010·Limnology and Oceanography

Abstract

Monthly plankton sampling across the Straits of Florida (SOF) allowed for a thorough investigation of the feeding ecologies of four taxa of larval tunas (family Scombridae, tribe Thunnini) and the horizontal and vertical distributions of tuna larvae and their dominant prey. Before piscivory, Thunnus spp. larvae had a mixed diet of crustaceans and appendicularians, whereas skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis), little tunny (Euthynnus alletteratus), and Auxis spp. displayed highly selective and nearly exclusive feeding on appendicularians. The availability of both appendicularians and larval fish prey declined from west to east across the SOF, and appendicularians were notably patchy. In the western SOF where prey was more abundant, all taxa of tuna larvae co‐occurred, indicating the sharing of resources by the larvae, in addition to the adults of these taxa using similar spawning habitat upstream in the Florida Current. In the central and eastern SOF, where prey was less abundant, only Thunnus spp. and skipjack tuna co‐occurred, and these two taxa exhibited significantly different vertical distributions. Prey removal rates (estimated from gut evacuation rates and daily rations) occurring in the western SOF where tuna taxa co‐occurred are likely to be sustainable by appendicularian levels within this region but would potentially not be by levels in the east. The spatial and trophic characteristics of these four abundant larval taxa highlight the potential influence of feeding‐rel…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4319/lo.2010.55.3.0983

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 55 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Llopiz, J. K., Richardson, D. E., Shiroza, A., Smith, S. L., & Cowen, R. K.
Affiliations
University of Miami (US)
Corresponding author
Llopiz, Joel K.
Venue
Limnology and Oceanography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-03-07
Volume
55
Issue
3
Pages
983-996
ISSN
  • 0024-3590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-5590
OpenAlex
W2098319086
Cited by
99
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
6.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Limnology and Oceanography (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Marine and fisheries research
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Oceanography › Marine and coastal ecosystems
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Aquatic Science › Aquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Keywords
appendicularians, feeding ecology, larval fish distribution, Thunnus, skipjack tuna, little tunny, Auxis, Florida Straits, microbial food web, prey availability, resource sharing, vertical distribution, daily ration, oligotrophic waters

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