Erratum to: I. M. Suthers and D. Rissik (eds): Plankton: A guide to their ecology and monitoring for water quality CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Australia, 2009, XVI + 256pp., ￡30 (Paperback), ISBN: 9780643090583 (Distributed by eurospan@turpin-distribution.com)

Compensatory growth refers to an animal’s ability to grow extremely rapidly after it has experienced a period of reduced growth. It is also widely held that the growth trajectories of animals showing compensatory growth converge towards those followed by conspecifics that have experienced favorable growth conditions throughout their lives. In other words, it is often assumed that animals undergoing compensatory growth also show some recovery, and thereby exhibit catch-up growth. This belief has resulted in the terms compensatory growth, recovery growth, and catch-up growth being used as synonyms, and has also created some problems with regard to data analysis and interpretation. Following a discussion of methods of analysis and their limitations, a series of growth simulations is presented to illustrate why the terms should not be used as synonyms. The simulations, based upon the assumption that compensatory growth results in a restoration of body composition (using condition index as a surrogate), show that compensatory growth is not always accompanied by a convergence of growth trajectories. Compensatory growth can occur in the absence of catch-up growth, and the simultaneous observation of compensatory growth and a recovery of body mass is a special combination of events. Further, it is possible for growth trajectories to converge even when animals that have experienced a period of reduced growth do not display compensatory growth. Definitions are proposed that distinguish between the terms compensatory growth, recovery growth, and catch-up growth, and guidelines are given relating to the analysis of the results of fish compensatory growth studies.     

Physiological and social constraints on growth of fish with special reference to Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus L.

Physiological studies of growth in animals predict that growth rates should decrease with increasing size, but when Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus, were reared together in large groups there was often a positive correlation between initial body size and the growth rate of an individual fish. This suggested that social interactions were important determinants of growth rates and, in the absence of the establishment of direct linear hierarchies, it is suggested that growth suppression is the result of short-term bouts of aggression associated with feeding periods leading to reduced food intake by certain fish. Evidence is presented to show that growth suppression can be reduced by increasing the frequency of feeding.     

To sea or not to sea? Multiple lines of evidence reveal the contribution of non‐diadromous recruitment for supporting endemic fish populations within New Zealand's longest river

相似文献   

Changes in the density and growth of brown trout (Salmo trutta) after intensive removal of sympatric Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) in the sub‐Arctic lake Møkkelandsvatn,Norway

This study tests the basic hypothesis that the removal of charr, Salvelinus alpinus (L.), would cause an increase in both the growth and density of a sympatric trout population, Salmo trutta L. The charr population was characterised by slow‐growing individuals, with a high proportion of mature fish, that is typical for so‐called overpopulated populations. A total of 31,000 charr was removed from the lake in the period 1990–1992, and the density of younger trout (1+, 2+), but not older trout (3+, 4+), increased. The growth of older trout (3+, 4+) increased, but the evidence for similar growth increases of younger trout (1+, 2+) was limited. From 1989 to 1990, the proportion of trout increased from 30 to only 40% of the total catch, but from 1991 to 1994, it was significantly higher (60–80%) than that of charr. Total trout biomass increased to a maximum in 1992 and then decreased so that the biomass of 1994 was nearly similar to that of 1989, that is before the start of the charr removal. Back‐calculated lengths of trout from otoliths showed that 2+ and 3+ trout caught in the pelagic were growing consistently faster over previous years than those caught in the littoral, while this was not the case for the 4+ fish. Therefore, the hypothesis was partially supported; the growth rate of trout increased (age groups 1+ to 4+), while the density of juvenile trout (1+, 2+), but not the older trout (3+, 4+), increased after the removal of charr.     

Evolution. Enhanced: A rodent as big as a buffalo

The largest living rodent is the South American capybara, a creature the size of a sheep that unlike smaller rodents stands on relatively straight legs. However, as Alexander explains in his Perspective, a new fossil find in Venezuela (Sánchez-Villagra et al.) reveals that the capybara would be dwarfed by Phoberomys, a giant rodent the size of a buffalo that lived during the Miocene Epoch.     

An empirical bio-economic stocking model for floodplain beels in Bangladesh

While stocking floodplain depressions or beels with fingerlings is a common form of fisheries management in Bangladesh, bio‐economic guidance for improving the outcome of stocking strategies is sparse. The Community‐Based Fisheries Management (CBFM) Project, funded by the Ford Foundation and the UK Government's Department for International Development (DfID) promoted stocking practices in beels throughout the country as a means to improve fisher livelihoods. This paper describes an empirical bio‐economic model developed using data generated under the CBFM project. The model offers guidance on selecting stocking densities depending upon the available size (length) of fingerlings to maximize profit and return on investment while minimizing risk. Because large fingerlings are relatively inexpensive and have lower rates of natural mortality, the model predicts that it is more profitable to stock large fingerlings at low densities than small fingerlings at high densities. These general recommendations were found to be largely insensitive to the market price for harvested fish. To minimize credit burden and financial risk, minimum stocking densities should be selected according to the length of fish available that maximizes profit. Because of its empirical nature, the model recommendations may not be applicable beyond the project sites. Furthermore, it is recommended that attempts be made to field test the model predictions before widespread adoption or promotion.